• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Does Nuclear Energy Need More Loan Guarantees?

    Apparently not:

    Electricite de France SA and Constellation Energy Group say they want Exelon to join their UniStar Nuclear Energy development venture. After being ranked in the lower tier for federal loan guarantees, Exelon said it is seeking a reactor design more proven than the GE Hitachi Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor it initially planned to use in Texas. UniStar plans to use Areva SA’s Evolutionary Power Reactors in Maryland and New York.”

    The Energy Policy Act of 2005 establishes loan guarantees for handful of reactors built in the United States. Now, some companies are making their case for unlimited loan guarantees and more subsidies to keep things moving forward.

    But this is a clear example of why more loan guarantees aren’t needed. The important policy moving forward with regard to loan guarantees is that the program not be expanded in terms of dollar amount beyond what has already been legislated. Loan guarantees for the first few nuclear plants may be legitimate as a means to offset the risk posed by uncertain government regulation. However, any nuclear renaissance in America should not be dependent on these types of programs and will not grow to be sustainable if they do become dependent.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    11 Responses to Does Nuclear Energy Need More Loan Guarantees?

    1. Thomas Gray South Ca says:

      I don't think any building of nuclear power plants is going to happen until more people find out what the greens are doing to drive up the cost of electricity.

      And even then won't do anything about it if possible until it bites us all in the wallet.

    2. Barb -mn says:

      Loan guarantees from the bank not the government/taxpayers. Nuclear is an efficient all around way to go.

    3. Pingback: Does Nuclear Energy Need More Loan Guarantees? » The Foundry | kozmom

    4. Pingback: Does Nuclear Energy Need More Loan Guarantees? » The Foundry | definedebt.com

    5. Disagree says:

      This position misses the fact that the total cost to build a nuclear plant will be somewhere between 25 to 50% of the total capitalization of even the largest utilities. They cannot get loans this size, and will not bet their companies on new nuclear construction. The market will not work in this case. Loan guarantees will draw investment into new nuclear construction, and it will actually happen.

    6. Pingback: Does Nuclear Energy Need More Loan Guarantees? « Conservative Thoughts and Profundity

    7. Nicolas Loris Nick Loris says:


      The point of this blog post is exactly that. You’re right, companies may not want to go all in on nuclear, especially given what happened in the past where some of these companies lost a lot of money. But they still recognize the potential profit and are thus organizing to mitigate these risks – so they can split the risk privately instead of relying on the government. (see above quote)

    8. Pingback: Chum For You » Blog Archive » Locking Loans - <b>Mortgage Rate</b> and Tip For 12-16-08

    9. Pingback: Does Nuclear Energy Need More Loan Guarantees? » The Foundry | consolidatorloan.com

    10. Thomas Gray South Ca says:

      Coal is the only truly secure energy source we have here in the U.S.A. and should be an energy source to save for that purpose and not consume it or we lose that security. anti energy activist are reeking havoc upon our electric energy supplier's and our electricity supply grid and unfortunately the goal of these very powerfull envirogreensociolist league is to drive up the cost of electricity. With friends like these now soon in power in upper levels of government who needs enemies

      In order to save our coal we in reality must build nuclear power or we are all going to pay the piper much sooner as in oil cheap coal will end also. We need to stop exporting coal [ except for humanitarian purposes etc, ] As I said I agree NG, should be kept as a portfolio percentage of our overall energy supply according to it's risk factor. NG is a major energy source for critical heat on the northern tier of the U.S. in the winter months. NG should NOT be used to produce electricity.

      Transportation, where possible mainly auto must go electric,

      Everybody wants clean air and no pollution energy supply, you can't have your cake and eat it to, the byproducts of energy production is waste some usefull some not, my choice is nuclear to replace and save the coal and NG and oil.

      IF you agree with me on these points, when you get a chance pass them along to the right people. Thanks, Thomas Gray.

    11. Thomas Gray South Ca says:

      The elected officials of our government are in place to [ by rule] , maintain the well being of the majority.

      This is no less true for any president, what is wrong with the goals of our soon to be president Mr Obama is these goals are being dictated from unelected wealthy minority's and the goals[[[[[[[ will not[[[[[[[ maintain the well being of the majority.

      If I have to eat dog food to free up enough money to pay my electricity bill every month among others that are CRITICAL that I not die from exposure to cold, here's some reality

      electricity generated from wind and solar cannot keep me alive becouse it will be unaffordable electricity, but the attacks against our electric power supplies and resources by those planning to install solar and wind are not only [ on going ] but succeeding to drive up the cost of electricity that is necessary to advance their plan for themselves.

      Those that hate Americans must be smiling that we elected a president that ran on a campaign of raising the cost of living.

      ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, some people are stupidddddd.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.