Duke Energy
Type | Public (NYSE: DUK) |
---|---|
Headquarters | 526 South Church St. Charlotte, NC 28202 |
Area served | IN, KY, NC, OH, SC |
Key people | James E. Rogers, CEO |
Industry | Electric Producer, Distributor, and Utility Natural Gas Utility Real Estate Telecommunications |
Products | Electricity |
Revenue | $12.44 billion (2007)[1] |
Net income | ▲ $1.50 billion (2007)[1] |
Employees | 17,800 |
Divisions | Duke Energy Franchised Electric & Gas Commercial Power International |
Subsidiaries | Duke Energy Carolinas Duke Energy Ohio Duke Energy Kentucky Duke Energy Indiana Duke Energy Generation Services Duke Energy International Crescent Resources Duke Energy Generation Services Duke Energy Argentina Duke Energy Brazil Duke Energy Peru DukeNet Communications |
Website | Duke-Energy.com |
{{#badges:CoalSwarm|nuclear spin}}Duke Energy is a major electricity generating company headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Duke Energy owns and operates 36,000 MW of base-load and peak generation that it distributes to its 4 million customers. Duke Energy's service territory covers 47,000 square miles with 106,000 miles of distribution lines.[2] Almost all of Duke Energy's Midwest generation comes from coal, natural gas or oil, while half of its Carolinas generation comes from its nuclear power plants. During 2006, Duke Energy generated 148,798,332 MWh of electrical energy.
Duke Energy Generation Services (DEGS), a subsidiary of Duke Energy, specializes in the development, ownership and operation of various generation facilities throughout the United States. This segment of the company operates 6,600 MW of generation. 240 MW of wind generation are under construction and 1,500 additional MW of wind generation are in planning stages.[3]
Contents
- 1 Congressional Campaign Contributions
- 2 CEO compensation
- 3 CEO Jim Rogers suggests Duke moving away from coal
- 4 EPA releases list of 44 "high hazard" coal ash dumps
- 5 Duke files plans for carbon sequestration study in Indiana
- 6 Protests against Duke's proposed coal plants
- 6.1 Nov. 15, 2007: Student blockade of Duke Energy headquarters
- 6.2 April 1, 2008: Rising Tide/Earth First! occupation of Cliffside construction site
- 6.3 April 20, 2009: Hundreds protest in Charlotte, N.C. against Duke's proposed Cliffside plant
- 6.4 May 7, 2009: Activists protest Cliffside Plant at Duke Energy shareholder meeting in Charlotte, NC
- 7 Power portfolio
- 8 Duke proposes rate increases to cover higher cost of coal
- 9 Duke ordered to shut down three coal-fired units in Indiana
- 10 Decreasing power demand
- 11 History
- 12 Switching sides on global warming
- 13 Existing coal-fired power plants
- 14 Coal Projects Sponsored by Duke Energy
- 15 Duke's nuclear empire
- 16 MOX Enthusiasts
- 17 New Reactors
- 18 Environmental record
- 19 Lobbyists
- 20 Personnel
- 21 Related SourceWatch articles
- 22 Contact details
- 23 External links
Congressional Campaign Contributions
Duke Energy is one of the largest contributors to both Republican and Democratic candidates for Congress. These contributions total $392,600 to the 110th US Congress (as of the third quarter), the largest of which has been to Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) for $28,000. Senator Voinovich, for his part, has consistently voted with the coal industry on energy bills.[1]
Contributions like this from from fossil fuel companies to members of Congress are often seen as a political barrier to pursuing clean energy.[2]
More information on coal industry contributions to Congress can be found at FollowtheCoalMoney.org, a project sponsored by the nonpartisan, nonprofit Oil Change International and Appalachian Voices.
CEO compensation
In May 2007, Forbes listed Duke Energy CEO Jim Rogers as receiving $10.2 million in total compensation for the latest fiscal year. He ranked 10th on the list of CEOs in the Utilities industry, and 174th out of all CEOs in the United States.[4]
CEO Jim Rogers suggests Duke moving away from coal
In May 2009, Jim Rogers told reporters that that Duke was likely building its last two coal plants, until and unless carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology becomes commercially available. Rogers said he would instead focus on nuclear power generation. He said nuclear power presents less of a waste disposal problem than coal plants, because a smaller area is required for waste storage, and because CCS will require a system to transport CO2 gas long distances.[5]
EPA releases list of 44 "high hazard" coal ash dumps
In response to demands from environmentalists as well as Senator Barbara Boxer (D-California), chair of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, the EPA made public a list of 44 "high hazard potential" coal waste dumps. The rating applies to sites at which a dam failure would most likely cause loss of human life, but does not include an assessment of the likelihood of such an event. Duke owns 10 of the sites, all of which are located in North Carolina.[6]
The following table is derived from EPA's official list of Coal Combustion Residue (CCR) Surface Impoundments with High Hazard Potential Ratings. To see the full list of sites, see Coal waste.[7]
Facility Name | Unit Name | Location |
---|---|---|
G.G. Allen Steam Plant | Active Ash Pond | Belmont, NC |
Belews Creek Steam Station | Active Ash Pond | Walnut Cove, NC |
Buck Steam Station | New Primary Pond | Spencer, NC |
Buck Steam Station | Secondary Pond | Spencer, NC |
Buck Steam Station | Primary Pond | Spencer, NC |
Dan River Steam Station | Secondary Pond | Eden, NC |
Dan River Steam Station | Primary Pond | Eden, NC |
Marshall Steam Station | Active Ash Pond | Terrell, NC |
Riverbend Steam Station | Secondary Pond | Mount Holly, NC |
Riverbend Steam Station | Primary Pond | Mount Holly, NC |
Duke files plans for carbon sequestration study in Indiana
In July 2009, Duke filed a proposal for a carbon dioxide storage project with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission. Duke would invest over $120 million to store a portion of the CO2 emissions from its proposed Edwardsport Plant in Knox County, Indiana. The three-year project would attempt to store emissions in saline aquifers and in depleted oil and gas fields.
The experiment would result in an average 1 percent rate increase for customers between 2010 and 2013. The company is also applying for a federal grant to cover about half of the project's costs. If the project is successful, Duke will apply to capture and store the emissions on a permanent basis.[8]
Protests against Duke's proposed coal plants
Nov. 15, 2007: Student blockade of Duke Energy headquarters
On November 15, 2007, two Warren Wilson College students - dressed as polar bears - chained themselves to the door of Duke Energy's headquarters in Charlotte, North Carolina, in protest of Duke's plans to build the Cliffside coal-fired power plant in western North Carolina. Several dozen people held a rally in support of their blockade, dressing as Santa Claus and elves and presenting a stocking full of coal to the company. The two students were arrested on charges of trespassing and disorderly conduct.[9][10]
April 1, 2008: Rising Tide/Earth First! occupation of Cliffside construction site
On April 1, 2008, as part of the Fossil Fools International Day of Action, a group of North Carolina activists with Rising Tide and Earth First! locked themselves to bulldozers to prevent the construction of the Cliffside coal-fired power plant proposed by Duke in western North Carolina. Others roped off the site with "Global Warming Crime Scene" tape, and held banners protesting the construction of the plant. Police used pain compliance holds and tasers to force the activists to unlock themselves from the construction equipment. Eight people were arrested.[11][12]
April 20, 2009: Hundreds protest in Charlotte, N.C. against Duke's proposed Cliffside plant
Hundreds of people marched and rallied against Cliffside in Charlotte, N.C. The demonstration was organized by more than a dozen environmental, faith-based, and social justice groups, which are calling on Duke Energy and the state of North Carolina to cancel construction of the Cliffside plant. The plant, if built, would release 6 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, and would use coal extracted through mountaintop removal. 44 activists were arrested.[13]
To see video of this protest, see Stop Cliffside
Activists dominated Duke Energy's annual shareholder meeting in Charlotte, NC. About 25 protesters gathered outside the company's headquarters, calling for Duke to cancel its proposed Cliffside Plant. Inside the meeting, activists who own shares of the company grilled CEO Jim Rogers about the company's coal and nuclear investments.[14]
Power portfolio
Out of its total 43,761 MW of electric generating capacity in 2005 (4.10% of the U.S. total), Duke produces 42.5% from coal, 32.4% from natural gas, 17.2% from nuclear, 6.5% from hydroelectricity, and 1.3% from oil. Duke owns power plants in Arkansas, Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, and Virginia.[15]
Duke proposes rate increases to cover higher cost of coal
In March 2009, Duke Energy Carolinas proposed a 5 percent increase on its power charges in North Carolina, to compensate the company for higher coal prices. The fuel-charge increase is separate from an upcoming Duke proposal for a general rate hike. The company estimates that the average customer bill would increase from approximately $87 per month to about $91 per month. Similar increases will be proposed in South Carolina in summer 2009.[16]
Duke ordered to shut down three coal-fired units in Indiana
On May 29, 2009, U.S. District Judge Larry J. McKinney ordered Duke to shut down three units of the Wabash River Generating Station in Indiana for violations of the federal Clean Air Act. In 2008, a jury found that Duke-owned Cinergy had modified the facilities without installing best-available pollution control technology. In his ruling, Judge McKinney cited increased sulfur dioxide emissions from the units and gave a deadline of September 30, 2009 for closing them. Duke's Chief Legal Officer Marc Manly said the company was disappointed with the court's decision to "accelerate the shutdown." The units, which supply 39 percent of the station's power, were slated to be taken off line in 2012.[17]
Decreasing power demand
In November 2008, Duke announced plans to roll back on new power generation because of a decline in demand. The company will delay the construction of two gas-fired power plants in North Carolina and postpone the approval process for the a nuclear plant in South Carolina. The changes were announced along with a 65% decline in third quarter earnings and are expected to reduce capital costs by $200 million this year. The cost-cutting moves did not include any changes to Duke's heavily-opposed coal plant proposals.[18]
History
The company began in 1900 as the Catawba Power Company, when Dr. Walker Gill Wylie and his brother financed the building of a hydroelectric power station at India Hook Shoals along the Catawba River. In need of additional funding to further his ambitious plan for construction of a series of hydroelectric power plants, Wylie convinced James B. Duke to invest in the Southern Power Company, founded in 1905, which later became known as Duke Power. In 1988, Nantahala Power & Light Co., which served southwestern North Carolina, was purchased by Duke and is now operated under the Duke Power - Nantahala Area brand. Duke Power merged with PanEnergy in 1997 to form Duke Energy. The Duke Power name continued as the electric utility business of Duke Energy until the Cinergy merger.
With the purchase of the Cinergy Corporation, announced in 2005 and completed on April 3, 2006, Duke Energy Corporation's customer base now includes the midwestern U.S. as well. The company operates nuclear power plants, coal-fired plants, conventional hydroelectric plants, natural-gas turbines to handle peak demand, and pumped hydro storage. During 2006, Duke Energy also acquired Chatham, Ontario-based Union Gas, which is regulated under the Ontario Energy Board Act (1998).
On January 3, 2007, Duke Energy spun off its gas business to form Spectra Energy. Duke Energy shareholders received 1 share of Spectra Energy for each 2 shares of Duke Energy. After the spin-off, Duke Energy now receives the majority of its revenue from its electric operations in portions of North Carolina, South Carolina, Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana. The spinoff to Spectra also included Union Gas, which Duke Energy acquired the previous year.
Switching sides on global warming
The company, previously called Duke Power, was a member of the Global Climate Coalition, a now-defunct industry group that fought plants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. [3]
In January 2007, Duke Energy was one of 10 major companies to form the U.S. Climate Action Partnership, an industry group that called on U.S. President Bush to "to fight global warming by limiting greenhouse gases, funding research into renewable energy and creating a market for carbon dioxide emissions." [4]
Duke's role in the group was widely seen as visionary and/or selfless. "About half of Duke's electricity comes from coal-fired power plants, which release more carbon dioxide than those burning natural gas," noted the San Francisco Chronicle. [5] Yet Duke's investments in natural gas and nuclear power [6] [7] would likely benefit from the measures proposed by the "Climate Action Partnership." The Nuclear Energy Institute frequently argues that nuclear power is part of the solution to climate change. [8] [9]
Existing coal-fired power plants
Duke had 70 coal-fired generating stations in 2005, with 18,591 MW of capacity. Here is a list of Duke's coal power plants with capacity over 100 MW:[15][19][20]
Plant Name | State | County | Year(s) Built | Capacity | 2007 CO2 Emissions | 2006 SO2 Emissions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Gibson | IN | Gibson | 1975, 1976, 1978, 1979, 1982 | 3340 MW | 20,400,000 tons | 155,057 tons |
Belews Creek | NC | Stokes | 1974, 1975 | 2160 MW | 13,600,000 tons | 95,290 tons |
Marshall | NC | Catawba | 1965, 1966, 1969, 1970 | 1996 MW | 12,600,000 tons | 85,050 tons |
W.H. Zimmer | OH | Clermont | 1991 | 1426 MW | 8,597,000 tons | 22,054 tons |
Miami Fort | OH | Hamilton | 1949, 1960, 1975, 1978 | 1378 MW | 7,546,000 tons | 62,028 tons |
Beckjord | OH | Clermont | 1952, 1953, 1954, 1958, 1962, 1969 | 1221 MW | 6,330,000 tons | 62,480 tons |
Wabash River | IN | Vigo | 1953, 1954, 1955, 1956, 1968, 1995 | 1165 MW | 4,738,000 tons | 58,793 tons |
G.G. Allen | NC | Gaston | 1957, 1959, 1960, 1961 | 1155 MW | 5,864,000 tons | 45,395 tons |
Cayuga | IN | Vermillion | 1970, 1972 | 1062 MW | 6,914,000 tons | 86,174 tons |
Cliffside | NC | Cleveland | 1940, 1948, 1972 | 781 MW | 3,591,000 tons | 28,878 tons |
East Bend | KY | Boone | 1981 | 669 MW | 4,332,000 tons | 3,947 tons |
Gallagher | IN | Floyd | 1958, 1959, 1960, 1961 | 600 MW | 3,383,000 tons | 50,819 tons |
Riverbend | NC | Gaston | 1952, 1954 | 466 MW | 1,676,000 tons | 16,481 tons |
Buck | NC | Rowan | 1941, 1942, 1953 | 370 MW | 1,626,000 tons | 12,054 tons |
W.S. Lee | SC | Anderson | 1951, 1958 | 355 MW | 1,151,000 tons | 10,256 tons |
Dan River | NC | Rockingham | 1949, 1950, 1955 | 290 MW | 827,000 tons | 7,882 tons |
Edwardsport | IN | Knox | 1949, 1951 | 109 MW | 680,000 tons | 8,281 tons |
In 2006, Duke's 17 major coal-fired power plants emitted 103.8 million tons of CO2 (1.7% of all U.S. CO2 emissions) and 811,000 tons of SO2 (5.4% of all U.S. SO2 emissions).
In 2006, Duke's Gallagher plant emitted more tons of SO2 per MWh than any other major power plant in the country; Wabash River ranked 6th in tons of SO2 per MWh, and Cayuga ranked 8th.[19]
Coal Projects Sponsored by Duke Energy
Duke's nuclear empire
Duke Energy operates seven nuclear power stations. Three of these are at the Oconee Nuclear Station in Oconee County, South Carolina and two each at Catawba Nuclear Station in York County, South Carolina and McGuire Nuclear Station in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. [21]
The company is a member of the NuStart Consortium, which aims to obtain one of the new ‘streamlined’ combined Construction and Operating License (COL) for two selected reactor technologies.
Duke Energy is also a member of the Nuclear Energy Institute and the World Nuclear Association.
MOX Enthusiasts
In March 1999, a consortium of companies led by Duke Engineering & Services (a former business unit of Duke Energy), COGEMA and Stone & Webster (DCS) entered into a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to fabricate mixed oxide (MOX) fuel using plutonium from surplus weapons and then to use that fuel in commercial nuclear power plants. The consortium will design, construct and operate a MOX fuel fabrication facility at the DOE Savannah River Site. Duke Energy will use the fuel at McGuire and Catawba nuclear stations beginning around 2011 or later. [22]
Duke Engineering & Services was sold to Framatome ANP, in January 2002. [23] However, Duke Energy continued with the plan to use MoX in its reactors. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) granted permission for the use of MOX fuel at Catawba Nuclear Station, after a two-year review process, in March 2005. [24]
In September 2004, 140 kilograms of weapons-grade plutonium oxide (powder) were shipped via Charleston, South Carolina, to France for fabrication into MOX, where it was met by a storm of protest. The plutonium arrived back, as MOX, at Charleston on April 12, 2005, after an 4000 mile round trip. The French state company Areva fabricated the plutonium into MOX. Greenpeace said the shipment flies in the face of global efforts to curb the nuclear threat. The testing was a prelude to the start up of a large-scale plutonium fuel program in the United States.
New Reactors
Duke Power has selected a site in Cherokee County, (South Carolina) – jointly owned with the Southern Company - for a potential new nuclear power plant. The Company will develop an application to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a combined construction and operating license (COL) for two Westinghouse AP1000 (advanced passive) reactors.[25] The COL application submittal to the NRC is anticipated in the late 2007 or early 2008 time frame. Submitting the COL application does not commit either company to build new nuclear units. The companies will decide whether to proceed with plant construction at a later date. The US Public Interest Group, Public Citizen, said “Duke is angling to receive billions of dollars in taxpayer subsidies to defray the costs of applying for a license as well as operating the plants; it should not be given a government handout for the application … Nor should the government issue a license. Not only does nuclear power pose a threat to public health and safety, but Duke Energy has a track record that indicates it has been dishonest with consumers”. [26]
In addition to selecting the Cherokee County location for a COL application, Duke Power is considering the preparation of early site permit (ESP) applications for locations in Oconee County, S.C., and Davie County, N.C. Early site permits enable companies to complete environmental and site suitability reviews, and obtain approval from the NRC for potential nuclear plant sites in advance of requesting a license to build and operate a plant. [27]
Environmental record
In 1999 the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency commenced an enforcement action against Duke Energy for failure to comply with the Clean Air Act. Duke asserted that EPA regulations under the law were arbitrarily changed over the course of 25 years. Environmental groups asserted that Duke was using loopholes in the law to increase emissions. Initially, Duke prevailed at the trial court level, but in 2006 the case was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court (Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp. (05-848)). The Court unanimously ruled on April 2, 2007, against Duke Energy and in favor of the environmental groups.[28]
Lobbyists
Duke Energy lobbyists include the firm Dutko Worldwide. [29] Other consultants and lobbying firms working for Duke Energy include Alpine Group, BG-4, Dow Lohnes, Hunton & Williams, Mary Kenkel, Lighthouse Consulting Group, LTD Group, Daryl Owen Associates, Valis & Keelen, and Van Ness Feldman, according to the Lobbyists.info online database. [30]
ADD 2008 & 2009 DATA HERE.
Personnel
- James E. Rogers, President and Chief Executive Officer
Related SourceWatch articles
- Climate Action Partnership
- Global Climate Coalition
- North Carolina and coal
- Nuclear Boosters
- Nuclear Energy Institute
- Paul Anderson
- Global warming
Contact details
Web: http://www.duke-energy.com/
External links
References
- ↑ Jump up to: 1.0 1.1 Duke Energy Corp., BusinessWeek Company Insight Center, accessed July 2008.
- ↑ http://www.duke-energy.com/pdfs/Oct_fact_sheet_rev.pdf
- ↑ Overview - Duke Energy, Duke website.
- ↑ CEO Compensation: #174 James E Rogers, Forbes.com, May 3, 2007.
- ↑ Gerard Wynn, "Duke Energy building "last two" coal plants: CEO," Reuters, May 26, 2009.
- ↑ Shaila Dewan, "E.P.A. Lists ‘High Hazard’ Coal Ash Dumps," New York Times, June 30, 2009.
- ↑ Fact Sheet: Coal Combustion Residues (CCR) - Surface Impoundments with High Hazard Potential Ratings, Environmental Protection Agency, June 2009.
- ↑ "Duke Energy files plans for carbon-storage study," Charlotte Business Journal, July 7, 2009.
- ↑ Students Chain Selves to Duke, Raleigh News & Observer, November 16, 2007.
- ↑ Direct Action at Duke Energy Over Proposed Coal Expansion, It's Getting Hot In Here blog, November 15, 2007.
- ↑ "Eight Climate Protesters Arrested at U.S. Coal Plant", Reuters, April 1, 2008.
- ↑ "Eight Arrested as North Carolina Residents Shut Down Construction at Cliffside Coal Plant", Fossil Fools Day blog, April 1, 2008.
- ↑ "Hundreds March and 44 Arrested to Stop Cliffside Power Plant," Power Past Coal, April 21, 2009.
- ↑ "Coal debate highlights Duke meeting," Triangle Business Journal, May 8, 2009.
- ↑ Jump up to: 15.0 15.1 Existing Electric Generating Units in the United States, 2005, Energy Information Administration, accessed April 2008.
- ↑ "Bills may rise as Duke pays more for coal," Charlotte Business Journal, March 13, 2009.
- ↑ Andrew M. Harris, "Duke Energy Ordered to Shut Indiana Coal-Fired Units," Bloomberg, May 29, 2009.
- ↑ "Duke Energy taking steps to deal with slowing power needs," Charlotte Business Journal, November 7, 2008.
- ↑ Jump up to: 19.0 19.1 Environmental Integrity Project, Dirty Kilowatts: America’s Most Polluting Power Plants, July 2007.
- ↑ Dig Deeper, Carbon Monitoring for Action database, accessed June 2008.
- ↑ Duke Energy, website, accessed December 2006.
- ↑ Duke Power, Mixed Oxide Fuel Program undated.
- ↑ Duke Energy Duke Energy Announces Sale of Duke Enginering & Services Unit to Further Align Focus on Wholesale Energy Markets. Press Release, January 31, 2002.
- ↑ Duke Power Duke Power Granted Licence Amendment by Nuclear Regulatory Commission to use MOX Fuel Press Release, March 3, 2005.
- ↑ Duke Power, Duke Power selects Cherokee County site for Nuclear Application, Press Release, March 16, 2006.
- ↑ Public Citizen, Duke Energy Should Be Denied Taxpayer Subsidies to Build New Nuclear Reactors; Better Alternatives Exist, Press Release March 17, 2006.
- ↑ Public Citizen website, accessed December 2006 page on Cherokee County South Carolina.
- ↑ Supreme Court Says EPA Can Regulate Greenhouse Gases
- ↑ Carrie Levine, "Fuel Fight," The blog of Legal Times, December 7, 2007.
- ↑ "Duke Energy," Lobbyists.info (sub req'd), accessed December 2007.
Articles
- David R. Baker And Zachary Coile, "Lobbying effort signals corporate climate change: Business leaders urge reduction of greenhouse gases," San Francisco Chronicle, January 23, 2007.
Wikipedia also has an article on Duke Energy. This article may use content from the Wikipedia article under the terms of the GFDL.