Part 2 of 2 Parts (Please read Part 1 first)
The DoE seems to be in a rush to get this new rule in place. They told FERC that they want the implementation of the new rule to be accomplished in sixty days. Eleven trade energy groups have immediately jumped into the discussion. They filed a legal motion requesting that FERC accept input from the energy industry and other stake holders in its consideration of the new rule. The trade organizations include renewable companies and organizations, oil and gas groups, electricity consumer organizations, rural electrical cooperatives and natural gas pipeline owners.
In the legal brief that was filed, the industry groups said, “This is one of the most significant proposed rules in decades related to the energy industry and, if finalized, would unquestionably have significant ramifications for wholesale markets under [FERC's] jurisdiction. [This rule would] … affect electricity prices paid by hundreds of millions of consumers and hundreds of thousands of businesses, as well as entire industries and their tens of thousands of workers.”
The DoE claims that the propose rule will, “will strengthen American energy security by ensuring adequate reserve resource supply.” However, the industry associations say that there actually is no problem with reliability of the grid and no analysts have claimed that there is one. The energy industry groups also claim that a recent report issued by the North American Reliability Council explicitly states that there is no reliability problem for the grid that requires assistance to nuclear and coal power plants.
Any individual or organization who wants to participate in the discussion about the newly proposed rule must act quickly. Any input will have to be developed and submitted within the sixty day timeline. The DoE has said that if FERC cannot get the new rule in place within the sixty days, then FERC should issue an Interim Final Rule that implements the DoE proposal effective immediately. This action would allow for later public comment and possible changes to the rule.
So the energy source that was going to be too cheap to meter and bill is now in need to governmental support. As the cost of natural gas continues to remain low and the price of renewable energy keeps decreasing, the cost of nuclear power will make it less and less competitive. Customers and energy suppliers will be saddled with increasing bills dedicated to keeping nuclear power alive in the U.S. This is simply not sustainable given that many cities and states are in serious financial difficulty and the debt being held by consumers is rising.
A great deal of research is being dedicated to battery improvement and the development of other schemes to store energy. Smart grids are evolving which will be able to make more efficient use of the energy supplied by diverse sources. Conservation measures are reducing the demand for electricity. As such systems improve, baseload power plants will be less and less important to the availability of power twenty-four/seven. It would be a serious mistake for the U.S. government to lock consumers into a long-terms plan to prop up nuclear power plants that cannot compete in the energy marketplace.
