Latest Headlines
- Cantonment Man Charged With Sexual Battery, Molestation Of 5-Year-Old
- Two Newly Elected Escambia School Members Installed
- Matt Gaetz Withdraws From Attorney General Consideration
- Molino Dollar General Assistant Manager And Her Boyfriend Charged With Theft
- Century Town Hall Closed For Portions Of Next Two Business Days
- Troopers Say Semi Driver Fell Asleep Causing Crash That Block I-10 For Hours
- Free Dental, Vision and Medical Care Available At Weekend Clinic
- Farm Share Food Distributions Friday In Walnut Hill, Saturday In Cantonment
- ECUA Elects Board Officers, Appoints Advisory Committee
- One Injured In Highway 29 Crash
Future Of North Escambia ‘Nuclear Site’ Now Uncertain, Could Be Sold
July 18, 2012
The future is now uncertain for 2,728 acres of land in North Escambia purchased by Gulf Power following ruling Tuesday by state regulators that the utility can’t make customers pay for the land in advance of plans for power plant.
Gulf Power, for the second time, asked the Florida Public Service Commission for a rate hike equal to about 20 cents per customer per month to fund the expenses related to the $12 million worth of land purchased near McDavid. And, for the second time, the PSC shot down the plan.
It is now unclear whether Gulf Power will ever build a power plant — nuclear or otherwise on the site near as the utility has not taken a key first step in the lengthy approval process — a step known as getting a “determination of need.” Also, it would likely take at least a decade to get permits and build a nuclear plant.
“We are trying now to get a good handle for now on what is the best course for the future,” Sandy Sims, Gulf Power spokeswoman, said Tuesday afternoon.
She said Gulf Power may make a third trip back to the Public Service Commission in attempt to fund the land purchases, but other options will be considered.
“We could sell it, lease it or look at other revenue generating opportunities,” Sims said. Possibilities for the property, if it is retained by Gulf Power, include selling the timber and replanting or even hunting leases on a portion of the 2,728 acres.
The base rate paid by Gulf Power customers already includes pennies each month for property purchased by Gulf Power years ago near Caryville for a power plant that has never been constructed. Part of that property is now leased for hunting.
“We’ve done all kinds of things in the past to generate revenue,” she said. “We even had a sod farm one time years ago under high voltage transmission lines.”
In an April filing with the Public Service Commission, Gulf Power suggested that it might sell all or part of the property if the PSC did not approve its rate increase request.
“The commission’s decision to exclude the North Escambia site from rate base … leaves open the very real possibility that the company, in the exercise of good business judgment, will divest itself of some or all the property constituting the North Escambia site,” the filing said. “The notion that the company will, or must, retain the property at its shareholders’ expense for the future benefit of its customers ignores economic reality, the regulatory compact, commission precedent and the fundamental nature of the utility business.”
In early 2009, Gulf Power quietly purchased just over 100 acres in the 200 block of Roach Road with no public announcement. The utility’s plans for a power plant, particularly the possibility of a nuclear power plant, in McDavid were not made public until NorthEscambia.com uncovered the land purchases in March 2009. The plans were revealed in an exclusive NorthEscambia.com article on March 14, 2009.
But now Gulf Power’s immediate needs have changed, adding to the uncertainty of the North Escambia site.
Gulf Power’s need for excessive power is now satisfied by a non-utility power plant in central Alabama. Gulf Power, according to PSC documents, has a 14-year contract that ends in 2023 to purchase 885 megawatts of electricity from the Tenaska Central Alabama natural gas-fired electric generating plant near Montgomery through a contract with Shell Energy North America.
“That has bee a great advantage to our customers,” Sims said. “Purchasing from the natural gas plant has reduced our costs and allowed us to lower rates.”
Pictured above: Property purchased by Gulf Power near McDavid for a possible nuclear power plant.Pictured below: One of the first parcels of land purchased by Gulf Power in 2009 in the 200 block of Roach Road. NorthEscambia.com photos, click to enlarge.
Comments
31 Responses to “Future Of North Escambia ‘Nuclear Site’ Now Uncertain, Could Be Sold”
REGARDING:
“Are you aware of the nuclear disaster that is still unfolding in Fukushima, Japan?”
Yes, I am. And even with that, it’s safer than turning the planet into a greenhouse. If we have an earthquake, tsunami and meltdown around here, it would be bad. However, tusnamis don’t climb that high and modern designs would avoid that particular kind of meltdown. Even meltdowns are a safety feature designed to mix fissionables with neutron absorbers to kill the reaction. They had a mixture, not cooling it enough to avoid a meltdown but adding water and dumping the contaminated water.
AND
“That almost 10% of Japan is too contaminated for crops to be grown?”
Nope, don’t keep up with the specifics. I do know Japan is a small place and the reactors were near croplands. I assure you plants are growing there even if you or I wouldn’t’ want to eat them.
AND
“That the radioactive contamination from Fukushima has been measured in California soil?”
I am aware we can measure radiation at levels far below naturally existing background. Remember, every shovel of dirt on the planet is radioactive and always has been.
AND
“That bluefin tuna in off the California coast are contaminated?”
They were in the area where the jury rigged coolant was dumped into the ocean then they swam here. Now address the levels, remembering they were radioactive to begin with just as you are.
AND
“I cannot agree with your statement that nuclear power is “safe”. “
Try reading carefully, make the distinction between “safe” and “safest”. Nothing is safe but some things are safer than others.
David for safest power with caution
The Fukushima plant was 1950’s technology at best. This is the 21st Century, with 60 years of improvement over that. It has NOTHING to do with anything built now.
A question for “David for safest power”.
Are you aware of the nuclear disaster that is still unfolding in Fukushima, Japan? That almost 10% of Japan is too contaminated for crops to be grown? That the radioactive contamination from Fukushima has been measured in California soil? That bluefin tuna in off the California coast are contaminated? I cannot agree with your statement that nuclear power is “safe”. The last thing we need in Escambia County is a nuclear power plant.
Unless your kid has a background in nuclear propulsion or electrical engineering it is unlikely he/she will be doing much with a reactor, other than facility maintenance of the buildings and compound.
REGARDING:
“Whatever happened to “green energy” like solar power, wind power or anything else that would put the Earth in better shape with good stewardship.”
Nothing happened to them. They are still there, just like coal powered energy.
What’s more, they still have the same old problems. Solar only works when the sun is shining, can be damaged by high winds, hail, pollen, lightning, snow, birds relieving themselves, stray shots. Wind only works when the wind is blowing at certain times of the day.
Figure out a way to store it better and transmit it further and you will have contributed greatly to the planet, assuming your methods don’t damage the environment too badly.
Nuclear, works day and night, rain or shine, fair weather or foul. It can be placed anywhere even though most prefer it be in someone else’s back yard. It CAN run for years without refueling. It produces no greenhouse gases. The fuel can be produced domestically so we are less dependent on radical people to keep the lights on and grandma from freezing.
The only real problems with nuclear is what happens to the spent fuel afterward — and that isn’t really a problem, it can be recycled or sealed — and what happens if radioactive material is released due to human error or terror.
There is a financial problem in that the companies want the users to pay for construction without giving us a share in the company and we‘d rather not pay anything we can avoid. There is a regulatory problem in that different people come into power every couple of years and some will create artificial problems for political gain.
David for safest power
Sandra Im with you. Iceman thank you for a well educated opinion.
Oversight…They probally had the same problem they are having here in our area.Fighting a community that does’t want change.
If we are fortunate enough to get this plant, maybe there would be some hope for kids that don’t want to move away to actually have a decent job here, close to home.
If you get any info about them leasing the land for hunting please pass it along!
Why would some of you expect us ratepayers to sell you back the property for dirt cheap? Most were paid inflated prices so that GP could get their hands on it. As a ratepayer i will raise cane if My electric utility sells back the property for a penny less than they paid for it.
Wow….maybe this is a cahnce to get some of my family’s land back cheap!
Whatever happened to “green energy” like solar power, wind power or anything else that would put the Earth in better shape with good stewardship. There are jobs in “clean energy”..people just need training. I suppose those kind of programs didn’t have enough money for lobbyists to pad the pockets of politicians.
FYI- all that it takes to make a deal is a willing buyer and a willing seller and when you are threatened with iminent domain you become a little more willing then its just just a matter of price…. I know from experience because I have not sold yet….
I know some people that sold properties to Gulf Power for this plant. It is unbelievable what they paid for these parcels of land. Some of the homes went for incredible prices also. I think they should have looked at the going rate in this area. It seems as though they paid prices more comperable to some big city or a much more populated area. I haven’t seen many houses with about 20 acres around here selling for over a half million $.
It’s no wonder they need to figure out how they’re going to pay for what they’ve bought.
Maybe the 4-H Club could buy a piece with their 3 million!
-Iceman- very well put. could not agree with you more!!
I’d like a big, new office so that I can better serve my customers. Do you think they would mind paying extra for it now? Mind you, I won’t start building for about 10 years, but I’d like to get the cash in now so that I don’t have to pay for it myself.
For all the nay sayers that are so against the expansion into nuclear, bio-mass, or other types of power production facilities, Just WHY do you think GPCO wants to pursue this plant? GUESS, (It’s for you, when you flip that wall switch, or adjust that thermostat on your wall). I assure you, it’s not “just to build it’. Whether you know it or not, there are NO coal fired plants being permitted in the United States. The ones that are in operation are being governed to death by HIGH dollar scrubber add-ons and the like until they are becoming more of a financial burden to power producers in our country. Try to expand and see the big picture: More consumers = More demand on our already ailing power grid system. IF GPCO started tomorrow on this plant it would take 10 years, Yes, TEN years to complete. Think of the jobs and infrastructure this would create for our area, as well as out-lying areas. I will GLADLY give $1:00 a month for this, and i assure you, some of the very ones against this endeavor will be the First to get on the band-wagon for some help when the rolling brownouts begin, and yes, they Wll come if there is no expansion . YES, I am FOR COAL, NUCLEAR, BIO-MASS, and so on.. I like Electricity!!
would this not create jobs for north escambia county?
If they got the rate increase of .20 cents for the property before they buy all of it on 12 million. What would be the rate increase for the BILLION DOLLAR plant before they build it.
Well hate to say it, but they need to secure a loan from some one else other than paying customers . What you say you will do , and then what really happens are two different things.In the current busisness climate, (trust us, we will do the right thing), is falling on deaf ears.)You do not give people money who ( might)!!!!!!!!!!!
The South Co chairman has greatly underestimated the integrity and allegiance of the PSC to the public trust. I am sure the board is gravely disappointed in him.
It is time for him to board his flight and be removed.
>>I’m just curious if any of the land was obtained thru eminent domain for a public utility?
No. All of the land was purchased without eminent domain.
I’m just curious if any of the land was obtained thru eminent domain for a public utility? If so, how could they purchase it for a public utility use and then lease it or sell it for other uses.
I agree, GP has enough money from already high power bills to do what they need to build a nuke plant if that is what they really want. No, what will happen if they got their rate increase is to keep the rates and drag their heels for years to get it built. I’m waiting for another bogus reason for them to increase rates now just so they can use that increase to build after all.
One day solar will be cheaper and easier to have per household and their will be no need of the power companies energy and if we do it will be to run places like Champion or stores in the area. Then they will have all this excess power that home owners are no longer using… so no need for a huge nuke plant in the area.
I would love to have a solar/wind system for my home and every year let GP give me money for the excess power I’m not using.
GP would be granted the rate increase if they performed the “determination of need.”.
GP knew that is a requirement before they asked the first time.
I can only assume that GP already knows that a “determination of need” would not be shown nor quantify the need to the PSC.
I bet GP is kicking themselves in the head now for not getting the PSC approval before they got that long term contract for power from elsewhere.
Just another BIG BUSINESS wanting the public low and middle class to pay for there expansions. That’s what there profits are supposed to be used for that they make. Stop paying dividends to stock holders or decrease the CEO’s wages. We the public already insure them from storm damage. If no other power company In Florida never needed the public to purchase land for expansion why should o poor Gulf Power need it.
“The base rate paid by Gulf Power customers already includes pennies each month for property purchased by Gulf Power years ago near Caryville for a power plant that has never been constructed.”
How many years ago was that land bought and why did not Gulf Power build on it?
I have to wonder, is another “plane crash” coming?
Another backdoor deal designed to screw the rate payers.
These people must be ex government workers. If at first you don’t get what you want, resort to using SCARE TACTICS!
So you have bought most of the land but need a rate increase to pay for the purchase? Whatever…..
Thank you William, for continuing to shine the light on the dark dealings in this county which affect those of us who are footing the bill for all these utility monopolies. GP apparently thought we would just roll over and take it once again but your reports caused them to have to explain what they were doing. Good job as always. We the people owe you a big debt for dragging this out into the open.
Wow. “Sell the Land” Wonder if they would sell the land back at a reduced price to the former land owners.?? I doubt they will sell it. If I had to guess they will send their Lobyist back to the Public Service Commission in a few years. In the mean time selling some of the timber would make more sense. Wonder if Gulf Power even thought they might get denied before they purchased the land ?