News

North Miami City Council passes resolution against nuclear cost recovery, Southern Energy Network

{March 15, 2012}

On Tuesday night, the North Miami City Council took an important step in standing up for citizen’s rights by passing a resolution against early cost recovery legislation, intended to incentivize nuclear power in the State by putting the burden on the ratepayers.

Progress Energy customers on hook for $1.1B for nuclear plant that may never be built, The Tampa Bay Times

{March 11, 2012}

Imagine a company that profits from getting a billion-dollar project wrong. It makes money despite grossly underestimating the costs. It collects more for failing to get work done on time. It pushes a law that forces customers to pay for its miscalculations. That company exists right here in Tampa Bay.

Shaw Power Group, Westinghouse face cost issues at SC project, The Charlotte Business Journal

{February 24, 2012}

The Shaw Power Group and Westinghouse Electric Co. are negotiating who will have to pay for about $340 million in disputed cost overruns for construction of two nuclear-power units in South Carolina.

The cost of electricity is devastating Eastern North Carolina, The Independent Weekly

{February 15, 2012}

North Carolina’s bizarre municipal electricity system has devastated low-income people, tapped the savings of those on the margins and strained an already frayed social safety net to the point of breaking.

Progress Energy to cancel main construction contract for Levy County nuclear plant, The Tampa Bay Times

{January 26, 2012}

Progress Energy plans to cancel the main development and construction contract for its proposed nuclear plant in Levy County, but its customers will have to keep paying in advance anyway.

No more blank checks for Florida utilities, The Tampa Bay Times

{January 11, 2012}

As a staunch advocate for consumers, I believe that protecting our citizens’ pocketbooks, particularly in these trying economic times, is of the utmost importance. In Florida, allowing utilities to recover the costs of a new power plant before the plant is placed in service and regardless of whether such a plant is ever even completed is unfair to consumers and bad public policy.

Florida utility customers pay now for future power, NPR

{November 9, 2011}

Regulators in Florida recently gave two utilities permission to begin charging customers for nuclear plants that won’t be completed for at least a decade. To encourage development of nuclear power, Florida allows utilities to charge customers upfront for the costs. Now there’s a movement to rethink that policy.

Rate hike opponents sing out against Duke Energy, The News & Observer

{November 3, 2011}

Hours before the 7 p.m. hearing, a crowd gathered more than a block away to protest Duke Energy’s proposed rate hike for customers before the N.C. Utilities Commission – to criticize Duke Energy, corporate greed and the political climate that has allowed businesses to raise fees and increase profits.

Speakers urge state to deny rate hike request, Smoky Mountain News

{November 2, 2011}

Economic times are simply too hard, and Duke Energy is being too greedy for the state utilities commission to allow the company to hike its rates, many of the speakers taking advantage of a public hearing in Franklin said last week, which attracted about 100 people from North Carolina’s westernmost counties.

Citizens oppose Duke Energy’s proposed rate hike, Yes Weekly

{November 2, 2011}

“What [Duke Energy] should do instead of building new coal and nuclear facilities, is taking that same money and investing it in energy efficiency,” said Sandra Diaz, the North Carolina campaign coordinator for Appalachian Voices. “It’s a win-win for everybody involved because energy efficiency reduces energy bills.”

NC Public Staff: Cut Duke Energy rate hike by 66%, The Charlotte Business Journal

{November 1, 2011}

North Carolina’s utility-customer advocate proposes cutting Duke Energy Carolinas’ proposed rate increase by more than two-thirds to 4.9% from the 15.2% hike the utility is seeking.

Duke Energy Ohio customers to get 11% RATE REDUCTION, Business Courier

{October 25, 2011}

Duke Energy Ohio has reached a settlement agreement with parties who objected to a proposed electric rate plan that’s due to take effect Jan. 1. Subject to approval by the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, the new proposal would provide for a competitive auction process to determine electric rates in Duke’s territory. Duke estimates that customers will see a rate reduction of about 11 percent in their bills as of Jan. 1, the company said in a press release.

Crowd jams hearing on Duke Energy’s proposed rate hike, The Charlotte Observer

{October 12, 2011}

An overflow crowd – irate at Duke Energy’s proposed 15 percent rate hike for North Carolina customers – filled a Charlotte hearing Tuesday night before the N.C. Utilities Commission. Some protested the impact of higher rates on customers already suffering in a troubled economy. Others insisted Duke needs more revenue for the wrong reasons: to continue burning fossil fuels and investing in nuclear power, instead of moving toward renewable energy.

Duke Energy rate hike hearing draws more than 100 residents, The Charlotte business Journal

{October 11, 2011}

Comments at the hearing addressed concerns that focused primarily on power-plant pollution’s effects on health and the impact of high bills on residents and business struggling during difficult economic times.

Florida paying for risky nuclear costs, SACE

{September 22, 2011}

For the third consecutive year Florida utilities have asked the PSC to approve millions of dollars in ratepayer increases to pay in advance for proposed nuclear power projects that have an uncertain future, especially in a post-Fukushima world. Utilities gained this ability in 2006 when the Florida Legislature passed anti-consumer legislation. Southern Alliance for Clean Energy has intervened on behalf of Florida consumers every year to highlight the risks of these proposed nuclear power projects and the resulting unfairness in charging Florida ratepayers in advance.

Florida legislator regrets letting utilities pass on costs, The News & Observer

{March 23, 2011}

A Florida Republican is urging North Carolina’s legislators against making it easier for Progress Energy and Duke Energy to raise customer rates to pay for new nuclear plants. Sen. Mike Fasano wrote legislators that he had voted in favor of such legislation in 2006 in his own state but subsequently concluded it was “unfair to consumers and bad public policy.”

Hurdles for nuclear plants in Carolinas looms, The News & Observer

{March 16, 2011}

The nuclear accident unfolding in Japan is raising questions about whether Duke Energy and Progress Energy will get the legislation they say is essential to building nuclear plants in North Carolina and South Carolina. The legislation would allow the utilities to raise customer rates to pay for the plants during construction without having to go through lengthy rate hearings.

Duke Energy Profits Up 23 Percent, CEO Calls for Regular Rate Increases, WFAE Charlotte Public Radio

{February 17, 2011}

Extreme weather and higher rates in the Carolinas led Duke Energy to make 23 percent more last year than it did in 2009. But the company says it needs predictable rate increases moving forward.

In nuclear power planning, a growing case of the blind leading the blind, Business Column in The St. Petersburg Times

{February 10, 2011}

Florida’s nuclear power future may be as clear as mud but there are big wheels turning in this state and elsewhere that involve nukes, Florida power companies and consumer rates you should know about.

Foes gear up to fight utilities, The News & Observer

{February 10, 2011}

A coalition of environmental and consumer advocates will fight a proposal by the state’s largest electric utilities that would make it easier to raise rates to pay for new nuclear plants. The opponents are getting a head start. They have begun waging their anti-nuclear campaign before the utilities have recruited a friendly legislator to introduce a bill on their behalf.

Duke Energy fails at building power plants, The Indianapolis Star

{February 4, 2011}

Last fall, as costs and accidents were mounting at Duke Energy Corp.’s massive power plant in Edwardsport, Indiana, the project’s engineering contractor warned that Duke was taking “significant risks” with the way it was managing the $2.9 billion construction project. In a confidential letter to Duke dated Oct. 5, Brian Hartman, project manager for engineering giant Bechtel Corp., raised sharp questions about the project, which has since become embroiled in an ethics scandal.

Should utilities or customers pay to plan proposed nuclear plants?, Sun Sentinel

{February 4, 2011}

For the third year in a row, Sen. Mike Fasano, R-New Port Richey, has proposed revoking a law that allows utilities to charge customers for nuclear planning costs before the plants are built, or even receive approval from federal regulators. A coalition of a more than a dozen groups in North Carolina are fighting a similar law pitched by Progress Energy and Duke Energy, which announced plans last month to merge and form the largest U.S. power company.

Op Ed by Rev. Lynice Williams and Jim Warren, The News & Observer

{February 1, 2011}

Recent news of a merger between Duke Energy and Progress Energy sets the stage for North Carolina to become home to the nation’s largest electric utility. They say the merger will save customers money by eliminating redundancy, but what appears to be a key driver behind the merger – building two nuclear reactors in South Carolina – would cost customers much more. The key questions are, who would pay for those multi-billion dollar projects during construction? And should the utilities or North Carolina families and businesses take the major risks of cost overruns and project failure?

Groups don’t want utilities to raise rates to build nuclear plants, WRAL

{February 1, 2011}

Several organizations fired a pre-emptive strike Tuesday against plans by two North Carolina utilities to streamline the process for seeking rate increases to pay for new nuclear plants.

Can N.C. up the ante on renewable energy?, The Indy

{August 11, 2010}

When the General Assembly enacted Senate Bill 3 in 2007, it was an important step toward using more renewable energy sources for electricity in North Carolina—and a step away from coal, and perhaps from nuclear power as well.