Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Billions of New Nuke Giveaways in Kerry-Lieberman Bill Exposed

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 12:51 PM
Original message
Billions of New Nuke Giveaways in Kerry-Lieberman Bill Exposed
Edited on Fri Jun-18-10 12:53 PM by defendandprotect
Billions of New Nuke Giveaways in Kerry-Lieberman Bill Exposed
Submitted by NBerning on Thu, 06/17/2010 - 09:34
Global WarmingEnergy
Thursday, June 17, 2010


BILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN TAX BREAKS FOR EACH NEW REACTOR UNDER KERRY-LIEBERMAN WIPE OUT RISK FOR UTILITIES ALREADY BENEFITING FROM MASSIVE LOAN GUARANTEES

Washington, D.C. -- The nuclear industry could end up facing no risk under massive tax break subsidies in the Kerry-Lieberman climate bill, according to an important new analysis conducted for Friends of the Earth by the research organization Earth Track. These tax breaks totaling $9.7 billion to $57.3 billion (depending on the type and number of reactors) would come on top of the Kerry-Lieberman measure’s lucrative $35.5 billion addition to the more than $22.5 billion in loan guarantees already slated for nuclear power.


The memo evaluates three tax break subsidies, describing how they work and estimating their subsidy value to recipients in the nuclear power sector:

· 5-year accelerated depreciation period for new nuclear power plants (Kerry-Lieberman section 1121).

· Investment tax credit (ITC) for nuclear power facilities (K-L section 1122) and the related grants for qualified nuclear power facility expenditures in lieu of tax credits (K-L section 1126).

· Modification of credit for production from advanced nuclear power facilities (K-L section 1124).

According to the Earth Track analysis:

· The K-L tax breaks would be worth billions per reactor. The new subsidies will be worth between $1.3 billion and nearly $3.0 billion on a net present value per new reactor. This is equivalent to between 15 and 20 percent of the total all-in cost of the reactors, as projected by industry.In fact, the new nuclear tax break subsidies would be worth 15 to more than 50 percent of the expected market value of power the plants will produce. This is over and above the many other subsidies the nuclear projects would already receive.

· The new K-L tax breaks will undermine equity requirements of the nuclear loan guarantee program. In theory, the current rules require investors to hold a 20 percent equity stake in the new project. A key goal of this requirement is to ensure investors have a strong interest in the long-term success of the venture. However, the K-L bill would in effect allow investors to recover funds equal to this equity share within the first few years of plant operation. Financial risks from project failure would then rest almost entirely with taxpayers.

· Total tax subsidies to new reactors could reach tens of billions of dollars from K-L's two main tax breaks alone. The national cost of K-L's tax provisions can be benchmarked by evaluating two build-out scenarios: six reactors, matching the number likely to be supported under K-L's expanded nuclear loan guarantee pool; and 22 reactors, matching the number going through NRC licensing as of May 2010. As not all reactors will be the same type, the calculations assume half are AP1000s and half Areva EPRs. Under a six-reactor scenario, K-L will add $9.7 billion to $15.6 billion in tax subsidies to nuclear power. Under a 22-reactor scenario, the net present value of subsidies on offer just through 5-year depreciation and ITCs reaches $35.7 billion to $57.3 billion. Neither of these other subsidies have any national caps under Kerry-Lieberman.

http://www.foe.org/billions-new-nuke-giveaways-kerry-lieberman-bill-exposed


----------

EXCERPTS FROM THE ARTICLE --
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. Is there anything that Congress does that doesn't go to the rich? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
2. I'm in favor or resuscitating nuclear power.
I used to be a virile opponent of it, but changed my mind over the last few years after seeing the increasing peril we are on by being such a slave to oil.

Nuke power is safer and more attractive than it used to be. The time has come.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aramchek Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 12:56 PM
Response to Original message
3. why wouldn't a new Energy Bill provide subsidies for new Energy sources??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
4. Lieberman: master at fucking the American people and our Republic at every opportunity,
at every stage, in every way imaginable, at every turn imo. Of course that's just my opinion and I might be wrong. :P
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. You are not wrong he is an Evil Opportunist
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:02 PM
Response to Original message
5. Too bad they don't think of green energy.
Imagine what a subsidy of $35.7 billion to $57.3 billion would do for wind or solar. Idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:04 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Do you really think that wind and solar
as much as I would prefer them, are at the sufficient stage of technological development that they could satisfy a significant portion of our national energy needs? Because I dont think they are. Nuclear is, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bahrbearian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Talk to Germany , They replaced a Nuclear Project with Solar.
Saved Billions$$$$$
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #8
18. They were scammed out of billions and built new coal and natural gas plants.
They "saved" nothing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:48 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. They were scammed on their solar energy project? And as as result had no
solar power so had to build new coal and nat gas facilities? (Trying to follow, here.) Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:20 PM
Response to Reply #8
19. This is something that just baffles me. Many other countries are far beyond
where we are -- why don't we just adopt their plans? It always seems as though we have to figure it out ourselves, and I think it's crazy not to utilize the research and experience of those who have already been working on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #19
32. Until we NATIONALIZE the oil industry, nothing new is going to happen...too valuable
an investment --

PLUS military uses most of the oil -- i.e., oil = National Security!!

Can't go to war without oil!!

PLUS, they won't even permit the solar/wind stuff to advance -- too dangerous for

private interests.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KonaKane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #8
21. But Germany's energy problems are not solved. She still is dependent on coal
and fossil fuels, even though she is embarking on ambitious alternative renewable energy programs. The point is, even solar isn't doing it for them yet. It's part of the solution, but it doesnt look like its all of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #21
33. The idea that you have to drag electricity across the country thru huge
Edited on Sat Jun-19-10 12:13 AM by defendandprotect
electric transmitters is insane --

Evidently, every building could have a generator -- local production of electricity --

and supposedly very easy to store electric energy --

Once again, like the destruction of PUBLIC UTILITIES, it comes down to monopoly corporations

and the race for the meaningless dollar bill!


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
17. I strongly feel we need to launch a balls-to-the-wall effort to develop green
energy - this is an emergency. Eventually it will come to that when we begin to have to worry about the nuclear waste and, I'm convinced, begin to learn it isn't as safe as we think it may be.

Ramping up for nuclear will take time, too -- I think we better use that time developing and implementing green.

Also, there may be something in addition to wind or solar that's viable, too -- who knows what we may discover? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. Exactly, with that much in tax breaks there could
be many discoveries in green. We will never know though unless we try.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #6
22. By all means then, we shouldn't even try.
Nuclear is the only answer.:crazy: Yeah I think we might just do better,at least it would be a start. I don't imagine there would be as many hazards as we get with oil and nuclear. I used to have a house with solar, there were times my gas heater was not used for a month at a time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #6
31. Wasn't BP buying up wind technology? Come on .. . !!
This stuff hasn't been permitted to advance because there is such high profit

in privated oil industry. Oil industry should be NATIONALIZED --

Nuclear is insane -- dangerous, ultimately.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. I agree! I just have to ask "why?" It's the same as when they were all
hot on hybrids "in the future" meanwhile car companies were successfully developing all electric vehicles. I just didn't understand why they didn't go directly to electric, just as now I don't understand why they don't go directly to green energy.

But I'm sure, as always, the answer is money. We probably won't be able achieve true green energy until they're able to make it as profitable as oil. :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. Larry Everest had a very interesting speech on that the other day
It's all about the oil profit. Until we either change the for profit system, or take the profit out of oil, nothing will change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gateley Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #14
25. It's always about the fucking money. Always. I don't know HOW to change
the for profit system - did he give any examples?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
28. You are right, it's all about the profits, for them.
My husband and I bought a house that had solar installed about 15 years ago, there were times when our natural gas heater was not used for a month, sometimes a little more. That was quite a savings to us. I would love to have the money to have solar installed in the house we have now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:15 AM
Response to Reply #10
34. Obvious answer is that oil industry and car manufacturers are allied . . .
Keeping GM and Detroit from having done something sensible with cars 20 years ago

wasn't a very bright idea -- but it certainly served the profits/purpose of the oil industry!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #5
20. Left didn't help Kerry-Boxer bill FIGHT for that. This bill is a compromise to get 13 Dem senators
who refused to support Kerry-Boxer bill to vote for this one.

Of course, people in this thread ignored that letter sent to Kerry and Boxer where Feingold, Franken and 11 others refused the greener bill because they claimed it would burden their states.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
howaboutme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #5
27. Especially for solar generation by individuals
These schmucks in Washington can't seem to do anything unless it funnels our tax dollars through the mega corporations and utilities. That can't see past the fog of corruption and bribes.

The ultimate solution with minimal impact to the environment would be distributed energy generation. Each residence and business would be incentivized to use their own building footprint to provide supplemental photovoltaic and solar panels that would serve to help feed their business and reduce the load on the grid. It would also help to provide redundant power in cases of national emergencies or disasters. It would increase self sufficiency and be almost transparent to the environment.

Instead they want to give money to encourage central nuclear generation which means harm to the environment, and more distribution lines more of the same ole same ole profits for big business.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #5
30. Oh, they think of it -- they think of killing it -- Until we NATIONALIZE oil industry ...
we'll never get alternative energy --

There's just too much illegitimate power -- private power -- in the oil industry

and should never have been permitted!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
7. So I guess all the new nuclear waste dumps are going to be in New England then?
Preferably on the Kerry and Lieberdouche estates?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:14 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Dump them in the upper middle class white collar neighborhoods
the DLC caters to.

I'm sick of the environmental war against the poor where our neighborhoods are polluted with toxic waste and our children get sick.

You want nukes. Put the waste in your back yards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #7
24. Perfect place for the waste. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
9. Billions of dollars of the people's money. Tax breaks for nukes. I'm shocked.
Lieberman Dems and friends at it again. I'm shocked. How low the party has fallen.

No fucking nukes!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
13. Kerry-Leiberman: Isn't that just special?
Edited on Fri Jun-18-10 01:15 PM by Better Believe It
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #13
35. Right . . . you would think that Lieberman would be being shunned by Dems . . .!!!
Rather, he's carted around on a pedestal!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
15. Thank you. Rec'd n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 01:16 PM
Response to Original message
16. Thank you. Rec'd n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-18-10 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
29. Meanwhile the working poor and unemployed are told to 'eat less'
and maybe not go see that monthly movie, a large popcorn is expensive and fattening. Really shouldn't be buying things you can't afford, bread and milk are good enough to feed the kids. Congress hates the working class yet loves 'interviewing' white collar crime. I believe they have all turned into self-serving peacocks. I guess it will take a lot of desperate people dying off from malnutrition? Will the M$M even report it? Hey if they can coverup our ocean travesty, then nothing is to big.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-19-10 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
36. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Apr 29th 2024, 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC