IBJNews

Indiana Senate panel advances nuclear incentive bill

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A bill that would allow Indiana's utilities to quickly pass onto their customers some of the costs of planning nuclear power plants is advancing in the General Assembly.

The bill co-sponsored by Republican Sen. James Merritt passed the Senate's Utilities and Technology Committee on a 6-2 vote Thursday after the panel heard about four hours of testimony. It's now eligible for second reading in the Senate.

As IBJ reported Wednesday, the bill would allow utilities to seek "timely recovery" of the costs of designing, licensing and permitting of nuclear power plants. Indiana currently has no such plants.

Opponents say the bill as written would circumvent the state's utility regulatory review process and damage efforts to boost Indiana's clean-energy sector. They also say it would hurt working class families and small businesses.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • NO NUCLEAR
    I will move my entire family out of this state if those idiots allow a toxic dump of a power plant to be built here. Seriously, how many nuclear disasters have to happen before people open their eyes and realize how stupid of an option nuclear power is. I don't care how "efficient" they say it is, safety of our people should be the number one priority. Why don't we build a hydro electric facility at every dam on every river and actualy supply electricity to the local people instead of transfering it half way across the country and loosing 60% of the power that gets generated at the faclity. Wake up people!!
  • This bill is terrible; an affront
    Absolutely not. This is an open checkbook. Letting utilities companies directly pass through the costs of "designing, licensing and planning" nuclear plants is an affront. How many hundreds of millions will that cost? Shouldered by utilities customers? No way. Absolutely not. Its a backhanded insult to the 50% of residents of the entire state who don't want nuclear plants in Indiana at all. To make them pay for all the planning, licensing and designing costs first, through their utility bills, to get it all geared up and fight their political and regulatory and financing battles for them? Forget it. The public is funding nothing towards designing, licensing and planning at this early stage of the game. Its shocking overreaching. I happen to believe nuclear power is the answer to energy independence, following the French model. China and India and all the next superpowers are building nuclear plants in great number. The modern ones have exceptional safety records. But its madness to try to push one, out of possibly 50, development scenarios, by committing designated rate paying customers' money to one, early agenda. We need a dialog on nuclear plants in Indiana. Not power plants raping our checkbooks monthly for their business expansion plans. We won't be rushed. This bill is unconscionable and I question the motives of the men pushing it and the money behind it.
  • Well darn it all.....
    I can't believe this. Make it stop. It doesn't even matter how many people would vota against it. Our electon system is a scam and politicians prove it. They are in the business of making money, the largest funders get the prize and we low lifes are along for the ride. Indiana continues to regress into the dark ages with little care about the future. It sickens me to see this story to the point where I can no longer focus. If I had time to eat breakfast this morning it would be all over the ground. We constantly are fed one mistake after another and just sit back and take it. Our day to day lives seem about the same so we don't care enough. How bad will it have to get?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT