Skip to main content

Florida nuclear project cancelled in face of shale gas boom

It has become hard for some energy companies to justify new nuclear energy projects in the face of a shale gas boom that has brought low prices.

Fred Lum/The Globe and Mail

North America's nuclear industry received more bad news last week when Duke Energy scuttled a planned $24-billion nuclear project in central Florida, as competition from low-cost gas has cast a pall over a long-promised renaissance.

Duke is only the latest in a list of companies that have either cancelled construction plans or announced closure of reactors that had been scheduled for costly overhauls.

The industry has run into a number of problems including weak power demand and cost over-runs. But it has also become hard to justify new nuclear in the face of a shale gas boom that not only has brought low prices, but is expected to keep a lid on the fuel costs for decades to come.

Story continues below advertisement

Ontario is currently redrawing its long-term energy plan, and will be reviewing proposals from Westinghouse and Candu Energy to build two reactors to make up for the loss of capacity when older ones reach end of life in the next decade.

Nuclear looks more challenging in the short term because it has high upfront costs – and financiers are extremely risk averse – though operating costs are lower.

But the cost of gas-fired power depends greatly on the price of the fuel, which has proved volatile over the past decade. Given the long life expectancy of power plants, it is difficult to count on a low cost of gas not only a decade from now, but two or three decades in the future. The gas industry has ambitious plans to export large quantities and boost demand for gas in the transportation sector.

North Carolina-based Duke says it remains committed to its nuclear program, proclaiming the "importance of fuel diversity in creating a sustainable energy future."

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter