Lamar Alexander should stop romancing nuclear power

U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, right, takes part in a Tennessee Valley Authority roundtable discussion Monday at the Howard Baker Jr. Center in Knoxville.
U.S. Sen. Lamar Alexander, right, takes part in a Tennessee Valley Authority roundtable discussion Monday at the Howard Baker Jr. Center in Knoxville.

Tennessee senators went out of their way Monday to question TVA's power generation mix because the utility's new 20-year plan calls for adding wind power if it provides a cheap option. And at an estimated 4 to 4.5 cents per kilowatt hour, it looks as though wind will do just that.

At that price, the wind energy produced by windmills in Oklahoma and Texas and delivered and sold to TVA by Clean Line Energy Partners would be below the average 6.6 cents per kwh price TVA charges its wholesalers for power now. What's more it should be below some other new generation in the region, including new nuclear plants being built in Georgia and South Carolina, according to a Tuesday news story about TVA officials and Sens. Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker taking part in a roundtable meting in Knoxville.

Read more

Tennessee senators caution TVA about 'romance' with renewables

But Sen. Lamar Alexander, long a nuclear power supporter, brushed off those figures and admonished TVA to cut off its "romance" with renewable power -- especially wind power.

"The most expensive path you could take is to maximize energy efficiency and to maximize renewable power. The goal is not more windmills. The TVA act requires you to pursue low-cost power."

What? The most expensive path you could take is to maximize energy efficiency? The most expensive path you could take is to maximize renewable power?

This is beyond nonsensical.

But we must remember that Alexander, before Fukushima's massive nuclear accident following an earthquake and tsunami in Japan, called for the U.S. to build 100 new nuclear reactors. And in March, as the the new chairman of the Senate Energy and Water Development subcommittee, he renewed the call, this time for 48 new reactors.

"I don't see why we need any wind (generation)," said Alexander. "If nuclear is zero (carbon and air) emissions and wind is more expensive, and you don't need wind most of the time, why would you buy it?"

We ask why a U.S. senator would spurn promoting energy efficiency and cheaper, carbon-free power?

Right now, renewable energy makes up less than 1 percent of TVA's power generation portfolio. If, in fact, TVA can buy the wind power as cheaply as promised, TVA's new long-range energy plan being developed this year would call for boosting renewables to 8 percent of the portfolio. By 2033, TVA envisions using high-voltage, direct-current transmission lines planned by Clean Line Energy Partners to import wind-generated power from states like Oklahoma and Texas where it is more abundant than wind is in the Tennessee Valley.

"TVA is looking for the best and lowest cost option and we understand that and believe we can ultimately be competitive," said Jimmy Glotfelty, executive vice president of Clean Line.

Corker and Alexander invoked the "jobs-we-need-jobs" argument, noting that TVA power rates must be low to attract industries that provide those jobs.

" If we want more good jobs and higher family incomes, TVA should stick to its mission of low rates and not be tempted to pursue the energy fad of the moment," Alexander said.

TVA's CEO Bill Johnson countered: "It's clearly moving in the right direction and, in my view, our rates are competitive."

Data from the Energy Information Administration shows TVA rates are below the U.S. average for both residential and industrial customers. Among the 100 largest U.S. utilities, TVA ranks 14th lowest in industrial rates -- and second lowest in the Southeast -- at an average delivered cost of 5.78 cents per kwh. Residential customers pay an end-use price of about 9.11 cent per kwh, which ranks 38th lowest among the top 100 U.S. utilities.

And the proof that TVA's industrial rates appeal to industries is coming from record new investment in the Tennessee Valley, which rose to $8.5 billion last year and is on pace for even more investment in fiscal 2015.

Perhaps the real problem here is Alexander's and Corker's displeasure with the Obama administration's proposed new carbon rules and the wind subsidies already approved by Congress.

The Clean Power Plan proposed by EPA could require Tennessee to cut its carbon emissions by nearly 40 percent from the levels before 2010. As proposed, EPA would not give TVA credit for the new Watts Bar Unit 2 reactor since its was started in 1973, long before the new law was drafted.

Speaking of subsidies, both Alexander and Corker criticized the federal tax subsidies for wind generation as a type of "wealth transfer" from low-wind states such as Tennessee to windier states that can generate such power.

We guess the billions of dollars given to prop up the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries nationally and worldwide are OK with our senators. In the U.S., over the years 19502010, oil, natural gas, and coal received $369 billion, or 70 percent of total energy subsidies over that period. Non-hydro renewable energy (primarily wind and solar) benefited from $74 billion in federal subsidies, 9 percent of the total. Nuclear power benefited from $73 billion in federal subsidies, also 9 percent of the total. Hydro power received $90 billion, or 12 percent.

The fact is that wind is quickly becoming as cheap as nuclear power -- and much faster to install. As solar continues to fall in cost, we wonder if our senators also will oppose it.

Both would reduce carbon emissions. And neither could leave thousands of people unable to return home, as happened in Fukushima.

Upcoming Events