ShareThis Page

Energy Secretary Rick Perry proposes sweeping new moves to support coal and nuclear plants

| Friday, Sept. 29, 2017, 11:00 p.m.

Energy Secretary Rick Perry took sweeping steps Friday to buttress a pair of financially strapped nuclear plants under construction and redefine how coal and nuclear plants are compensated for the electricity that they provide — a move that, if agreed to by independent federal energy regulators, could tilt some of the nation's complex power markets away from renewables and natural gas.

Perry announced that the Energy Department would provide $3.7 billion in loan guarantees to three Georgia utilities struggling to complete a pair of nuclear reactors at the Alvin W. Vogtle generating plant. These loan guarantees come on top of $8.3 billion in loans the department has already given to the project, but they still might fall short of what will be required to complete the costly reactors.

The nuclear project has been running far over-budget and behind schedule, and the utilities have been scrambling to come up with financing after the main engineering company, Westinghouse, declared bankruptcy earlier this year.

The nuclear industry has urged the federal government to help, saying that the AP1000 reactors are part of a new generation of nuclear plants. “I believe the future of nuclear energy in the United States is bright and look forward to expanding American leadership in innovative nuclear technologies,” Perry said. And he noted that the project had created approximately 6,000 construction jobs and, if completed, would create about 800 permanent jobs.

The aid for Vogtle partners would be issued by the Energy Department's loan guarantee program, which President Trump's 2018 budget proposal would abolish.

Many Republicans have criticized the Energy Department's loan guarantees, often citing a loan given to Solyndra, a photovoltaic panel manufacturer that went bankrupt. But defenders of the program say that the loan guarantee program's failure rate is well below the level Congress anticipated when it created the program.

The new loan guarantees would provide $1.67 billion to Georgia Power, a subsidiary of Southern Co.; $1.6 billion to Oglethorpe Power; and $415 million to three subsidiaries of the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia.

Critics of the loan guarantees say that the construction of the Vogtle reactors is risky and that there is a strong possibility that they will not be repaid. The Georgia Public Utilities Commission must review the utilities' financial plans and construction progress regularly because the utilities have already been passing along costs to consumers.

Perry also moved Friday to help nuclear and coal plants competing in regional electricity markets. Citing his department's recent, contested study about the workings of the electric grid, Perry asked the independent Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC, to adopt new regulations that would ensure that coal and nuclear plants that add to the grid's reliability can “⅛recover⅜ fully allocated costs and thereby continue to provide the energy security on which our nation relies.”

Perry's letter to FERC, and the proposed regulation, argue that these so-called “baseload” plants provide critical stability and reliability to the electric grid and should be compensated accordingly. They cite not only the department's recent grid study, but also the recent hurricane disasters afflicting the United States and power outages during the 2014 polar vortex event.

FERC now has 60 days to decide what action to take, and there is no guarantee that the independent agency will go along with Perry's request. But Trump has recently appointed people to key posts at the agency. If FERC agrees, and if it decides coal and nuclear are more reliable, the result could potentially mean reducing the use of solar, wind and natural gas by key grid operators in favor of coal and nuclear — which would be compensated in a way that would help prevent more plant closures.

“What's most significant about this is that we've been working on these issues for the better part of the last three-plus years, even longer — and what the secretary has done is said, enough talk, we need to actually act,” said Matt Crozat, the senior director for policy development at the Nuclear Energy Institute, which hailed both of Perry's moves Friday. “And so what this is going to do is drive to some conclusion what a policy action is going to be.”

But some environmental groups and defenders of renewable energy quickly attacked the proposed regulation as a way of imposing government mandates on the working of energy markets and reducing competition.

“I think this is the most significant electricity policy action in 20 years,” said Rob Gramlich, who works for renewable energy clients through his consulting firm Grid Strategies LLC, and previously served as an adviser to FERC commissioner Pat Wood.

Gramlich argued that if FERC goes in this direction, then grid operators are “going to pay for resources they don't necessarily need. So they're going to charge homes and businesses more than they otherwise would. And they're going to use relatively more coal and nuclear relative to gas, wind and solar.”

Mark Kresowik, a deputy regional director for the northeast with the Sierra Club, said he thinks that if FERC adopts the proposed policy, it would lead to lawsuits or even states dropping out of certain regional electricity markets that would be affected, which primarily lie in the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic and Midwest.

“Instead of coal and nuclear plants having to compete against cheaper, cleaner sources, customers would be forced to pay for unnecessary plants,” Kresowik said. “Frankly, I think that states that currently compete and use the markets would leave. I certainly would expect states to walk away from organized markets. It would be the end of competitive markets in the United States of America. That's not even an exaggeration.”

But the nuclear and coal industries hailed the move Friday.

“We commend Secretary Perry for initiating a rulemaking by FERC that will finally value the on-site fuel security provided by the coal fleet,” said Paul Bailey, the president and CEO of the American Council for Clean Coal Electricity. “The coal fleet has large stockpiles of coal that help to ensure grid resilience and reliability. We look forward to working with FERC and grid operators to quickly adopt long overdue market reforms that value the coal fleet.”

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.