SCE&G’s main reasons for going with nuclear power

  • Posted: Sunday, July 7, 2013 9:55 a.m., Updated: Sunday, July 7, 2013 9:56 a.m.

Natural gas prices historically have been volatile. Predictions for decades of cheap gas are guesswork and no way to plan for long-range, reliable, reasonably priced electricity.

Natural gas is much cleaner than coal, but it also produces greenhouse gases which could face stricter and more expensive future regulations that are impossible to predict.

Nuclear power helps SCE&G reduce reliance on coal so that it will have a relatively balanced, nuclear, gas and coal base of power production, supplemented by renewable energy.

It’s too late and too expensive to stop nuclear plant construction because about $2 billion of the reactors’ $10 billion-plus construction cost already has been spent.

Nuclear power stations are more expensive to build than natural gas-fired, but once running nuclear plants cost less to produce electricity. Ratepayers gain savings over a plant’s 40- to 60-year life.

Source: Public Service Commission and S.C. Supreme Court filings.

Comments { } is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Read our full Terms and Conditions.