advertisement

Missouri House committee advances nuclear plant bill

Tuesday, February 22, 2011 | 7:07 p.m. CST

JEFFERSON CITY — A Missouri House committee endorsed legislation Tuesday that would allow utilities to charge electric customers for some costs of developing a second nuclear power plant in the state.

The House Utilities Committee voted 21-2 to advance the legislation; the lone dissenters were a bipartisan duo of first-term lawmakers who said they were concerned about how consumers would be affected. Supporters contend the bill is needed for Missouri to continue consideration of whether to expand the use of nuclear power for electricity.

The bill would let power companies recoup from customers the cost of getting an early site permit from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A 1976 voter-approved law currently bars utilities from charging customers for the costs of a new power plant before it starts producing electricity.

A group of utilities that includes Ameren Missouri, Empire District Electric, Kansas City Power & Light, electric cooperatives and municipal utilities announced in November that they were considering seeking an early site permit for a second nuclear plant near an existing plant in Callaway County, near Fulton. The permit would not specify a plant design or authorize construction, and the group has said it has not decided whether to build a second plant.

Rep. Glen Klippenstein, R-Maysville, who voted against the legislation Tuesday, said he could support expanding nuclear power but the bill seemed like an effort to shift some of the risk of building a new plant from utilities to customers.

On the flip side, Rep. Jason Holsman, D-Kansas City, voted for the legislation after telling colleagues that he opposes expanding nuclear power. Holsman said the legislation nonetheless is needed for Missouri to keep its energy options open.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

Derrick Fogle February 22, 2011 | 8:29 p.m.

One promise from Ameren would fix this CWIP mess. Just guarantee that the financing ratepayer base gets first dibs on any energy the financed plant produces, and gets it at a guaranteed 'reasonable' rate: i.e. 5.5% markup over actual ongoing operating costs. Any production unused by the financing ratepayer base could be sold on the open market, no strings attached.

OK, technically that's two promises. But... put *that* to the Missouri voters and see if we don't get that project rolling. Most of us are not against the project. We just expect, as collective financiers of the project, to get something for our investment.

And it shouldn't cost $40M and 44 months to certify Callaway for a 2nd plant. It should cost maybe $5-$6M and take about a year. Anything more needs to be scrutinized as over-regulation.

3rd article repost reprise: Surprise! (NOT): Ameren gets ratepayer financing without having to promise *anything* to to the rate-paying financiers. Well played.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements