IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/enepol/v154y2021ics030142152100149x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decommissioning the U.S. nuclear fleet: Financial assurance, corporate structures, and bankruptcy

Author

Listed:
  • Lordan-Perret, Rebecca
  • Sloan, Robert D.
  • Rosner, Robert

Abstract

Over the next three decades, it is likely that on the order of 100 U.S. nuclear power reactors—almost the entire U.S. nuclear fleet, which at its peak in 1990 operated 112 commercial reactors—will be shut down and decommissioned. Decommissioning is a costly, time-consuming process that involves removing or decontaminating all radioactive infrastructure and related materials on site to prevent risks to public health so that the land can be safely used for other beneficial purposes. Though federal regulations have required that plant licensees prepare financially for this eventuality, we argue that particularly in light of commonly used corporate structures designed to strictly segregate financial risks, and under the current energy market conditions, the financial regulations in place may be insufficient in some exigent situations to ensure successful decommissioning. We explore available options for legal recourse if funding is inadequate in a corporate law context and pursuant to existing federal law. We comment on the possibility that taxpayers might be required to shoulder all or part of the financial liability at “legacy” plants in the absence of structural changes.

Suggested Citation

  • Lordan-Perret, Rebecca & Sloan, Robert D. & Rosner, Robert, 2021. "Decommissioning the U.S. nuclear fleet: Financial assurance, corporate structures, and bankruptcy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:154:y:2021:i:c:s030142152100149x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112280
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030142152100149X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112280?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lucas W. Davis & Catherine Wolfram, 2012. "Deregulation, Consolidation, and Efficiency: Evidence from US Nuclear Power," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 194-225, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kwangheon Park & Seunghyun Son & Jinhyuk Oh & Sunkuk Kim, 2022. "Sustainable Decommissioning Strategies for Nuclear Power Plants: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-21, May.
    2. Lordan-Perret, Rebecca & Bärenbold, Rebekka & Weigt, Hannes & Rosner, Robert, 2023. "An ex-ante method to verify commercial U.S. nuclear power plant decommissioning cost estimates," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(PB).
    3. Mackie, Colin & Velenturf, Anne P.M., 2021. "Trouble on the horizon: Securing the decommissioning of offshore renewable energy installations in UK waters," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    4. Lee, Juyong & Cho, Youngsang, 2023. "Economic value of the development of nuclear power plant decommissioning technology in South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Berthélemy Michel & Bonev Petyo & Dussaux Damien & Söderberg Magnus, 2019. "Methods for strengthening a weak instrument in the case of a persistent treatment," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 23(1), pages 1-30, February.
    2. Lou, Jiehong & Shen, Xingchi & Niemeier, Deb, 2020. "Are stay-at-home orders more difficult to follow for low-income groups?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    3. Desgranges, Gabriel & Gauthier, Stéphane, 2016. "Rationalizability and efficiency in an asymmetric Cournot oligopoly," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 163-176.
    4. Kyle C. Meng, 2016. "Estimating Path Dependence in Energy Transitions," NBER Working Papers 22536, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Brown, David P. & Eckert, Andrew & Olmstead, Derek E.H., 2022. "Procurement auctions for regulated retail service contracts in restructured electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    6. Severin Borenstein & James Bushnell, 2015. "The US Electricity Industry After 20 Years of Restructuring," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 437-463, August.
    7. Lucas Davis & Catherine Hausman, 2014. "The Value of Transmission in Electricity Markets: Evidence from a Nuclear Power Plant Closure," NBER Working Papers 20186, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Jacqueline Adelowo & Moritz Bohland, 2022. "Redesigning Automated Market Power Mitigation in Electricity Markets," ifo Working Paper Series 387, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    9. Carlos Suarez, 2021. "Private management and strategic bidding behavior in electricity markets: Evidence from Colombia," IREA Working Papers 202102, University of Barcelona, Research Institute of Applied Economics, revised Jan 2021.
    10. Alessandro Piazza & Fabrizio Perretti, 2015. "Categorical Stigma and Firm Disengagement: Nuclear Power Generation in the United States, 1970–2000," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 724-742, June.
    11. Sugimoto, Kota, 2019. "Does transmission unbundling increase wind power generation in the United States?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 307-316.
    12. Catherine Hausman & Lucija Muehlenbachs, 2019. "Price Regulation and Environmental Externalities: Evidence from Methane Leaks," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(1), pages 73-109.
    13. Sven-Olof Fridolfsson and Thomas P. Tangeras, 2015. "Nuclear Capacity Auctions," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).
    14. David P. Brown & Derek E. H. Olmstead, 2017. "Measuring market power and the efficiency of Alberta's restructured electricity market: An energy-only market design," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(3), pages 838-870, August.
    15. Polemis, Michael L., 2016. "New evidence on the impact of structural reforms on electricity sector performance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 420-431.
    16. Linares, Pedro & Conchado, Adela, 2013. "The economics of new nuclear power plants in liberalized electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 119-125.
    17. Hausman, Catherine, 2019. "Comment: Market deregulation and nuclear safety," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 68-69.
    18. Seifert, Stefan & Cullmann, Astrid & von Hirschhausen, Christian, 2016. "Technical efficiency and CO2 reduction potentials — An analysis of the German electricity and heat generating sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 9-19.
    19. Wang, Chang & Guo, Yue & Yang, Yu & Chen, Shiyi, 2022. "The environmental benefits of electricity industry restructuring in China: Ownership mixing vs. vertical unbundling," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    20. Tiago Pires & André Trindade, 2018. "Ex-post Evaluation of Mergers in the Supermarket Industry," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 52(3), pages 473-496, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:154:y:2021:i:c:s030142152100149x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/enpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.