South Carolina Nuclear Reactors -- Update -- August 25, 2018; The Question: This Story Should Concern ... Exactly ... Whom?

Updates

October 13, 2018: US has critical shortage of icebreakers. 

Original Post 

Link to WSJ  here.

The primary owner of a power plant with two partially built nuclear reactors in South Carolina walked away from the $9 billion project last summer because of high construction costs and delays. Now no one wants to pay for it.

The utility overseeing the Virgil C. Summer plant is asking ratepayers across the Palmetto State to shoulder its construction expenses of $4.7 billion, citing a law passed last decade.  But local lawmakers are trying to force South Carolina Electric & Gas Co. to pick up more of the tab.

A federal judge handed lawmakers an initial victory earlier this month, ruling that a temporary state-imposed rate cut for customers could stand. The utility, known by its acronym SCE&G, is appealing the decision.

This dust-up is part of a larger U.S. dispute over how much public support should be provided to support nuclear power at a time when the industry is struggling to compete with lower-cost natural gas and renewable energy.

The South Carolina plant and a similar project in Georgia both encountered massive cost overruns that led to the bankruptcy of nuclear project builder Westinghouse Electric Co.  The company that owns the Georgia plant, which like the South Carolina project also received state support, said earlier this month that it would take an earnings charge to cover more than $1 billion in new cost overruns.

Okay, I'm getting way ahead of my headlights here, but this should be entertaining.

Disclaimer: this is not an investment site. Comments, facts, opinions follow.

After the federal judge's ruling, SCE&G could take a financial hit.

What do SCE&G investors think?

SCANA (SCG) is the holding company for SCE&G.

SCG was up about 4% yesterday. What gives?

Back on January 3, 2018, Dominion announced it would buy SCE&G in an all-stock offer.

D also rose yesterday in trading, up less than 1%. D is "down" for the YTD and the past six months, but seems to be in a trading range, now.

Dominion's market cap: $50 billion.

The nuclear reactor tab: $5 billion.

After going through this, the bottom line(s) for me:

• the WSJ nuclear reactor story is a non-story for investors;
• it appears the parties involved will let this play out in court and investors appear unconcerned
• South Carolina ratepayers are going to get up to $1,000 in cash from Dominion when the deal closes
• what's not to like?

Dominion seems, to me, to be in the news a lot. Recently.

***************************************

Northwest Passage Icebound

This was the year -- or maybe last year, or maybe the year before that -- that Algore said the "Northwest Passage" would be ice-free. Many, many nations and shipping companies were counting on that.

Not so fast.

Icebound.

Not only is the "northwest passage" icebound, but the ice conditions are heavier than normal.

Wow, this gets tedious.

And, not reported on the nightly news or in any mainstream media. My hunch: Scientific American won't even mention it. And based on what I've seen in Scientific American lately, it has changed its motto: all the science fit to print, as long as it's politically correct.

From IceAgeNow:

CCG icebreakers cannot safely escort pleasure craft.” At least 22 vessels affected and several have turned back to Greenland. From the Canadian Coast Guard:

Due to heavier than normal ice concentrations in the Canadian arctic waters north of 70 degrees, the Canadian Coast Guard, recommends that pleasure craft do not navigate in the Beaufort Sea, Barrow, Peel Sound, Franklin Strait and Prince Regent. CCG icebreakers cannot safely escort pleasure craft. Operators of pleasure craft considering a northwest passage should also consider the risk of having to winter in a safe haven in the Arctic, or in the case of an emergency, be evacuated from beset vessels. Safety of mariners is our primary concern.

************************************

The List of Predictions

A Few Past Forecasts of Ice-less Arctic Summers

A comment from the story at this post, a few past forecasts of iceless Arctic summers:

• in 1972 in The Christian Science Monitor's Bernt Balchen predicted no ice by 2000;
• in 2006 Marika Holland of National Center for Atmospheric Research predicted an ice free Arctic by summer 2040;
• in 2007 Jonathan Amos of the BBC forecasted ice free Arctic by summer 2013;
• In 2007 Al Gore in his Nobel speech predicted an ice-free Artic by 2014;
• In 2008 Robin McKie in the Guardian predicted an ice-free Arctic in summer 2013;
• in 2008 De Gheldere, climate ambassador of Al Gore publicly forecasted Arctic summer ice would have disappeared by 2013-2018;
• In 2008 in National Geographic David Barber, of the University of Manitoba, predicted an ice-free Artic in summer 2008;
• ditto Steve Connor in the Independent;
• In 2009 in a speech to the U.N. climate conference Al Gore predicted an ice free Arctic by 2014;
• in 2010 ("Arctic ice expert") Robert Correll predicted an ice free Arctic by summer by 2030;
• in 2011 Keith Pickering in Daily Kos predicted an ice-free Arctic by summer 2018;
• In 2011 Joe Roma predicted an ice-free Arctic by 2030;
• in 2011 Professor Peter Wadham ("One of the world's leading ice experts") predicted that by 2031 the Arctic would be ice-free;
• in 2012 the same Prof Peter Wadhams predicted an ice free Arctic by 2016;
• in 2012 Jarvis Cocker (another of the 97% consensus?) predicted an ice-free Arctic by 2032;
• ditto Catherine Brahic in the New Scientist;
• and I could go on and on...
• in 2017 the Economist predicted ice-free summers in the Arctic by 2040
• what do these prediction have in common ?
• they are all over the place;
• all those unlucky enough to make relatively short-term prediction have found to be utterly wrong;
• those smart enough to make predictions for when they will be in retirement and hope that we haven't bookmarked their forecasts look like they will be wrong too; and,
• none mention anything about the Antarctic ice mass which is 10 times bigger and growing, because that would be - ermmm... - inconvenient