Sierra Club opposes changes to CWIP law
regarding SB 50, 321, 359 and 406
Prepared by Henry Robertson
March 8, 2011

"Hard caps," refund guarantees and funding for the Office of Public Counsel do not begin to address Sierra Club concerns with these bills. CWIP is an unsound way to finance power plants, now as much as when Missouri voters rejected it 2-to-1 in 1976.

Two weeks ago Ameren Missouri unveiled its long-range "Integrated Resource Plan."  It found that the most cost-effective way to serve its customers is by promoting energy efficiency, thus saving energy and money for ratepayers and avoiding the need for a massive new generation project. But Ameren ignored its own analysis in the name of “preserving the nuclear option” and keeping $30 million per year additional profits for their shareholders. Ameren wants to load what it hopes will be a cash cow for its shareholders and directors onto the backs of ratepayers, many of whom will not be around to see the electricity it generates.

The nuclear renaissance keeps receding into the future. Only massive federal subsidies keep the dream alive. Last week the Wall Street Journal and NBC News released a poll showing that the number one most popular federal budget cut, favored by 57% of respondents, is subsidies for nuclear power. We don’t need to add a state subsidy.

Energy efficiency and renewable energy can create more jobs than a nuclear plant and can do so immediately, not years down the road, and can do so all over the state, not just in one county.

Ameren filed a license application with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for an Evolutionary Power Reactor (EPR). Then it suspended that application. No EPR is going forward in the United States. No one has even applied for a design certification for a small modular reactor, which is the other type of reactor Ameren is considering. This plant is a long shot, and CWIP won’t save it. CWIP only encourages cost overruns and puts ratepayers at risk in the eventuality — a very likely one — that the plant is canceled.

CWIP is wrong in principle. It transfers risk from investors to customers in violation of market principles. Do not allow this. We have better, cleaner, cheaper, more job-creating ways to meet our energy needs.