This paper examines the factors causing the escalation in the 1980s and' subsequent leveling off of nuclear power plant non-fuel Operating and Maintenance (O&M) costs. Over the period 1974-93, real (inflation-adjusted) non-fuel O&M costs escalated from about $23 to about $97 per kilowatt of installed capacity (kW). However, much of the escalation in costs occurred in the 1980s. Over the period 1975-87, real O&M costs escalated at an annual rate of about 11 percent. Since then, the annual growth rate in real O&M costs fell to about I percent. The research found that the escalation in O&M costs was primarily due to increased regulatory activity by the Nuclear Regulatory, Commission. More important, there is little evidence that the moderation in the growth in O&M costs was regulatory induced, but instead was due to changes in the economic incentives to improve plant performance.
BowersH.FullerL.MyersM. (1988). Cost Estimating Relationships for Nuclear Plant Operation and Maintenance. ORNL/TM-10564. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN.
2.
CantorRHewlettJ. (1988). “The Economics of Nuclear Power: Further Evidence on Learning, Economies of Scale, and Regulatory Effects,” Resources and Energy10(4): 315-335
3.
EpsteinL.DennyM. (1980). “Endogenous Capital Utilization in a Short-Run Production Model,” Journal of Econometrics12(1): 189-207.
4.
GilinskyV. (1992). “Nuclear Safety Regulation: Lesson from the USA,” Energy Policy20(8): 704-711.
5.
HewlettJ. (1992). “The Operating Cost and Longevity of Nuclear Power Plants: Evidence from the USA,” Energy Policy20(7): 608-622.
6.
HewlettJ. (1994). “The Economics of Aging US Nuclear Power Plants,” The Nuclear Industry: Into the 21st Century? Financial Times Business Information, London, UK.
7.
HsiaoCheng (1986). Analysis of Panel Data, Cambridge University Press, New York.
8.
JoskowP.SchmalenseeR. (1985). “The Performance of Coal-Burning Electric Generating Units in the United States: 1960-1980,” MIT Energy Laboratory Working Paper MIT-EL-85-013Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
9.
JoskowP.SchmalenseeR. (1987). “Incentive Regulation of Electric Utilities,” Yale Journal of Regulation4(2): 1-49.
10.
JorgensonD. (1967). “The Theory of Investment Behavior” in RobertFerber ed., Determinants of Investment behavior, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York.
11.
KahnA. (1971). The Economics of Regulation: Principles and Practice, John Wiley and Sons, New York.
12.
KimM. (1988). “The Structure of Technology with Endogenous Capital Utilization,” International Economic Review29(1): 111-129.
13.
KrautmannA.SolowJ.(1992). Nuclear Power Performance: The post Three Mile Island Era,” Energy Economics 14(3): 209-215.
14.
LesterR.McCabeM. (1993). “The Effect of Industry Structure on Leaning by Using in Nuclear Power Plant Operation,” Rand Journal of Economics, 24(3): 418-438.
15.
McCabeMHewlettJ. (1996). “Dynamic Behavior of Regulated Firms: Some Evidence from Nuclear Utilities,” A paper presented at the 1994 Meetings and the American Economic Association, Washington D.C., January1995.
16.
McKerronG. (1992). “Why Do Nuclear Costs Keep Rising,” Energy Policy20(7): 641-653.
17.
Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation (1992). Economic Analysis of the Continued Operation of the Nine Mile Point One Nuclear Power Station, Syracuse, New York.
18.
Portland General Electric Power Corporation (1992). Integrated Resource Plan, 1992, Portland, Oregon.
19.
RothwellG. (1990). “Utilization and Service: Decomposing Nuclear Power Capacity Factors,” Resources and Energy12(3): 215-229.
20.
RustJ.RothwellG.(1995). Optimal Response to Shift in Regulatory Regime: The Case of the U.S. Nuclear Power Industry,” Unpublished paper, University of Wisconsin and Stanford University.
21.
SturmR. (1993). “Nuclear Power in Eastern Europe,” Energy Economics15(3): 183-189.
22.
United States Council for Energy Awareness (1993). The Industry Commitment to Improve Economic-Performance, Washington, D.C.
23.
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (1986). An Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Construction Costs, DOE/EIA-0485, U.S. Government Printtag Office, Washington, D.C.
24.
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (1988). An Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Costs, DOE/E1A-0511, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
25.
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (1995). An Analysis of Nuclear Power Plant Operating Costs: A 1995 Update, SR/OIAF/95-01. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
26.
U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration (1996). Annual Energy Outlook, EIA/DOE 0383(96), U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
27.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1990). Annual Report to Congress, NUREG-1145, Vol 10 U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
28.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1991). “Monitoring the Effectiveness of Maintenance at Nuclear Power Plants,” Federal Register, Vol. 56, No. 132 July 10, 1991, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
