The JEA Nuclear Conundrum

[spuwho]

JEA has an option coming up to purchase a share in a nuclear plant. The overall cost share to JEA (actually the rate payers if they proceed) is around $2bn USD.

The questions begs, if JEA was to spend $2 billion in an energy saving initiative over the bond life of the investment, could they create the energy savings to defer the power needs of going nuclear for 30 years?

While it would be easy to say "buy $2billion worth of energy saving bulbs" (it's a lot of bulbs), this would be something more comprehensive.

Going "nuke" helps reduce JEA's dependence of fossil fuels (and their vacillating pricing) and while reduces their carbon footprint, it increases to some degree their long term costs as they will have to help pay to store the nuclear waste 40 years from now. (Yucca Mountain is on hold thanks to Sen. Reid)

Lots of benefits, lots of costs. Which way does JEA go?