4 ms·

They do -- And then they come in at 2x time/cost of the doubled estimate. The initial estimate for the Vogtle expansion in Georgia was $11.5 billion total with

They do -- And then they come in at 2x time/cost of the doubled estimate. The initial estimate for the Vogtle expansion in Georgia was $11.5 billion total with first power coming in 2016 and 2017 for the two reactors. The cost was repeatedly revised upwards with the latest estimate at $27 billion and they aren't expecting power before 2022. The entire project might still be cancelled and rate payers will just lose ten billion+ dollars. Can you imagine a project that is over 100% over budget in time and money when the scale is billions of dollars and a decade? Anyone with the background should try and pencil out a financial forecast to make money off tying up tens of billions of dollars for 15 years before you see a penny of revenue.

hospes 8y ago
Meanwhile in 8 months in India they have built 648 MW solar plant that costs $679 million [1]. [1] https://youtu.be/gM-0lrIxCnE https://youtu.be/gM-0lrIxCnE
- adventured 8y ago
  11 of the 12 most polluted cities on earth are in India. They need to build a lot faster given coal is still 3/4 of their energy generation. The US is a laggard on solar as a percentage of energy generation, and even the US has a larger share of its energy derived from solar than India does. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-43972155 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-43972155
  - Reason077 8y ago
    India's air pollution problem is only partially due to power plants. Much of it comes from things like cooking fires, agricultural burning, and combustion vehicles. Closing down coal would be a step forward, but wouldn't solve the problem alone.
- DoctorOetker 8y ago
  Pretty much off topic by me but: Do you know what is the total surface area of currently installed solar panels by SolarCity? Alternatively the largest total area solar panels operated by a single entity? (it's for an astronomy idea I have)
maxxxxx 8y ago
This makes fusion look almost cheap :-)
- mikhailfranco 8y ago
  And look almost quick to market ... in 50 years (as they always say).
growlist 8y ago
Why don't they build sites with many small productised nuclear sub propulsion type reactors, as opposed to a single monstrous and pretty much bespoke reactor? I'm sure there's a good reason but on the surface it seems like commodity reactors would be a far cheaper approach in the end.
- yourapostasy 8y ago
  > ...commodity reactors would be a far cheaper approach in the end. I've read claims that in the US, unfortunately there are no commodity reactors, with commensurately commodity costs in licensing, environmental and regulatory approvals. Each reactor is effectively a one-off effort, with a minority of transferable capital equipment, skills, etc. I've also read that France's reactors are far more uniform, and they reap many benefits from it. I wish more research and engineering could be justified into ultra-small reactors like described in this Quora response [1]. Not really sure what he meant by a magneto-hydrodynamic power conversion because I didn't picture a conductive fluid involved from his description, but I wonder if the reaction can be scaled down even smaller than the proposed 100 GJ burst (I somehow suspect battery chemistries don't take kindly to those scales of bursts). [1] https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-micro-nuclear-reactor-that-can-power-up-a-house-for-entire-life-time https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-micro-nuclear-reactor-that-...
  - greglindahl 8y ago
    The whole point of the new generation of both Westinghouse and EDF reactors is that each would be a commodity. And both are stumbling at the start.
- brandmeyer 8y ago
  Because there are natural economies of scale in building larger nuclear reactors. Submarine propulsion reactors are several times more expensive than commercial reactors on a per-unit-power basis, even after accounting for the overruns.
  - growlist 8y ago

hospes 8y ago

Meanwhile in 8 months in India they have built 648 MW solar plant that costs $679 million [1]. [1] https://youtu.be/gM-0lrIxCnE https://youtu.be/gM-0lrIxCnE

adventured 8y ago
11 of the 12 most polluted cities on earth are in India. They need to build a lot faster given coal is still 3/4 of their energy generation. The US is a laggard on solar as a percentage of energy generation, and even the US has a larger share of its energy derived from solar than India does. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-43972155 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-43972155
- Reason077 8y ago
  India's air pollution problem is only partially due to power plants. Much of it comes from things like cooking fires, agricultural burning, and combustion vehicles. Closing down coal would be a step forward, but wouldn't solve the problem alone.
DoctorOetker 8y ago
Pretty much off topic by me but: Do you know what is the total surface area of currently installed solar panels by SolarCity? Alternatively the largest total area solar panels operated by a single entity? (it's for an astronomy idea I have)

maxxxxx 8y ago

This makes fusion look almost cheap :-)

mikhailfranco 8y ago
And look almost quick to market ... in 50 years (as they always say).

growlist 8y ago

Why don't they build sites with many small productised nuclear sub propulsion type reactors, as opposed to a single monstrous and pretty much bespoke reactor? I'm sure there's a good reason but on the surface it seems like commodity reactors would be a far cheaper approach in the end.

yourapostasy 8y ago
> ...commodity reactors would be a far cheaper approach in the end. I've read claims that in the US, unfortunately there are no commodity reactors, with commensurately commodity costs in licensing, environmental and regulatory approvals. Each reactor is effectively a one-off effort, with a minority of transferable capital equipment, skills, etc. I've also read that France's reactors are far more uniform, and they reap many benefits from it. I wish more research and engineering could be justified into ultra-small reactors like described in this Quora response [1]. Not really sure what he meant by a magneto-hydrodynamic power conversion because I didn't picture a conductive fluid involved from his description, but I wonder if the reaction can be scaled down even smaller than the proposed 100 GJ burst (I somehow suspect battery chemistries don't take kindly to those scales of bursts). [1] https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-micro-nuclear-reactor-that-can-power-up-a-house-for-entire-life-time https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-micro-nuclear-reactor-that-...
- greglindahl 8y ago
  The whole point of the new generation of both Westinghouse and EDF reactors is that each would be a commodity. And both are stumbling at the start.
brandmeyer 8y ago
Because there are natural economies of scale in building larger nuclear reactors. Submarine propulsion reactors are several times more expensive than commercial reactors on a per-unit-power basis, even after accounting for the overruns.
- growlist 8y ago