Energy Central News

Curated power industry news from thousands of top sources.


White House Whims Are Not Grounds for Emergency Coal, Nuke Plant Bailouts

Targeted News Service (Press Releases)

CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts, June 1 -- The Union of Concerned Scientists issued the following news release:

The White House is planning to issue a directive to the Department of Energy (DOE) that forces the agency to require electricity grid operators to buy power or capacity from uneconomical power plants for two years, according to news reports.

President Trump's mandate would force the DOE to implement two emergency-only provisions--the Federal Power Act and the Defense Production Act--to once again attempt to bail out coal-fired and nuclear power plants.

Below is a statement by Mike Jacobs, senior energy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

"This attempt to turn an era of cheap, abundant electricity into an emergency should be seen for what it is--a scare tactic, pure and simple.

"Energy Secretary Perry is being forced to issue another unnecessary and unprecedented emergency order to favor coal and nuclear over more economic electricity suppliers, including renewables. The Federal Power Act, which ensures a reliable power supply after sudden emergencies, is not meant to insulate uneconomic power plants from market forces. The Energy Department has primarily used that authority to address major power outage events and shortages, such as the California energy crisis in 2000 and the Northeast blackout in 2003. Abusing this authority to bail out uneconomic power plants for such an extended time makes no sense, especially when most regions of the country are awash with excess electricity.

"The Energy Department has already tried to tip the scale in favor of uneconomic coal and nuclear power plants to provide a totally unnecessary 'resilience' benefit. That attempt was rightfully denied by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which determined that market rates and processes are indeed sufficient to meet national energy demand.

"The Trump administration is trying, once again, to fleece ratepayers by giving coal and nuclear power plants billions of dollars in guaranteed profits. It's absurd to force consumers to bail out money-losing plants when grid operators are having no problem keeping the lights on."


donn dears's picture
donn dears on June 5, 2018

The UCS is wrong again. The article, Americans are Being Badly Served, at explains why.

Jan Pirrong's picture
Jan Pirrong on June 5, 2018

I'm shocked that the UCS is against a nuclear power plant! Not! For the last 50 years they have maintained their unsupported position, with the only result being delays in construction and spiraling costs.

Richard Ford's picture
Richard Ford on June 8, 2018

Energy policies should not be decided based on who voted for the winner and who voted for the loser.

Robert Magyar's picture
Robert Magyar on June 12, 2018

How the UCS' position on nuclear has resulted in the industry's ongoing poor economics is not clear. Atomic power has enjoyed exceptional federal regulatory support for decades including massive loan guarantees, tax credits, liability immunity and uncontested rights of eminent domain. Several states have mandated ratepayers pay for nuclear plants even if not built. This industry needs still more taxpayer bailouts?


Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »