Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘CPS Energy’

Smitty: Austin and San Antonio took different paths when choosing new electric utility management

Posted in Consumers, Efficiency, Good Government, Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , on July 23, 2010 |

This is Andy checking in from Vegas and Netroots Nation: sheesh, we leave Texas for a few days and the wheels start to come off the bus, don’t they?  Of course, our fearless and tireless leader, Tom “Smitty” Smith is there to handle everything, as he has done for the last 2 and a half decades.

This ran in today’s Texas Energy Report, but want to give all of our Public Citizen Texas members and followers a taste if you’re not a subscriber to the Energy Report.

Tom Smitty Smith, Director of Public Citizen TexasSMITTY: TWO CITIES TOOK OPPOSITE PATHS IN SELECTING UTILITY GM

An Op-Ed by Public Citizen’s Tom “Smitty” Smith.

The recently announced new general managers for Austin and San Antonio couldn’t be more different, and may have huge economic repercussions for both cities.

Austin has chosen Larry Weis, a “green” general manager from Turlock, California, Irrigation District. San Antonio’s CPS Energy has chosen Doyle N. Beneby Jr., from Exelon Corp. While Mr. Weis opposes nuclear power due to its costs, Mr. Beneby comes from a utility that has the largest nuclear assets in the country.

The process that each city underwent in selecting their new managers stands in stark contrast with one another. Austin announced its finalists over a month ago and invited the public to question the candidates.

CPS kept its candidates secret. In light of this lack of information, I am left to wonder what San Antonio’s fate will be given the recent track record of Exelon. Could Mr. Beneby signal the re-nuclearization of San Antonio or does he represent a future of renewable energy and green power?

Although San Antonio is still reeling from the trebling of cost of expanding the South Texas Nuclear Project, the CPS board has chosen someone from Exelon, which has tried and failed to buy NRG Energy, CPS’s partner in the nuclear expansion project, while simultaneously trying to develop another nuclear plant near Victoria.

While Exelon does have a mix of fossil fuel, hydroelectric, solar, landfill gas and wind generation sources, it only amounts to a meager 7 percent of its generation assets. The other 93 percent is nuclear.

Since the public was not privy to the public utility’s selection process, we are left to speculate what Beneby ‘s plans are. (more…)

Read Full Post »

NRC Staff Should Stop Balking, Provide Fire Safety Information, Groups Say

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on February 22, 2010 |

Agency Is Refusing to Adhere to an Order to Release Document That Would Help Determine Safety of New Nuclear Reactors

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) should stop balking and provide a critical document that would reveal how the owners of a Texas nuclear plant expansion project plan to deal with a fire or explosion, three public interest groups told the commission late last week.

Three administrative judges of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board have ordered the agency to provide at least a redacted version, but NRC staffers have refused. The NRC’s lack of transparency could impact the ability to get adequate safety-related information not only about the South Texas Project (STP) but about other proposed reactors around the country as well.

Late Friday, the groups – the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition, Public Citizen and the South Texas Association for Responsible Energy – filed a brief with the NRC. It noted that the NRC staff’s refusal to provide the information violated President Barack Obama’s new transparency policy. The groups also said the NRC is acting arbitrarily and trying to shut the public out of NRC proceedings.

“After the Sept. 11 attacks, Congress required new fire and safety standards for all new plants and the NRC developed rules to reflect this. Now, the NRC is trying to do its work behind closed doors, and its staffers are literally making up how to handle information as they go along, keeping as much secret as possible,” said Karen Hadden, executive director of the SEED Coalition. “Without disclosure of this information, we can’t tell how well the NRC is doing in protecting the public.” (more…)

Read Full Post »

CPS/NRG Settlement Shows Nuclear Power Too Costly, Too Risky

Posted in Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , on February 17, 2010 |

Statement of Tom “Smitty” Smith, Director, Public Citizen’s Texas Office

Today’s announcement that as a part of a settlement with NRG Energy, CPS Energy will withdraw its application for a federal loan guarantee for the South Texas (Nuclear) Project (STP) expansion and end further investment in the project demonstrates nuclear plants are too costly and too risky to build.

CPS Energy and the San Antonio City Council have signaled their desire to stop throwing good money after bad at STP, a message we hope will tell the U.S. Department of Energy that this plant is a poor candidate for federal loan guarantees. This debacle should show the federal government that nuclear loan guarantees are a fundamentally flawed and wasteful use of taxpayer money.

At $18.2 billion, the cost of STP has already tripled in just a year. When STP 1 and 2 were built, they ended up being six times over-budget and eight years behind schedule, and STP 3 and 4 look like they are on track to beat out that poor performance record.

Today’s announcement is a victory for the many citizens of San Antonio that have worked so hard in the last year to bring openness and accountability to the city’s participation in this project. We applaud CPS for wisely seeing the futility of wasting more time and energy on this flawed nuclear endeavor. We hope that they will be satisfied with the deal they’ve gotten and avoid the temptation to increase their ownership in the project. CPS has finally reached a settlement that shields San Antonio ratepayers from the financial risks of yet another nuclear deal gone wrong. Any future investment would throw that protection to the wind.

On Thursday, the City Council will vote on a proposed rate increase for CPS. The City Council should put a firewall in that proposal to ensure that no unauthorized money will be siphoned off to buy a bigger stake in STP.  San Antonio can’t afford to let this rate increase become a back door to continued nuclear investment.

We also have to wonder how NRG will move forward, without another clearly delineated partner in the project. Less than a month ago, NRG announced that if CPS “does not meet future obligations representative of its ownership interest in the site”, they “will wind down the project as quickly and as economically as possible.” We certainly hope that NRG CEO David Crane will remain true to that expressed intent to protect his shareholders from the next financial failure in a long historic line of overly expensive, poorly executed nuclear projects.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

San Antonio Public Forum on Proposed Rate Hikes

Posted in Energy, tagged , , , on February 8, 2010 |

Tonight San Antonio citizens will have a chance to weigh in on CPS Energy’s proposed rate hike. I have the following request from an activist in San Antonio:

Monday night CPS will be taking comments from the public on the proposed rate increase. This is short notice but we need a strong showing. We are at the end of a long struggle to have a major impact on how our energy company operates.

Please encourage your members to attend the meeting and give public comments at Villita Assembly Building, 401 Villita St at 6 p.m. on Monday, February 8, 2010.

Registration starts at 5 pm.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Nuclear Renaissance Dealt Blow by South Texas Project Troubles

Posted in Energy, Good Government, Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 29, 2010 |

A critical court ruling today rang the first chime in what could be the death knell of the so-called “nuclear renaissance,” starting with the failed expansion of the South Texas Project (STP).

This afternoon’s ruling by 408th District Court Judge Larry Noll that CPS Energy can safely withdraw from the proposed STP expansion project without losing all its investment offers the utility and the city of San Antonio the cue they’ve been waiting for to exit the national nuclear stage. Combined with the NRG Energy CEO’s announcement during a shareholder and press conference call this morning that NRG would “wind down the project as quickly and economically as possible” if CPS withdraws or STP does not receive federal loan guarantees, this news marks a major blow to those who claim nuclear power is a viable alternative to fossil fuel energy. The expansion project calls for two new nuclear reactors at a site with two existing reactors.

slide 8 of NRG's "STP 3&4 Nuclear Project and CPS Litigation" presentation given at shareholder and media conference call Friday, January 29, 2010 8:00 a.m. ET

These events give credence to the contention made over the past five years by opponents of nuclear power that it is a needlessly expensive and risky way to meet future energy needs.. In less than a year, the price of the STP nuclear expansion ballooned from around $5 billion to more than $18 billion. Given this case study of nuclear power’s failure, we must call into question the federal government’s decision to increase federal loan guarantees to support oversized, untenable projects that are already proving too risky for private investors.

Public Citizen calls on both CPS Energy and NRG Energy to stop throwing good money after bad with their nuclear expansion plans and halt the project. Thankfully, San Antonio Mayor Julian Castro intervened by putting the project on hold before costs jumped too far out of San Antonio’s reach. Given the court’s announcement that the city’s interests are protected, we hope San Antonio will take the next responsible step and bow out entirely.

Statement of Tom “Smitty” Smith, Director of Public Citizen’s Texas Office

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Public Citizen Welcomes Opportunity for Senate to Hold Rogue Utility CPS Energy Accountable

Posted in Energy, Good Government, Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on January 14, 2010 |

Statement of Tom “Smitty” Smith, Director of Public Citizen’s Texas Office

The latest interim charge of the state Senate Business and Commerce Committee provides a welcome opportunity for Texas to rein in rogue utilities like CPS Energy of San Antonio. Now tasked with studying the costs of municipally owned utilities’ generation plans and their impacts on residential and commercial customers, the Senate committee has the opportunity to protect Texans, especially low-income families, from the machinations of a utility bent on pleasing its industrial consumers at the cost of its most vulnerable customers.

CPS Energy is pursuing a risky investment in a nuclear expansion project that, depending on the final cost of the project, would raise rates between 36 percent and 60 percent over the next 10 years. The municipally owned utility has failed to adequately involve the citizenry and city government in its generation planning process. CPS Energy’s nuclear energy plan lacks any mechanism to protect consumers or low-income families, despite the fact that those customers would have to pick up the tab if the deal gets more expensive.

In comparison, the city of Austin’s generation planning process spanned two years and involved public input and roundtable stakeholder negotiations, leading to the development of special policies to protect low-income families from higher bills. Policies like built-in periodic reassessments of cost and feasibility will protect Austin residents and businesses from runaway energy costs that are so typical of large-scale nuclear construction projects. San Antonio residents need to see the same protections.

As Austin’s process clearly shows, CPS Energy can be much more inclusive and transparent. Public Citizen is grateful that the members of the Senate Business and Commerce Committee can step in and act as responsible figures in this process.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

CPS-NRG Lawsuit: Settlement Meeting and Citizen Intervenors

Posted in Energy, Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 11, 2010 |

Representatives from San Antonio’s CPS Energy and NRG Energy, their partner in the proposed South Texas Nuclear Project expansion, met this morning to try and reach a settlement on their $32 Billion lawsuit.  But CPS acting General Manager Jelynne LeBlanc-Burley apparently walked out of the meeting after learning that “neither Nuclear Innovation North America CEO Steve Winn nor NRG Energy CEO David Crane made the trip to San Antonio.”

Update: Monday’s settlement meeting ended with no resolution. Cooperation fail.

Meanwhile, a new non-profit called the Ratepayer Protection Coalition announced its inception and intention to intervene in the CPS-NRG’s lawsuit.

Whaaaa? They can do that? Yes, according to attorney Karen Seal:

In Texas, citizen groups have the right to intervene in lawsuits like this if there is evidence of illegal activity like fraud and misrepresentation and if the behavior is expected to continue. We believe this to be the case. We hope to protect our interest as ratepayers, taxpayers and voters from continuing fraud and misrepresentation by all parties.

But why intervene? Orlando Gutierrez, president of the coalition, had the following to say:

Ratepayers are not represented in the legal proceedings between these parties, although they will bear the brunt of a bad settlement deal with higher electric bills.  There has been fraud and misrepresentation throughout this process. CPS withheld information and misled the public about the $4 billion cost increase throughout the series of eleven district meetings last year. Project partner NRG admits to misrepresenting costs for purposes of negotiation. Both partners deceived the City Council. Yet neither the Council, taxpayers, or voters have independent representation in the Court.

The Ratepayer Protection Coalition is seeking discovery information to “get to the truth” about the costs of the proposed reactors and available energy alternatives.

According to Greg Harman, reporter at the San Antonio Current:

CPS can’t represent the City of San Antonio, argues the Ratepayer Protection Coalition, a collection of familiar faces from the vindicated critics’ pool. Not only has CPS “conducted a campaign of misinformation, disinformation, and deception designed to convince the San Antonio community about the merits of pursuing nuclear power” but threatened the City Council “that a decision not to pursue the nuclear project would lead to the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the project to date by CPS Energy.”

In short, CPS has “dirty hands” and can’t represent the City of San Antonio in court, according to RPC’s complaint filed this morning in the 37th District Court, joining the CPS-NRG lawsuit as an intervener.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Year in Review: San Antonio Nuclear Debacle/Amores Nucleares Telenovela

Posted in Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 5, 2010 |

*Update: Greg Harman at the San Antonio Current just published a fantastic and very thorough recap of the twisted nuclear saga. Check it out!

Here’s part 2 in this year’s first annual Year in Review: Top Texas Vox Stories of 2009 series. Part 1 is just a hop, skip and scroll down.

3. San Antonio Nuclear Debacle/Amores Nucleares Telenovela

This year has been a doozy for nuclear power, with the highlight of course being the San Antonio situation.  Over the last 12 months San Antonio has ridden a wild wave of cost estimates, community meetings, protests, scandals, and misinformation.  But I’m getting ahead of myself. Remember when…

Last January, CPS Energy committed to spend $60 million more on the proposed expansion of the South Texas Nuclear Project, a decision which at that point brings the city utility’s total expenditures on units 3 & 4 to $267 million. Not long after that, Austin City Council took a look at participating in the expansion project but said “No way, that’s much too risky of an investment for us.” San Antonio decided that something magical (but mysterious) was different for them, despite our prediction in late April that the proposed reactors could actually cost as much as $22 Billion.  Mum was CPS’ word on a cost estimate at that time, but by June they announced that $13 Billion was a good, round number. We worried at this point that CPS was being overly optimistic, ignoring the history of the South Texas Project and other nukes around the nation and independent reports, but those concerns largely fell on deaf ears.

Then over the summer, CPS Energy launched a massive public outreach campaign, with meetings in every district — but kind of botched it.  Despite activists’ protests that CPS’ cost numbers were innacurate, the utiltiy refused to release their information or back up numbers, and many San Antonio citizens left the community meetings feeling disenchanted with the process and suspicious of CPS.

As a rising tide of activists and concerned citizens grew, eventually they formed the coalition group Energía Mía and worked together to halt CPS’ spending for more nuclear reactors. The group launched a string of protests and press conferences highlighting the many flaws of nuclear power and the San Antonio deal in particular.  Everyone was all geared up for a big showdown the last week in October, but then the cowpie really hit the rotating bladed device (let’s call it a windmill). For the next part, I’m going to pull from a previous post where I likened the whole situation to a geeky, policy version of a telenovela.

Previously, on Amores Nucleares:

With just days before San Antonio City Council was to vote to approve $400 million in bonds for new nuclear reactors, it was leaked that the project could actually cost $4 Billion more than CPS had been saying all summer (according to Toshiba, who would actually be building the plant). The vote was postponed, there was an impromptu press conference, and it came out that CPS staff had actually known about the cost increase for more than a week — Oops! Oh, and the “leak” wasn’t that CPS came out with the truth, an aide from the mayor’s office only found out after confronting CPS about a rumor he’d heard. But how did the mayor’s office find out? NRG, CPS’ partner in the project was the “Deepthroat”, because they were going to announce Toshiba’s $17 Billion cost estimate at a shareholder’s meeting soon after the city council vote and thought, geez, that could look really bad for CPS! Meanwhile, CPS reps flew to Japan in a hurry to figure things out. Steve Bartley, interim GM for CPS, resigned. Furious that CPS had hidden the ugly truth from City Council, the mayor demanded the resignation of two key CPS board members, and got City Council to vote unanimously that they get the boot. Chairwoman Aurora Geis agreed to go, but Steve Hennigan said “No Way, Jose.” THEN CPS completed an internal audit of the whole shebang to figure out what-the-hell-happened, which found that Steve Bartley was to blame, and everyone else was only guilty of failure in their “responsibility of prompt disclosure”. Then it came out the project could be even more way way expensive than anyone thought (except of course Energia Mia, Public Citizen, SEED Coalition, the Center for American Progress, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and analysts Arjun Makhijani, Clarence Johnson, Craig Severance, and Mark Cooper to name a few). And then those crazy cats all started suing each other.

So in the end, they told folks all summer long that the plant would cost $13 Billion, even though insiders knew since late June that it could very well be $4 Billion more. Latest update is that the plant could really cost $18.2 Billion! On December 31st, Toshiba provided CPS with another new estimate, which the utility will use to come up with their own new cost estimate mid-January. City council is slated to vote sometime after that, once and for all, on $400 million in bonds to continue the project.

But clearly, enough is enough. So if you live in San Antonio, tell City Council to stop throwing good money after bad, and to cut their losses before its too late. Tell them to vote “no” to nuclear bonds and start the year off fresh and free from the “ghost of nuclear projects past.”

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

$18.2 Billion! Amores Nucleares: San Antonio Nuclear Expansion Soap Opera Update

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 23, 2009 |

The San Antonio Nuclear Expansion Soap Opera plot thickens.  Today’s update brings the shocking news that South Texas Project Reactors 3 & 4 could actually cost, not $13 Billion, not even $17 Billion… but $18.2 Billion!

With all the trouble CPS has gotten into recently regarding transparency (a gentle term we’re using that translates roughly to “lying to the public and covering up bad news”), you’d think that they would’ve come forward and made this estimate public as soon as humanly possible.

But you’d be wrong.  Instead, they presented the numbers to their board in a closed session last week (read: NOT public, you’re not invited).  Sometime later, the San Antonio Express-News got wind of the update, “based on numbers provided by the South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Co”, and published the results.

When will CPS learn that they have got to be honest with the public, the mayor, and city council? They told folks all summer long that the plant would cost $13 Billion, even though insiders knew since late June that it could very well be $4 Billion more.  CPS has led a lengthy and sloppy cover-up campaign of STP and nuclear power’s “inconvenient truth” that culminated in resignations, an internal investigation, and several firings and demotions.

Am I going to fast for you? Did you miss a few episodes, and are confused that CPS’ prize project could so quickly fall to pieces? Let’s do a recap.

Previously, on Amores Nucleares:

With just days before San Antonio City Council was to vote to approve $400 million in bonds for new nuclear reactors, it was leaked that the project could actually cost $4 Billion more than CPS had been saying all summer (according to Toshiba, who would actually be building the plant).  The vote was postponed, there was an impromptu press conference, and it came out that CPS staff had actually known about the cost increase for more than a week — Oops! Oh, and the “leak” wasn’t that CPS came out with the truth, an aide from the mayor’s office only found out after confronting CPS about a rumor he’d heard. But how did the mayor’s office find out? NRG, CPS’ partner in the project was the “Deepthroat”, because they were going to announce Toshiba’s $17 Billion cost estimate at a shareholder’s meeting soon after the city council vote and thought, geez, that could look really bad for CPS! Meanwhile,  CPS reps flew to Japan in a hurry to figure things out.  Steve Bartley, interim GM for CPS, resigned.  Furious that CPS had hidden the ugly truth from City Council, the mayor demanded the resignation of two key CPS board members, and got City Council to vote unanimously that they get the boot.  Chairwoman Aurora Geis agreed to go, but Steve Hennigan said “No Way, Jose.” THEN CPS completed an internal audit of the whole shebang to figure out what-the-hell-happened, which found that Steve Bartley was to blame, and everyone else was only guilty of failure in their “responsibility of prompt disclosure”.  And then this week it came out the project could be even more way way expensive than anyone thought (except of course Energia Mia, Public Citizen, SEED Coalition, the Center for American Progress, Nuclear Information and Resource Service, and analysts Arjun Makhijani, Clarence Johnson, Craig Severance, and Mark Cooper to name a few).

That about brings us up to speed.

So what is next? December 31st, Toshiba should come out with a new, “official” cost estimate, which CPS will use to come up with their own cost estimate mid-January. City council is slated to vote January 15th, once and for all, on $400 million in bonds to continue the project.  But clearly, enough is enough.  Tell City Council to stop throwing good money after bad, and to cut their losses before its too late.  Tell them to vote “no” to nuclear bonds January 15th, and start the year off fresh and free from the “ghost of nuclear projects past.”

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Read Full Post »

Georgetown Council Snubs Students Over Nuclear Power

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 11, 2009 |

Original post can be found at the ReEnergize Texas Blog

On Tuesday, students from Southwestern University’s Students for Environmental Activism and Knowledge (SEAK) had intended to speak before the Georgetown City Council regarding the 20 year energy plan for their city.  They had registered an agenda item with the City Secretary’s Office, asked all the right questions about who could speak and for howlong, and everyone was in City Council chambers ahead of the meeting forms in hand and polite, thoughtful, well-reasoned remarks committed to memory.

SEAK’s charismatic President, Connor Hanrahan, went to the mic and spoke politely about hoping to form a positive “working relationship” with the city as they discussed aspects of the energy plan and in particular a provision to purchase 30% of their electricity from nuclear power plants.

“We are not here to protest nuclear,” he said, “but want to discuss new information that affects this plan.”

And then the Mayor dropped a bomb.  Citing a “misunderstanding” about City Council procedures, he informed Connor and the group of students and allies he’d brought with him that they would not be allowed to speak at the meeting that evening.  To his credit, Mayor Garver did make an effort at conciliation by offering Connor the opportunity to nominate 2 members of his party to speak for 3 minutes apiece, but the notion was quickly rebuked by Councilwoman Pat Berryman, a known proponent of nuclear power.

Does this sound familiar to anyone?  Think Pedernales Electric Coop and CPS Energy.  These two major electric utilities in Texas have been recently embroiled in controversy over failure to provide information, give the public access to speak, and making bad, even corrupt decisions from positions of power.  As a result, reform candidates have been elected to the PEC Board of Directors and two of its former members face multiple felony indictments.  At CPS, two executives have been placed on leave while its board investigates why the utility failed to disclose new cost estimates to the public and the San Antonio City Council.

Why would Georgetown’s Mayor and City Council tell local students they had no right to speak about the energy future of their own city?  Because the rules said so?  Can a member of the City Council not make a motion to suspend the rules?  In fact they can, but no member of the City Council had the courage or good sense to make that motion and give their constituents the opportunity to weigh in on an issue of city governance. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Nuclear cost estimate balloons by $4 Billion, San Antonio delays vote on expansion project

Posted in Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 28, 2009 |

With just two days before San Antonio City Council was to vote to approve $400 million in bonds to move forward with the South Texas Nuclear Project two reactor expansion, officials announced yesterday that the cost estimate for the project had ballooned by up to $4 BILLION.  That means that the new price tag on the new reactors, up from $13 Billion, is now a whopping $17 Billion (and don’t forget that even $13 Billion was a big jump from the original cost estimate of $5.4 Billion).  As a result, the Council has postponed the vote until January.

This is a huge victory for environmentalists, social justice workers, and citizen activists who have been tirelessly organizing opposition to new nuclear reactors.  If these concerned citizens hadn’t gotten involved, the City Council would have voted to approve the bonds a month ago, with no option to renegotiate their contract or pricing.  Because citizens got educated and involved, City Council was forced to delay the vote until they had all the information.  And the information, as it turns out, is that the cost estimates that groups like Public Citizen and SEED Coalition have been predicting for more than a year (up to $17.5 Billion according to a 2008 study by Arjun Makhijani and as much as $22 Billion according to analyst Clarence Johnson), far from a Cassandra cry, have been right on the money all along.

For all the dirty details, be sure to read the San Antonio Express-News’ breaking article Nuclear cost estimate rises by as much as $4 billion and the San Antonio Current’s blog post Nuke Collider: San Antonio delays $400 million nuke bond vote over Toshiba cost surge.  And courtesy of the unstoppable Greg Harman at the Current, check out the following video from the emergency press conference CPS officials and the Mayor’s office held yesterday, a MUST WATCH:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwdivqvtjgc&feature=player_embedded]

What I find most interesting about this whole mess is that CPS insiders knew a week and a half ago that the costs were up by $4 Billion, but neglected to tell the Mayor or City Council until yesterday.  And even then, it didn’t come as a formal announcement — the cat was only let out of the bag because, as the Express-News reports, an aide of the Mayor confronted CPS about rumors of a cost increase.

CPS interim General Manager Steve Bartley said the utility’s main contractor on the project, Toshiba Inc., informed officials that the cost of the reactors would be “substantially greater” than CPS’ estimate of $13 billion, which includes financing.

He said utility officials found out about the increase “within the last week and a half or so.”

But the mayor said he only learned the news Monday night after an aide asked Bartley about rumors of a cost estimate increase.

Castro said he didn’t know whether CPS would have divulged the increase to the council before its vote Thursday had his aide not directly questioned utility management.

“One would hope otherwise, but the evidence seems to suggest that they were less than proactive,” he said.

Sounds like CPS was going to wait until after Thursday’s vote to share their special need-to-know information, and that if it weren’t for those meddling kids they would have gotten away with it too.

Any way you look at it, yesterday’s announcement is fortuitous for the City of San Antonio.  Now City Council has a better idea of the real costs they are looking at with the project, and hopefully will think twice about placing their trust in CPS Energy now that they’ve been burned by the utility’s untransparent business practices.  With two months time until the vote, City Council now has plenty of time to order an independent study to model various energy scenarios and present a slew of options (besides just “nuclear or nothing”) for San Antonio’s energy future — including a heavy mix of renewable energy and efficiency. An outside study to model alternatives would present City Council with the most cost-effective, least risky, most environmentally sustainable plan possible. CPS claims to have done a ‘thorough’ investigation of these options, but just as they conveniently underestimated the cost of nuclear, they have overestimated the cost of renewable energies such as wind, solar, storage, and energy efficiency to the point of absurdity.  With two months to work at it, there is no reason why San Antonio shouldn’t have a green plan to put up against the nuclear plan by January.  They nearly voted to approve the project this week without the full range of information.  San Antonio City Council can’t put themselves in that situation again.

But don’t take my word for it.  Check out the following statements from Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas Office and Karen Hadden, director of the SEED Coalition:

Cost Increase of South Texas Project Shows Nuclear Power Is Too Expensive, Too Risky

Statement of Tom “Smitty” Smith, Director, Public Citizen’s Texas Office

We can’t think of any good reasons for the San Antonio City Council to continue with this project when there are far less expensive alternatives readily available. Investing in wind and solar makes much more sense and carries none of the risks – both the extreme financial risk that CPS wants taxpayers to bear and the health and safety risks inherent with nuclear power. If the City Council continues with this project, the average ratepayers will see their utility bills increase by 50 percent.

If San Antonio citizens hadn’t stepped to the plate, the City Council would have voted for the STP a month ago and the city would have been another $400 million in the hole with no option to renegotiate. But citizens got educated and got involved. Their involvement made the City Council delay the vote until they had all the information.

We know the San Antonio City Council is too smart to continue to support this boondoggle. Nuclear power is too expensive and too risky to use. It’s time for the San Antonio City Council to pull the plug on the STP expansion.

Statement of Karen Hadden, executive director, Sustainable Energy and Economic Development (SEED) Coalition:

We aren’t surprised to hear that the latest cost estimate for the South Texas Project puts the price to build two new nuclear reactors at $17 billion, $4 billion more than what CPS Energy said in June and more than three times the project’s original $5.4 billion price tag. We’ve been saying for two years that CPS has been feeding the public lowball estimates that wouldn’t hold up to reality.

Read Full Post »

CPS has dropped the ball on alternatives to nuclear

Posted in Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , on October 2, 2009 |

CPS has dropped the ball on alternatives to nuclear

By Arjun Makhijani – Special to the San Antonio Express-News

CPS Energy is asking its board and the San Antonio City Council for permission to sell $400 million of bonds to follow the $276 million CPS Energy has already spent to get an option to buy a nuclear pig in a poke.

Yet, the price that Toshiba, the company that would build the plant, would charge won’t be fully disclosed until 2012; a “baseline” cost estimate will be disclosed this winter. A commitment of such a vast additional sum is premature, at best.

First, CPS’ electricity demand projections are suspect. Its projected annual growth rate would increase from about 1.5 percent during 2009-2020 to about 2.4 percent after that. Yet, stringent building and appliance efficiency regulations are in the works nationally. Carbon prices are likely to rise steeply after 2020.

CPS’ assumption about an increasing growth rate makes neither market sense nor common sense. The risk to San Antonio would not be as serious had CPS done a careful analysis of the options. It has not. It only considered coal (a poor risk) and natural gas as potential alternatives.

CPS did not consider compressed-air energy storage, in use on a large scale both in Alabama and Germany. An investment of $400 million could convert the 1,250 megawatts of wind energy that CPS has or plans to acquire into about 400 megawatts of baseload capacity. CPS estimates a cost of $9,000 per kilowatt for a concentrating solar thermal power plant with heat storage, yet utilities are signing contracts (or purchased power agreements) for half this amount or less today. Google’s green energy chief, Bill Weihl, recently stated that solar projects typically cost $2,500 to $4,000 per kilowatt, plus $1,000 for storage.

Moreover, these costs are coming down. CPS did not consider combined heat and power, which is commercial, biomass used in an integrated gasification combined cycle plant, or elements of a smart grid that could convert intermittent renewable capacity into dependable capacity for loads like washing machines and air conditioners. It doesn’t appear to have considered recent drops in natural gas prices.

In brief, CPS has dropped the ball on alternatives. The argument that CPS must meet urgent deadlines to preserve its nuclear option should not rush the board or the city. NRG, CPS’ 50-50 partner in the project, can hardly proceed without CPS. Without CPS’ stellar bond rating and money, NRG, with its junk bond rating, would be far less likely to get federal loan guarantees.

Indeed, in my view, without CPS, NRG would not have a viable project. During the Clean Technology Forum in San Antonio on Sept. 16, Mayor Julián Castro promised the public that CPS’ investment decision will be made on merits.

However, this cannot be done now, because CPS has not put the options on the table that would enable a comparison on the merits. An independent expert panel could probably do a study for City Council in six months, possibly less. It would be unwise to risk $400 million more without it.

Arjun Makhijani is president of Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. He has published two studies on CPS nuclear costs.

Read Full Post »

Four more contentions added to STP nuke expansion legal fight – isn’t it time for CPS and San Antonio to reconsider?

Posted in Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , on September 30, 2009 |

Great news about the legal fight against STP.

The Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel admitted four more of the contentions (all water related) brought by SEED Coalition, bringing the grand total to 5 contentions admitted for a hearing with 7 still pending.

This is more than anywhere else in the country.

This increased uncertainty *should* make CPS and San Antonio City Council think twice about going forward.

Look! A Press Release!  (fully continued after the jump if you want to get into all the legal contentions)  As always, for more info go read everything at NukeFreeTexas.org

For Immediate Release: September 30, 2009

Contacts: Karen Hadden,  SEED Coalition,

Susan Dancer, South Texas Association for Responsible Energy

Robert V. Eye, Attorney for Intervenors

Citizens Gain Ground in STP Intervention Over Water Concerns

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Admits

Four Additional Water Related Contentions for a Hearing

Citizen opposition to two proposed nuclear reactors at the South Texas Project (STP) continues with another success. Yesterday the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (ASLB) Panel ruled that South Texas Project Nuclear Operating Company (STPNOC) had failed to adequately analyze the environmental impacts of radioactive contaminated water and water availability, issues or “contentions” raised by concerned citizens in their Petition to Intervene in the proposed expansion at STP. The Order is of national significance since STPNOC is the first in the nation to request licensing in 30 years.

“Citizens intervening in the South Texas Project’s licensing process gained significant legal ground yesterday when the ASLB Panel ruled that four additional contentions be admitted for a hearing,” said Karen Hadden, Executive Director of the SEED Coalition, one of the Intervenors. “Intervenors now have a total of five admissible contentions, with seven contentions related to fires and explosions and losses of large areas of the plant still pending.” The licensing process is likely to be delayed as a result of additional contentions. It was delay and construction problems that led to the first reactors at STP coming in six times over budget.

SEED Coalition, Public Citizen and the Bay City based South Texas Association for Responsible Energy (STARE) are Intervenors in the case. Attorney Robert V. Eye went before the ASLB Panel in June and argued the admissibility of 28 contentions challenging the license application for two additional reactors, Units 3 and 4, at the South Texas Project.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

Come Speak TONIGHT at CPS Public Hearing

Posted in Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , on September 28, 2009 |

Tonight at 6 pm is the final CPS hearing regarding the proposed nuclear reactors. The trustees will vote at their next meeting, Oct. 5th, on whether to participate in the proposed two additional nuclear reactors and spend an additional $400 million. This could be the last chance for citizens to directly address CPS on this extremely important issue.

Nuclear reactors come with serious financial, health and security risks, and are not the answer to San Antonio’s energy needs. We are increasingly concerned about the misinformation, spin and fuzzy math used by CPS to defend its risky nuclear proposal. CPS Energy knows that safer, more affordable options already exist today. These better energy choices could build green jobs locally.

WHEN: Today – Monday, September 28th at 6 pm (Come at 5 pm to sign up to speak)

WHERE: Lobby of Villita Assembly Building, 401 Villita Street, San Antonio

Hope you can make it out!

For more info visit: www.Energiamia.org

Energía Mía includes members of Esperanza Peace and Justice Center, Southwest Workers Union, Sun Energy, Former San Antonio City Council members, Project Verde, Alamo Group of the Sierra Club, Highland Hills Neighborhood Association, Jefferson Heights Neighborhood Association, Texas Drought Project, Green Party, San Antonio Area Progressive Action Coalition, SEED Coalition, and Public Citizen.

Read Full Post »

WATCH: San Antonio Clean Tech Forum- The Great Nuclear Debate

Posted in Nuclear, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , on September 18, 2009 |

Many of you have been clamoring for these videos of the clean tech forum that we attended on Wednesday, so here they are in streaming digital goodness.
[vimeo 6648744]
[vimeo 6649649]

Outside the event we caught up with two of the panelists from the forum, specifically the ones opposed to San Antonio investing in the new nuclear expansion.  First, Craig Severance, a CPA by trade, who did a financial “due diligence” type of analysis on the proposed nuclear expansion at STP 3 and 4. Read about it in his blog at energyeconomyonline.com/San_Antonio_Debate

[vimeo 6648340]

We also spoke with Dr. Arjun Makhijani, a noted power expert, on the risks of nuclear expansion.

[vimeo 6648395]

It’s time to be hard-headed about this, folks.  Investing in nuclear  is an economic risk the City of San Antonio simply can’t afford to take.

Hungry for more?  We have full footage of the “Risking San Antonio’s Economic Future, Nuclear Experts Explain Flaws and Risks of Pursuing More Nuclear Reactors” forum that was held later in the day at the UTSA Downtown Campus.

[vimeo 6660448]
[vimeo 6662900]

Here’s some of the press coverage from the event:

Energy leaders to debate nuke issue in S.A.By Tracy Idell Hamilton   -Express-News

Nuclear forum highlights contrasting opinions –  By Anton Caputo   -Express-News

Nuke vote delayed; final hearing is set By Tracy Idell Hamilton   -Express-News

Nuclear investment part of a viable energy portfolio By Patrick Moore
(please go here and leave snarky comments about what a corporate stooge sell-out Patrick Moore is)

http://johntedesco.net/blog/2009/09/16/fresh-from-twitter-debating-nuclear-power/

http://blog.barberassociates.com/2009/09/san-antonio-clean-technology-nuclear.html

http://www.ksat.com/news/20966023/detail.html

And last but certainly not least, for our Amigos who can habla espanol, please watch this video from Univision featuring our own Melissa Sanchez and David Power!

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »