Nuclear Raid on Ratepayers Underway in Pennsylvania?

cost of renewables - Tom ShepstoneTom Shepstone
Natural Gas NOW

… 

Is Pennsylvania preparing to do a nuclear raid on electric ratepayers? This is madness. We have natural gas and it’s less expensive. What’s the problem?

I got a disturbing e-mail from my electric service provider, yesterday. It indicates the nuclear energy industry, following the lead of renewables scammers, is looking for ratepayers and taxpayers to protect them from natural gas competition. They want me to pay for their inability to compete.

Worse, rather than address the problem with nuclear energy costs (way too much expensive government delay and regulation), they’ve decided to join the forces that have held their industry down and go for the subsidies. That means we, as ratepayers and taxpayers, are slammed twice with the costs of bureaucracy. This is madness.

nuclear

Susquehanna Steam Electric Station – Berwick, Pennsylvania

There’s nothing wrong with nuclear energy except that it costs too darned much and people are scared of it after Three Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima. These factors are related, of course. The delays and costs of governmental regulation are a direct result of fears generated by these three examples of accidents. But, it has the advantage of being emission free and, in the insane world of zero emission virtue signaling that provides an excuse to ask for government subsidies. Let the ratepayers pay! Isn’t that what they’re there for, after all?

Yes, Pennsylvania’s shale revolution has made nuclear energy a whole lot less competitive than it once was and now the nuclear industry wants a subsidy, too. It’s a thoroughly bad idea and here’s what PPL, my electric service provider, had to say about it (emphasis added):

A nuclear subsidy proposal being discussed in Harrisburg would end up raising electric bills for customers in Pennsylvania and we estimate PPL Electric Utilities customers would collectively have to pay an extra $130 million per year.

PPL Electric Utilities is standing up against this plan because we believe this is bad public policy and an unfair burden on our customers.

Proposed legislation would require electric utilities to purchase as much as half of their customer demand from nuclear energy as part of a new mandate under Pennsylvania’s Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards Act. The reality is nuclear energy already benefits from a robust energy market in Pennsylvania.

PPL Electric Utilities and its parent company, PPL Corporation, support a clean energy future. No one disputes that nuclear energy is carbon-free, but we don’t want the public to confuse narrow nuclear subsidy proposals with efficient and effective economy-wide, market-based efforts to move the state toward a low carbon future.

Proponents of the nuclear subsidy measure have created a “crisis” environment and want quick action from legislators. We’re saying pump the brakes here and let this proposal be properly vetted. Hold hearings, call in all stakeholders and most importantly, demand numbers from advocates of this plan.

Is hiding a nuclear bailout in customers’ electricity bills necessary and is it the best course to move Pennsylvania forward? We don’t think so.

I don’t think so, either. Stop the madness before it spreads!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

4 thoughts on “Nuclear Raid on Ratepayers Underway in Pennsylvania?

  1. Looks like nuclear energy is preferred over gas..
    That means less profits for gas industry.

    Gas industry will be in more trouble financially than it is now.

    Not everyone loves gas as much as you do..

  2. NRDC is in agreement with you and likely your antifracking enemies at food and water watch will be as well. Though it’s doubtful that subsidies are the real issue for them.

    PS You might want to drop the “virtue signaling” lingo when discussing emissions. Do you think dominion and other companies are just virtue signaling when they discuss methane emission reduction?

    https://www.hydrocarbons-technology.com/news/dominion-energy-pledges-50-reduction-in-methane-emissions/

  3. https://mobile.twitter.com/crampell/status/1106032284967337986

    Interesting quote there about Trump running on coal in the last election. Didn’t Ted Cruz come to PA during the last presidential primary season to run on coal as well? Curious strategy for both Cruz and the Washington Examiner to headline with coal in the year 2016, no? One wonders exactly when conservatives and Republicans will get real about their party’s losing climate change denial and misinformation strategy? There were practically commercials for coal / climate change denial on this blog during the last election season via that quack Paul Driessen, no?

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/cruz-promises-to-end-war-on-coal

  4. Pingback: Nuclear Bailouts Are Uniting All in Disgust Over Corruption and SubsidiesNatural Gas Now

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *