Subscribe for 12 months with recurring billing - $199

Buy 12 months of subscription time - $199


Search Uranium Stocks
Uranium Price
Our RSS Feed

Uranium Updates

Enter your email address:

Follow Us on Twitter
« British Columbia: A policy of no uranium mining? | Main | Another cold shoulder for uranium »

Uranium: and now some good news!

Seabrook nuclear power plant

The bottom line here is that lower electricity bills are on the horizon for these customers who buy electricity from the Seabrook NUCLEAR power plant in New Hampshire.

"The market price for a natural-gas unit is significantly higher than the cost for a nuclear plant."

Says David Tuohey, a spokesman for the Massachusetts Wholesale Electric Company. David goes on to say that:

“In 2010, debt service for construction of Seabrook will start to decline, and it is scheduled to be eliminated by 2019. The reduction will be passed on to ratepayers in the form of lower electricity bills”

Three cheers for someone who is as far sighted as the French in terms of having the vision and the will to stick with nuclear power despite the dissenters. It wasn’t that long ago that the customers in the town of Stow wanted a separation from the Hudson Light & Power Department as it was deemed too costly to use their nuclear powered electricity. However, with the decline in the cost of servicing the construction debt nuclear power is being hailed as the way to go! Fantastic! But wait; there is an added kicker to this cheap supply of power in that the requirement to reduce carbon dioxide emissions comes into play. Well as Seabrook's nuclear plant does not produce carbon emissions they will be exempt this green tax. This is the requirement to buy credits for producing carbon emissions! Not applicable here, thank you!

Mr Tuohey goes on to say that "The ownership of the Seabrook plant has gone from a burden to a significant benefit, and the future looks even brighter" Bang on in our humble opinion, but we are biased to nuclear power. So what does this mean to the families concerned in terms of hard cash? For this we turn to Yakov Levin, general manager of Hudson Light who summarised as follows:

“For an average household using 800 kilowatt hours per month, Hudson and Stow customers pay $101, said Levin. Relying primarily on natural gas, National Grid's average bill is $129 for the same amount of electricity, and the figure for NStar customers would be $145”

When the end result is cheaper power then the customers will vote with their feet for more nuclear power stations, lets hope that they do so before the explorers and mine developers throw in the towel and go off searching for the other precious metals.

Have a good one and thanks to B for alerting us to this situation and to The Boston Globe for carrying the article.

If you are new to this web site and would like to stay in touch with the uranium sector and investment ideas regarding uranium stocks, then please click this link and enter your email address.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (9)

ive been reading the paper and i have noticed that there are slowly appearing news articles on nuclear power coming thinking with summertime coming up that power usage will obviously increase and im sure nuclear power will be talked about more often as summertime does bring poweroutages as has happened here in rochester ny in the past... also i read someone quote on stockhouse that they expect uran stocks to start to head upwards in the summertime as did last year...looking at my stocklist from i noticed alot of uran stocks were up today...could this be the beginning of the uranium uptrend that may occur this summer??? lets hope so..alot of my urans have taken a beating but im patiently holding....good luck to all

April 25, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterlou

Anyone wants to comment on:

Especially on the part:
Putting all other arguments aside, critics say that nuclear power is going to provide too little, too late. Jeremy Rifkin, president of the Foundation on Economic Trends and author of the Hydrogen Economy, told CNN: "To get any appreciable impact on climate change you have to get 20 percent from renewable energies. For nuclear power to achieve this figure would mean building 3000 nuclear plants -- that's three power plants every 30 days for the next 60 years."

The problems don't end there, Rifkin says. "We still don't know how to get rid of the nuclear waste. There is a problem of uranium deficits between 2025 and 2035 and there are also security threats."

But the most important factor, according to Rifkin, is that we don't have enough water. "In France -- which is the quintessential nuclear country -- 40 percent of all the water consumed every year goes to cooling the nuclear reactors. And when it comes back it's heated and it dehydrates the lakes and streams and furthers climate change drought. During the heat wave of 2003, there wasn't enough water to cool the reactors, so they had to slow them down," he said.
// end snip.
I am pleased to hear some thoughts on that drawback mentioned above
Regards, MyKel

April 26, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterMyKel

yes i hear your concern and heres my response to that.....nuclear power to little too late ? well if it wasnt for ginna nuclear power plant over here in rochester ny,,, that runs off of uranium - lights would be OUT here IN ROCHESTER and if it wasnt for the nuke plants else where in the world ...lights would be off there also...too little too late huh? well in order to provide as much power as nuclear and as it does it as quickly would require way more land and infrastructure--is the govt gonna start building all new houses with solar panels? are they going to make solar panels and installation affordable that everyone can afford it? i seriously doubt it! i would love to have a world that had all hydrogen cars,solar panels on all houses,infrastructure,etc, but it isnt going to happen any time soon at least not world wide or even city wide enough to really take the place of what power generation nuclear power can provide... the leaders of govt world wide are going to do what they want to do...gonna stop china and india from building nuke plants...i doubt it...they will all use bout all the nuke plants state wide ? are they gonna tear them all down and replace them with solar and windmills,etc... i SERIOUSLY DOUBT IT...not in my lifetime and im close to 50 ...i hear and understand your concern especially with waste--the govt is developing certain microbes that digest nuclear waste-thats at least a start...and in regards to cooling with sure they will come up with some kind of cooling system that doesnt use as much or no water to cool--perhaps substituting the water with something else-- controlled exposure to dry ice ?? or some other technology/method.

April 27, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterlou


April 27, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterlou

we could tell the usa govt to buy all of its oil from canada-where they have enough for the usa and canada for many years to come and to stop buying oil from an organization -opec-that contain within its organization countries with known terriorist activites.. why dont they do it? lobbyists and leaders of big organzations like big oil ,pharma etc that sway the politicians with big money for their campaigns to get elected and who knows what ive really given up on the system of this so called democracy where leaders -all-obama,mccain,clinton-all really great actors-who say they dont take money from big corporations but instead take money from relatives of big corporations or employees from big corporations--little loop holes make it so easy to TWIST THE TRUTH-AND IN ESSENCE LIE TO THE what do i do ? invest in gold ,silver uranium etc to hopefully one day achieve financial freedom for myself and my family and no matter how screwed up the world is due to its screwed up leaders who are really pawns of big corporations/lobbyists -me and family will be enjoying all that life has to offer-god bless america and the world and its leaders so one day they wake up and quit being under allegiance to big corporations/lobbyists and put the peoples needs first !!! just a hint -they called perot crazy-and now we know how right he actually was-he talked about not sending our jobs to china mexico etc, -the press and media -controlled by big corporations-put him down and that swayed the public-to think he was a fool-now we can see how much truth that man spoke and the media called him a fool-now with nader-sure he may not have experience but he talks about the big corporations/lobbyists who really control this country-media/press who is controlled by big corporations doesnt want us to hear the truth so they make a fool of him in the press....more and more lies--the canidates with the money get heard ..they ones with the backing of the media and press get heard and elected---its all a spiel !!!! good luck to all

April 27, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterlou

Many thanks to all your responses. I'm invested in Rampart since beginning March 2000, but patience is needed. Hope someday to see some profits.

April 27, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterMyKel

try investing in stocks they mention on this sight when they start having a signal they are buying...investing in producers or near producers is a good idea also i think..check out for a nice list...i feel that most of the urans are close to bottom in price so its just a matter of time before they start going up hoping close to summer they will start taking off again...i mentioned cameco possibly being bought out by china..if this happens im expecting these urans really to take off..just my opinion..have to wait and see...good luck

April 27, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterlou

also it may help to buy at a stocks 52 week low or buy close to the low when the urans start taking off again...easier said then done...have to watch closely daily...worth the reward

April 27, 2008 | Unregistered Commenterlou

And now some good news:
It's a long time ago, that I saw this kind of buy volume on Rampart at once. More than 1M. According to Times and Sales it is exchanged at the Ask (highest) price, so i suppose it was a buy. Interesting time ahead? (finally)

April 29, 2008 | Unregistered CommenterMyKel

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>