4 ms·

First Generation III+ reactor is still being built in Finland. Gen IV (thorium, LFTR etc.) should arrive after 2030. It seems that there's considerable distanc

by Ras_ 16y ago

First Generation III+ reactor is still being built in Finland. Gen IV (thorium, LFTR etc.) should arrive after 2030. It seems that there's considerable distance between getting an approval and building one. Areva's EPR-proto has proved that western nuclear industry contractors had forgot (comparable to UK's Trident missile -case) how to actually build nuclear power plants. This has resulted in several years of delays at Olkiluoto, Fi and Flamanville, Fr. As noted in recent discussion, jet fighter designers will also lose some of their skills when there isn't enough new design work to be done. "The first license application for the European Pressurized Reactor was made in December 2000. Construction of the power plant commenced in August 2005. The original commissioning date of the reactor was set to May 2009. However, in May 2009 the plant was "at least three and a half years behind schedule and more than 50 percent over-budget". The commissioning deadline has been postponed several times and as of June 2010 operation is set to start in 2013." - 10-15 years from license application to commissioning! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant

hga 16y ago
"Areva's EPR-proto has proved that western nuclear industry contractors had forgot (comparable to UK's Trident missile -case) how to actually build nuclear power plants." I really wonder about this: surely the cited concrete problems can't be due to requirements that are entirely unique to building nuclear power plants? (In some case, though, I can well believe it, e.g. the foundation for the reactor, although it ought to be at least a bit like building serious bomb-proof fortifications.) Have people forgotten how to forge metal? Very possibly, depending on the type and scale needed (I know there are general US issues with our defense industrial base here, then again we just aren't building military artifacts in the old ways anymore (e.g. modular Chobham tank armor vs. cast armor, construction of the B2 ws very different than the B1)), but we need more info than is provided in the source article: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Olkiluoto_pipe_welding_deficient_says_regulator-1610095.html http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Olkiluoto_pipe_welding_... Which you'll notice the main topic of was a gross failure to properly direct and supervise pipe welding. When you all these three things up, it smells to me like serious supervisory incompetence on the part of the general contractor rather than anything likely to be unique to nuclear engineering. Of course that could be due to the general contractor getting out of practice, but the concrete and pipe welding it relatively basic stuff (e.g. high quality pipe welding is critical to refinery and chemical plant construction). This sounds more like "out of practice at being serious about their job", which is a sort of institutional rot that can set in when an organization has no real work to do for too long. See e.g. Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy: http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail408.html#Iron http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail40...
- neutronicus 16y ago
  "Have people forgotten how to forge metal?" Not entirely related, but there are only three (foundries? forges? - not sure of the noun) capable of creating a one-piece reactor pressure vessel in the entire world, one in Germany, one in Japan, and one in France (I think - there might be two in France and none in Germany).
  - hga 16y ago
    I can't imagine forging something that big and casting at a foundry wouldn't I think produce what you'd need (maybe, and it would be a cast iron b----, so to speak to do :-). A bit of work with Google came up with this NRC Fact Sheet: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/prv.html http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/pr... which says they "are made of thick steel plates that are welded together" which is what you'd expect. If this was good enough for later 20th century warship armor (which most certainly got put to the ultimate test!) (ADDED:) and submarines (which get put to the test every time they dive) it's good enough for this purpose. Given that, it wouldn't take too much effort to cobble together what you would need to do it (stuff to hold the work in progress, like the two submarine shipyards we keep alive for the obvious reasons), but it's specialized and low volume enough I'm not be surprised there are only a handful operational in the world right now, and of course post-TMI the US wouldn't have one of them.
    - pjscott 16y ago
      Another fun fact: China and Korea are making large reactors without going through Japan Steel. Waiting in line for the heaviest of heavy forgings isn't necessary to create PWR nuclear reactors, even large ones.
- lispm 16y ago
  The safety requirements are much higher than in the past. There are lots of problems. For example the control systems are now all digital. Now find THREE INDEPENDTLY designed and programmed control systems, so that these are available redundant and don't fail at the same errors. How many companies are there that can get their stuff certified at the required levels?

by Ras_ 16y ago

hga 16y ago

"Areva's EPR-proto has proved that western nuclear industry contractors had forgot (comparable to UK's Trident missile -case) how to actually build nuclear power plants." I really wonder about this: surely the cited concrete problems can't be due to requirements that are entirely unique to building nuclear power plants? (In some case, though, I can well believe it, e.g. the foundation for the reactor, although it ought to be at least a bit like building serious bomb-proof fortifications.) Have people forgotten how to forge metal? Very possibly, depending on the type and scale needed (I know there are general US issues with our defense industrial base here, then again we just aren't building military artifacts in the old ways anymore (e.g. modular Chobham tank armor vs. cast armor, construction of the B2 ws very different than the B1)), but we need more info than is provided in the source article: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Olkiluoto_pipe_welding_deficient_says_regulator-1610095.html http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Olkiluoto_pipe_welding_... Which you'll notice the main topic of was a gross failure to properly direct and supervise pipe welding. When you all these three things up, it smells to me like serious supervisory incompetence on the part of the general contractor rather than anything likely to be unique to nuclear engineering. Of course that could be due to the general contractor getting out of practice, but the concrete and pipe welding it relatively basic stuff (e.g. high quality pipe welding is critical to refinery and chemical plant construction). This sounds more like "out of practice at being serious about their job", which is a sort of institutional rot that can set in when an organization has no real work to do for too long. See e.g. Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy: http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail408.html#Iron http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives2/archives2mail/mail40...

neutronicus 16y ago
"Have people forgotten how to forge metal?" Not entirely related, but there are only three (foundries? forges? - not sure of the noun) capable of creating a one-piece reactor pressure vessel in the entire world, one in Germany, one in Japan, and one in France (I think - there might be two in France and none in Germany).
- hga 16y ago
  I can't imagine forging something that big and casting at a foundry wouldn't I think produce what you'd need (maybe, and it would be a cast iron b----, so to speak to do :-). A bit of work with Google came up with this NRC Fact Sheet: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/prv.html http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/pr... which says they "are made of thick steel plates that are welded together" which is what you'd expect. If this was good enough for later 20th century warship armor (which most certainly got put to the ultimate test!) (ADDED:) and submarines (which get put to the test every time they dive) it's good enough for this purpose. Given that, it wouldn't take too much effort to cobble together what you would need to do it (stuff to hold the work in progress, like the two submarine shipyards we keep alive for the obvious reasons), but it's specialized and low volume enough I'm not be surprised there are only a handful operational in the world right now, and of course post-TMI the US wouldn't have one of them.
  - pjscott 16y ago
    Another fun fact: China and Korea are making large reactors without going through Japan Steel. Waiting in line for the heaviest of heavy forgings isn't necessary to create PWR nuclear reactors, even large ones.
lispm 16y ago
The safety requirements are much higher than in the past. There are lots of problems. For example the control systems are now all digital. Now find THREE INDEPENDTLY designed and programmed control systems, so that these are available redundant and don't fail at the same errors. How many companies are there that can get their stuff certified at the required levels?