Here’s the transcript of a discussion I had at Southern Methodist University with Jim Burke, the CEO of Vistra, and Ray Rothrock, a longtime nuclear investor and board member at Centrus Energy.
Sober panel. Burke's utilization math is what caught my attention — 50-55% combined-cycle utilization to 70% with curtailable load equals ~50 GW of data center capacity hiding in plain sight. Does the willingness to curtail in the top 1% of hours feature in hyperscaler negotiations, or is "speed to power" still winning?
"I don’t think we have a track record of adding 5 or 10 gigawatts successfully, realistically. "
Perhaps he didn't mean what this seems or is speaking about recently, but between 1970 and 1990 the USA added almost 100 GW of nuclear electricity capacity, averaging slightly below 5 GW per year and certainly exceeding 5 GW in many of those years.
That's a fair point. But it's a far more diffused electricity market today. Also, as Burke pointed out, US electricity demand overall is growing in the low single digits. Back in the go-go days of nuclear, domestic power demand was growing in the high single digits.
Outstanding. For those of us who favor nuclear power but are not nuclear engineers or involved in the industry, this exchange is very valuable. It suggests the growth of nuclear power in the US will be gradual as all parties evaluate the financial risks of expensive projects over long time periods. I do not want to see a stampede to nuclear power financed largely by the Federal government and adding to our national debt. (High-speed trains from San Francisco to LA come to mind). One important question not discussed was disposal or reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.
Regulations are important. But I agree with your point about the rate of growth of new nuclear capacity. From the 70s to the early 90s, electricity demand was growing rapidly. That growth period has been replaced by one of slow growth. Now the entire industry has to adapt to another surge in demand. That will take time. As I have said before, the US nuclear sector withered over the course of decades. Bringing it back will also require decades.
Sober panel. Burke's utilization math is what caught my attention — 50-55% combined-cycle utilization to 70% with curtailable load equals ~50 GW of data center capacity hiding in plain sight. Does the willingness to curtail in the top 1% of hours feature in hyperscaler negotiations, or is "speed to power" still winning?
Thanks, Robert. I won’t have to be nuclear clueless anymore.
This discussion is packed with facts and forward thinking, so I am sure it’s worth rereading portions of it several times.
Great work, Robert. Makes your work granular, not static and your guests are insightful b/c they come from industry.
Great combo. Helps with an interviewer who knows the business and can ask the right questions, not just the softballs and outer layers of the onion.
Well done.
Thanks, 'Mental. Yes, the interview was productive because both are so knowledgeable. I'm pleased with it.
Excellent, great discussion!
Thanks. Yes, I think it was great. Jim and Ray are clear-eyed about what's next.
Excellent talk. Thank you.
"I don’t think we have a track record of adding 5 or 10 gigawatts successfully, realistically. "
Perhaps he didn't mean what this seems or is speaking about recently, but between 1970 and 1990 the USA added almost 100 GW of nuclear electricity capacity, averaging slightly below 5 GW per year and certainly exceeding 5 GW in many of those years.
That's a fair point. But it's a far more diffused electricity market today. Also, as Burke pointed out, US electricity demand overall is growing in the low single digits. Back in the go-go days of nuclear, domestic power demand was growing in the high single digits.
Outstanding. For those of us who favor nuclear power but are not nuclear engineers or involved in the industry, this exchange is very valuable. It suggests the growth of nuclear power in the US will be gradual as all parties evaluate the financial risks of expensive projects over long time periods. I do not want to see a stampede to nuclear power financed largely by the Federal government and adding to our national debt. (High-speed trains from San Francisco to LA come to mind). One important question not discussed was disposal or reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel.
Regulations are important. But I agree with your point about the rate of growth of new nuclear capacity. From the 70s to the early 90s, electricity demand was growing rapidly. That growth period has been replaced by one of slow growth. Now the entire industry has to adapt to another surge in demand. That will take time. As I have said before, the US nuclear sector withered over the course of decades. Bringing it back will also require decades.