U.S. Energy Information Administration Independent Statistics & Analysis www.eia.gov

EIA Perspective on U.S. Nuclear Power

For

Nuclear Workshop: EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook and Status of U.S. Nuclear Power Generation

March 7, 2017 | Washington D.C.

By

Michael Scott, U.S. Energy Information Administration
EIA’s Objective

2

Properly represent the nuclear power market as it exists today and in the 

near-term and also how it might exist in the long-term under a set of 

scenarios (“cases”).

Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017

• Existing and Historical Conditions

• Future Market Conditions

• Future Plant Conditions
EIA’s Annual Energy Outlook 2017

3 Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017

Nuclear generation declines 

modestly over 2017–40 in the 

Reference case as new builds 

already being developed and plant 

uprates nearly offset retirements. 

The decline in nuclear generation 

accelerates beyond 2040 as a 

significant share of existing plants 

is assumed to be retired at age 60.
Fuel prices and current laws and regulations drive growing shares of 

renewables and natural gas in the electricity generation mix

4 Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017

Market share for nuclear 

power is boxed in by flat 

demand and push for more 

renewables and natural 

gas replacing coal
Near and Long Term Uncertainties

Presenter name, Presentation location, 

Presentation date 5

• Electricity Demand and Prices

• Transmission Access and Congestion

• State and Public Support

 Clean energy plan (mandates)

 Price support (e.g. Ill & NY)

 Valuation of nuclear power

- Baseload

- Clean

- Reliable

- Cost Certainty

Future Market Conditions Future Nuclear Plant Conditions

• Future O&M Costs

• Subsequent License Renewals Cost/Risks

• NRC Licensing Risks

• Overnight Costs

• Cost of Capital

• Technology Advantages and Risks
Actual and announced U.S. nuclear power closings and new builds

6

• Ft. Calhoun, Clinton, and 

Quad Cities closings due to 

economics

• Diablo Canyon closing due to 

public concerns

• Additions are all in regulated 

electricity markets 

103.33

103.35

80

85

90

95

100

105

2014 2016

Watts Bar

2016

Ft. Calhoun

2017

Clinton

2018

Quad Cities

2019

Vogtle 3

2020

Vogtle 4 &

VC Summer

2025

Diablo Canyon

gigawatts (GWe)

Sources: EIA, NRC, Utility Announcements

Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017
The near-term U.S. nuclear power projection is a rapidly moving target

Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017 7

103.33

103.35

80

85

90

95

100

105

2014 2016

Watts Bar

2016

Ft. Calhoun

2017

Clinton

2018

Quad Cities

2019

Vogtle 3

2020

Vogtle 4 &

VC Summer

2025

Diablo Canyon

gigawatts (GWe)

Sources: EIA, NRC, Utility Announcements

  

? ?

• Ft. Calhoun, Clinton, and 

Quad Cities closings due to 

economics

• Diablo Canyon closing due to 

public concerns and over 

supplied market

• Additions are all in regulated 

electricity markets 

• Indian Point and Palisades 

closure announcements for 

2021 and 2018

Palisades closing?

(0.846 Gwe)

Indian Point closing?

(2.122 Gwe)
8

• V.C. Summer 2 and 3: startup dates moved back based on latest news (April and Dec 2020) The 

reactors now are expected to start producing electricity in April and December of 2020.

• Vogtle units 3 and 4: startup dates moved back to December 2019 and September 2020 

• Hope Creek: uprate date and capacity changed to reflect latest reporting (Nov 2016).

• Catawba 1, 2: uprate date and capacity changed to reflect latest reporting.

• Clinton and Quad Cities: un-retired both following Illinois energy jobs bill.

• Peach Bottom 3: update capacity to reflect new capacity (uprate AEO2017 showed 1123).

• Indian Point 2, 3: use announced retirement dates (2021 and 2022) Indian Point Unit 2 will 

shut down by April 30, 2020 and Unit 3 by April 30, 2021.

• Grand Gulf: updated uprated capacity to 1401 MWe (AEO2017 showed 1190). 

• Susquehanna: updated to reflect uprate 1185 to 1257 FOR UNIT 1 AND 1190 to 1257 FOR 

UNIT 2.

• Palisades: retirement date not added until official actions taken. 

• Watts Bar 2: no change from current assumption of start date 

• St Lucie 2: Updated capacity (AEO2017 showed 981).

One month’s example of 

EIA’s effort to remain 

current with fleet 

performance changes

Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017
What happening?

9

• PRICES - Some of the most expensive nuclear plants in deregulated markets are 

losing money at current low electricity prices

• PRICE SUPPORT - States are beginning to acknowledge value of nuclear power 

and act with price supports (NY, IL, OH, PA, CT, NJ, MI)

• DEMAND - U.S. demand growth is flat & oversupplied in some markets

• COMPETING FUELS – North American natural gas is plentiful and inexpensive

• GEN III+ - Nuclear builds are occurring in regulated markets (V.C. Summer, 

Vogtle, and Watts Bar) but are experiencing delays and cost overruns

• CAPITAL COSTS - Near-term planned projects are at-risk for a variety of reasons 

(demand, costs, Toshiba, transmission issues)

• O&M COSTS – Fleet limited on controlling O&M costs to compensate for low prices

Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017

Large uncertainties 

create a large range 

of potential futures

What is most likely?
Subsequent License Renewals and New Builds

10 Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050

No Assessment Multiple Units State Support New Builds

Gigawatts (electric)

Long-term future of nuclear 

power is highly sensitive to

• Competitiveness

• Valuation by Stakeholders

For illustration purposes only
EIA Data Sources

11

• EIA Industry Surveys

• NRC Publications

• Industry Announcements

• Data Subscriptions

• Trade and International Groups

• Internal Analysis and Modeling

• Contracted and External Analysis and Modeling

Form EIA‐858, “Uranium Marketing Annual Survey”

Form EIA-851A “Domestic Uranium Production Report (Annual)”

Form EIA-861 “Annual Electric Power Industry Report”

Form EIA-906 “Power Plant Report”

Form EIA-923 “Power Plant Operations Report”

Form GC-859 “Nuclear Fuel Data Survey”

NRC Datasets

Reactor Status Reports

Plant Licenses and Renewals

Power Uprates

Status of Applications

Ux Consulting

SNL S&P Global

Bloomberg New Energy Finance

Energy Intelligence

TradeTech

Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)

International Atomic Energy Administration (IAEA)

International Energy Agency (IEA)

OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA)

World Nuclear Association (WNA)

American Nuclear Society (ANS)

American Public Power Association (APPA)

MIT Technology Review

DOE/INL/NREL/NETL

Joint Institute for Strategic Energy Analysis (JISEA)

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)

Electric Power research Institute (EPRI)

International Association of Energy Economics (IAEE)

Institute for Energy Research (IER)

Various Colleges and Universities

BP Energy Economics Owner/Operators

Utilities

FERC

ISOs

Governments

Electricity Generation Cost Analysis

National Energy Modeling System (NEMS) Modeling

Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017
Most Uncertain Variables 

12

• When and how will market conditions be resolved to fully value nuclear power?

• How level of investment is being planned for NPP projects and SLRs?

• What strategies are available to companies and states for future use & growth of nuclear power?

• Other than low prices, what are the other Achilles heels and what early warning indicators exist?

• What are advanced technologies barriers, including SMRs?

• How might next generation technology impact the existing fleet?

Michael Scott, Washington D.C., March 7, 2017