2 ms·
The only thing predictable about nuclear construction prices and schedules is that they tend to go over by 2x-4x or higher (but they tend to get canceled at tha
by dv_dt 8y ago
The only thing predictable about nuclear construction prices and schedules is that they tend to go over by 2x-4x or higher (but they tend to get canceled at that point).
The 3% difference is a reasonable criticism, meaning that they're basically at parity cost wise in this comparison. But then you really have to add the 1000+ year waste storage costs - which even if not ignored, are ridiculous to estimate costs for.
- tomatotomato37 8y agoIs that because its a nuclear project, or because its a large civic project? With everything from the California High-Speed Rail project to New York's public transit system to the F35 fighter jet I don't really think the US is going to be getting any major projects done again without absolutely demolishing anything resembling a budget, at least in the near future.
- dv_dt 8y agoI don't think you can separate nuclear projects from being large civic projects, but I agree with you on something going massively wrong with US large project capability. IMHO, it's the rise of a specialist-in-managment-only class of executive in the US more than other nations.
- fmajid 8y agoOnly in the US. France has well-managed public works and they use standardized reactor designs for economies of scale. That doesn’t prevent snafus on new designs like the Superphenix fast breeder reactor, but nothing like the US’ absurd cost disease.
- Octoth0rpe 8y agoSuperphenix isn't exactly the only example of a complete cost fuckup in france: http://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/EDF-revises-schedule,-costs-of-Flamanville-EPR http://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/EDF-revises-schedule,... Short version: was originally expected to cost 3.3 bil euro, is now at 10.9 bil euro and climbing.
- adrianN 8y agoAt some point during the next 1000+ years we'll probably build some breeder reactors to use all that "waste" as fuel.