[ RadSafe ] Intervenors in Florida Nuclear Plant Send out Warning

[Roger Helbig]

>From the other side - in case any of you are interested

 

Hi All,

 

The article copied below and previously distributed through E advocacy is
from Nucleonic's Week,  a nuclear industry publication.

 

The information included in the article regarding cost is interesting though
not totally accurate.

 

What is very important to be understood is that this article does not
mention the only anti-nuclear, pro efficiency/clean energy intervenors that
legally and formally participated in the hearing. 

 

Though we expect this kind of treatment from the nuclear industry, it causes
us great concern to see the misinformation, disinformation by omission,
spread onto and through the E-advocacy web page and beyond.

 

Here are the links to the pre hearing and post hearing statements of
intervenors Bob and Jan Krasowski.

 

1)
http://www.psc.state.fl.us/library/filings/08/00097-08/070650-ei,%20bob%20an
d%20jan%20krasowski,%20%20prehearing%20statement.doc

 

2)
http://www.psc.state.fl.us/library/filings/08/01227-08/posthearing%20brief%2
0turkey%20point.doc

 

The third link is to the complete list of filings in this docket. Anyone
interested in knowing  the true facts regarding this case can find them as a
matter of record on the web page of the Florida Public Service Commission.
You can't believe what is being written in the press.

 

3) http://www.psc.state.fl.us/dockets/cms/docketFilings2.aspx?docket=070650

 

The transcripts of the hearing are there as well, including our cross
examination of the witnesses, the only anti-nuclear cross examination of the
entire case.  The public testimony given by others concerned which is
entered into the case as heresay is also included in the transcripts.

 

We have experienced not only a news blockade from most of the traditional
media but have also been subjected to a lack of cooperation from traditional
environmental organizations that have been exaggerating their own
involvement and not helping us get the word out about our considerable
efforts.

 

If any of you are in a position to help get the word out we would appreciate
you assistance in breaking open what has become a news blackout.

 

Bob and Jan Krasowski

Naples, Florida 

239-963-6285

 

 

In a message dated 3/7/2008 6:04:22 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,
nancylaplaca at yahoo.com writes:

FPL says cost of new reactors at Turkey Point could top $24 billion

Nucleonics Week

02/21/2008, page 3

Pam Radtke Russell, New Orleans

Building two new reactors at Turkey Point would 
cost as much as $24.3 billion, depending on the 
technology chosen, Florida Power & Light Co. has 
told the Florida Public Service Commission.

The company said the cost for building the two 
units ranges from $12.1 billion to $17.8 billion 
for Westinghouse's AP1000, and $16.5 billion to 
$24.3 billion for General Electric's ESBWR.

FPL spokesman Mayco Villafana said last week 
that the company reached its cost estimates by 
revising a 2004 study of overnight costs done by 
a consortium of companies, led by the Tennessee 
Valley Authority in coordination with DOE. That 
study found the cost of building two ABWRs would 
be $1,611 per kilowatt. In updating those 
figures for 2007, FPL said, it found that costs 
for materials, equipment and labor had risen 
more than 50% by some indexes since 2004.

In its revisions, FPL determined that overnight 
costs for the power plant island and supporting 
construction would range from $6.7 billion, or 
$2,444/kW, to $9.8 billion, or $3,582/kW. FPL 
added owner's costs, including security, cooling 
towers, site work and land costs ranging from 
$1.27 billion, or $466/kW, to $1.96 billion, or 
$717/kW. Additionally, FPL estimated 
transmission costs and allowance for cost risk 
ranging from $541.7 million, or $198/kW, to $663.6 million, or $242/kW.

According to testimony submitted to the PSC, the 
total overnight cost for building two 
Westinghouse AP1000's would range from $3,108 per kWh to $4,540 per kWh.

FPL then added an 11% carrying charge for 
construction costs and factored in cost 
escalation over the scope of the project to 
reach its final figures of $5,780/kW to 
$8,071/kW depending on the scope of the project and inflation.

Villafana said FPL wanted to provide the most 
comprehensive cost estimate possible to the PSC 
so commissioners have an understanding of what such a project will
entail.

"We decided to move on this early and make sure 
that our commission and our regulators realize 
that if we are going to maintain the option for 
nuclear, we need to start the process today ... so 
they would be able to apppreciate what its 
going to take for us to build these."

In October 2007, Moody's Investor Service released a report "New Nuclear
Generation in the United States" that estimated 
total costs of a nuclear plant, including 
interest, would be between $5,000 and $6,000/kW. 
A June 2007 study by the Keystone Center, 
titled "Nuclear Power Joint Fact-Finding," 
concluded that overnight estimates for a new 
reactor would be $2,950/kW, or between $3,600 and $4,000/kW with
interest.

Technology

During PSC hearings late last month, FPL 
President Armando Olivera said the key to which 
technology the company chooses is cost. He said 
FPL is negotiating with GE and Westinghouse - 
vendors whose technology it is coonsidering 
using - to get the best commercial terms possible for itss customers.

"And at this time, we are in heavy discussions 
with both entities trying to figure out how much 
of that price, for example, can be a fixed price 
and how much of it is going to be a variable 
price," Olivera told the commission.

The company expects to make a decision on the 
technology later this year, before it moves 
ahead with the site certification process with 
the state's Department of Environmental 
Protection. FPL intends to file an application 
with NRC in 2009 for a combined construction permit and operating
license.

PSC Commissioner Nathan Skop said during the 
hearings that by FPL's own admission in previous 
discussions with the PSC, the company is "in 
further depth of discussions with one particular 
vendor, and they're using that as the basis for 
a lot of the things that have come before us ... 
If I weree a betting man, I think I could make a 
judgment call on which technology they may go with." Skop didn't say
which technology he believed FPL favors.

Need determination

The three-day technical hearing in Tallahassee, 
Florida was about FPL's request to certify the 
need for two new reactors at Turkey Point. FPL 
has requested the need determination in order 
to move forward with plans to have the new reactors online in 2018 and
2020.

In its request for the need certification, FPL 
said, "Failure to initiate development of the 
Project now, which would be the immediate 
consequence of the Commission not granting this 
petition, would irrevocably foreclose the 
possibility of adding new nuclear capacity by 
2018 and in fact would preclude the addition of such capacity before
2021."

The PSC staff is expected to issue its 
recommendation on need for the new reactors by 
March 6, and the five-member commission is 
expected to vote on the request March 18.

During the hearing, Olivera said the only way to 
meet the company's projected need for an 
additional 8,200 MW in 2020, without increasing 
the company's dependence on natural gas, is 
through more new nuclear generation. Even with 
the addition of two new units at Turkey Point, 
and demand side management practices, the 
company will have a shortfall of between 3,120 
MW and 3,960 MW to meet summer peaking loads in 
2020, according to company testimony.

"Based on everything we know today, this is the 
only best option that we have that contributes 
meaningful reductions in greenhouse gas 
emissions," Olivera said. "It provides needed 
base load capacity. It improves fuel diversity, 
and it reduces Florida's dependence on natural gas and oil fuel."

With the new units, FPL's nuclear generation 
would increase from 16% to 27%, according to an 
opening statement by FPL's general counsel, Wade 
Litchfield, who represented the utility in the 
hearing. The two new units at Turkey Point could 
contribute 76% of the greenhouse gas emissions 
reductions that FPL would be called on to 
provide by 2021 under a plan proposed by Florida 
Governor Charlie Crist. Litchfield also said 
that the new units are the most cost effective option for new
generation.

In addition to certifying the need for the new 
units, FPL also requested that the PSC approve 
the company spending $16 million this summer to 
reserve a forging spot at Japan Steel Works. 
Florida's Office of Public Counsel, the state's 
consumer advocate arm, argued that determination 
should be made at later cost recovery hearings.

Water concerns

A handful of opponents to the plan addressed the 
commission before testimony began. Most were 
concerned with the water use of the plant and nuclear waste.

Barry Parsons, who identified himself as a 
citizen from Madison County, said he was 
concerned about nuclear waste and plant safety. 
"I find it incomprehensible that this commission 
and this state is actually seriously considering 
approving a new nuclear power plant."

Dawn Shirreffs of Florida's Clean Water Action 
told the commission that construction
of the units doesn't qualify under Florida law because it is not the
most cost
effective alternative. "Florida Power has not addressed the most basic
issues
regarding cost, feasibility and water before 
coming to you today. Instead, they
await your approval so that risky investments 
into due diligence can be done on the 
ratepayer's dime while Florida Power & Light earns interest," Shirreffs
said.

Intervenors include the Orlando Utilities 
Commission, a municipal utility that is seeking 
a minority ownership interest in the new FPL 
units, and Seminole Electric Cooperative, which 
said it was spurned by FPL when it approached 
the company about a stake in the new units.

One of the key issues raised in questioning was 
the water source for cooling the new units, 
which will need 80 million gallons of water a 
day. Villafana said recently that the company is 
focusing on several options, including treated 
wastewater, and has made a commitment not to use drinking water for
cooling.

FPL won approval from the Miami Dade County 
Commission in December 2007 for zoning variances 
that would allow the company to build the new units at Turkey Point.