Duke Energy retires troubled nuclear plant

Considering the high costs and risks involved in repairing the reactor, this is a prudent decision.

By Trefis Feb 7, 2013 11:40AM
logoPower station mimmopellicolacom Flickr Getty ImagesDuke Energy (DUK) has decided to permanently shut down its crippled Crystal River nuclear power plant in Florida, choosing not to carry out repairs that could have cost the company as much as $3.4 billion. The reactor, which the company acquired through its purchase of Progress Energy in 2012, has been offline since 2009 after its containment shell formed cracks while undertaking maintenance activity.

Considering the high costs and risks involved in repairing the reactor, we believe that the company has taken a prudent decision and can better invest its capital towards building new lower cost generation capacity, to replace the plant.

What it means for Duke Energy

Financial Impact:

The company is likely to take an impairment charge of around $195 million in the fourth quarter, relating to the closure of the plant. Since the reactor was shut down in 2009, the company has been partly purchasing power to meet the shortfall and will have to continue doing so until a replacement plant is commissioned. While the details of the costs of purchased power are not available, they are likely to be higher than generating the power in-house and could marginally impact profitability.

Recouping Costs:

The company will seek to recoup its $1.6 billion investment in this reactor through future rate increases that will span a period of 20 years, a move that is likely to be allowed under its settlement with Florida officials last year. The company also stands to receive $530 million in insurance proceeds, in addition to the $305 million that it has already received.

Duke Energy US Electric And Gas EBITDA MarginReplacement Capacity:

While the company does not have a definitive plan for the new generation capacity, it is most

likely to use natural gas fired generation and the capacity could come online as soon as 2018. Natural gas fired generation has several advantages given the lower fuel costs, lower capital investments and environmental benefits, compared to other fuels like coal.

Gas prices have fallen by around 75% over the last five years and capital investments for gas fired plants are around 50% lower than those for coal per megawatt. The total cost of a megawatt-hour of power generated through gas is estimated to be around $90 as compared to around $143 at a nuclear plant, and $140 for coal fired plants. Adopting gas fired generation could help bring down costs and improve the company's margins going forward.

Tags: DUK


Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.

Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.


StockScouter rates stocks from 1 to 10, with 10 being the best, using a system of advanced mathematics to determine a stock's expected risk and return. Ratings are displayed on a bell curve, meaning there will be fewer ratings of 1 and 10 and far more of 4 through 7.

125 rated 1
264 rated 2
485 rated 3
679 rated 4
640 rated 5
617 rated 6
632 rated 7
493 rated 8
276 rated 9
153 rated 10

Top Picks

TAT&T Inc9



Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.

Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.

Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.