Trump’s Bizarre Bid To Bailout Coal And Nuclear

Sep 2013
48,066
39,906
On a hill
By Nick Cunningham - Jun 05, 2018, 5:00 PM CDT

The Trump administration is pulling out all the stops to give a leg up to coal and nuclear, moving to take unprecedented action to intervene in the U.S. electricity markets to essentially bail out failing plants as they face an existential threat from natural gas and renewable energy.

For more than a year, the Trump administration has been trying to come up with a justification to boost coal and nuclear power plants, but several attempts have failed to pass legal muster. In 2017, Secretary of Energy Rick Perry proposed offering a subsidy of sorts to power plants that held a 90-day supply of fuel on site, a definition that only coal and nuclear could meet. FERC rejected that proposal earlier this year.

But Trump isn’t given up yet. Last week, the President basically ordered Sec. Perry to come up with some way to keep unprofitable plants open, a desperate bid that has attracted criticism from many directions.

snip

The move is odd, given the alleged sanctity of the free market for Republicans and the supposed antipathy to picking “winners and losers.” But Trump’s proposal is a brazen attempt to prop up specific industries – assets that are failing in the market – at the expense of other, more efficient and more profitable entities.

snip

Even grid operators are dumfounded by the thesis that the grid needs the government’s assistance. “There is no need for any such drastic action,” PJM Interconnection, a grid operator that oversees electricity markets in the mid-Atlantic, said in a statement. “Any federal intervention in the market to order customers to buy electricity from specific power plants would be damaging to the markets and therefore costly to consumers.”

https://oilprice.com/Energy/Coal/Trumps-Bizarre-Bid-To-Bailout-Coal-And-Nuclear.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Jul 2014
38,922
33,912
Border Fence
The proposal calls for the Energy Department to direct the purchase of electricity from a list of specific facilities “to forestall any future actions toward retirement, decommissioning or deactivation,” according to a memo that was obtained by Bloomberg News. In other words, the government wants to force consumers into buying more expensive electricity from failing coal and nuclear power plants.

That would then buy time to conduct a two-year study that would look at vulnerability to the U.S. electricity system, including a focus on the vulnerabilities of gas supplies via pipelines.
Here is the whole plan.

Put a bandaid on coal...force usage and tell the coal country morons the issue is being worked on.

Trump will be out of office and coal will still be dying.

All those Trump coal country voters will be left scratching their heads as still out of work.

Some dumbass Democrat will propose job training a schooling and these people still will not get it.

Darwinism will eventually take care of the problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Feb 2007
11,575
9,927
In my mind
But it's clean coal!

Yeah, this seems to me to be propping up failure. I appreciate it is the jobs of folks on the line. Why not concentrate on replacing those jobs instead of prolonging the inevitable?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person

Djinn

Council Hall
Dec 2007
52,774
40,179
Pennsylvania, USA
I agree with bolstering funding for nuclear power. Its WAY more efficient than coal, and given today's tech, it's the highest-yield energy source we have. We should be decommissioning our oldest nuclear power plants, which were built in the 1970s and 1980s, using technology developed in the 1960s and 1970s, are replace them with newer reactors with improved efficiency and safety.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Jan 2016
57,388
54,210
Colorado
I agree with bolstering funding for nuclear power. Its WAY more efficient than coal, and given today's tech, it's the highest-yield energy source we have. We should be decommissioning our oldest nuclear power plants, which were built in the 1970s and 1980s, using technology developed in the 1960s and 1970s, are replace them with newer reactors with improved efficiency and safety.
But this is NOT what Mr. Trump is talking about or doing. He is ordering Energy Secretary Rick Perry to keep EXISTING nuclear power plants in operation, RATHER than decommissioning them.
 

Djinn

Council Hall
Dec 2007
52,774
40,179
Pennsylvania, USA
But this is NOT what Mr. Trump is talking about or doing. He is ordering Energy Secretary Rick Perry to keep EXISTING nuclear power plants in operation, RATHER than decommissioning them.
Yeah... I kinda assumed as much. It's going to take a nuclear power plant incident to convince the President (and Congress) to invest in new nuclear plants so we can safely decommission the old ones.
 
Mar 2012
60,128
41,546
New Hampshire
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person