In Wake of Street Crisis, ‘I Wouldn’t Own Any of These Heavy Nuclear Utilities’ - Analyst Scotto (Part 2 of 2)

By admin | October 6, 2008

Submitted by EnergyTechStocks.com

With Congress on the verge of committing a king’s ransom of taxpayer money to cope with the meltdown on Wall Street, it will have little appetite for guaranteeing billions of dollars in loans for new nuclear power plants, which could end America’s “nuclear revival” before it’s even begun.

That’s according to veteran Wall Street utility financial analyst Dan Scotto, who told EnergyTechStocks.com that federal loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants (without which Wall Street is unlikely to advance utilities the money to build) are now “way, way off Congress’s radar screen.”

no-nukes330.jpg

Reminded that presidential candidate John McCain has voiced strong support for more nuclear power, Scotto said that should he win, his administration will be too besieged by other financial issues to follow through. At best, Scotto said, the Wall Street meltdown has probably set back the timetable for constructing a new generation of nuclear power plants in the U.S. by three years.

The consequences of delay could be significant for utilities that have operating nuclear power plants, Scotto emphasized. He noted that while coal plants “can go on forever,” nuclear plants have a fixed lifetime. With most of America’s 100+ operating nuclear plants quite old, operating expenses are rising, as are concerns about where to put the spent nuclear fuel.

“It’s all going to hit a wall,” Scotto said, adding that only when there is an energy crisis as great as the current financial crisis will Congress probably take action. “This is a Congress that manages by crisis,” he said.

Scotto said that, as an investor, “I wouldn’t want to own any of those heavy nuclear utilities,” because of the rising cost and concern surrounding America’s aging nuclear plants. Asked to name names, Scotto mentioned Entergy Corp., Exelon Corp., Northeast Utilities System and PNM Resources Inc. as companies investors should

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

Comments