3 ms·
I believe the Flamanville EPR is considered as some sort of prototype. It was planned to be years in the making and difficulties were expected. It was schedule
by philipkglass 5y ago
I believe the Flamanville EPR is considered as some sort of prototype. It was planned to be years in the making and difficulties were expected.
It was scheduled to take 54 months to build when construction started in 2007:
https://web.archive.org/web/20110613091002/http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectionCode=132&storyCode=2048041 https://web.archive.org/web/20110613091002/http://www.neimag...
The last reactors to enter commercial operation in France, the 2 units at Civaux Nuclear Power Plant, took 13 and 11 years from construction start in 1988/1991 to commercial operation in 2002:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civaux_Nuclear_Power_Plant https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civaux_Nuclear_Power_Plant
I wonder if EDF succumbed to hubris in thinking that they could build a new reactor design twice as fast as the last-completed reactors, or if they published optimistic numbers because they thought that there was more institutional tolerance for constant slippage than for estimating unhappily large numbers right at the start.
- Maakuth 5y agoI would bet on hubris here. In parallel with the Flamanville unit, they've been building EPR in Olkiluoto, Finland. There's a number of issues that have been shared by both of the projects, of course with some issues specific to each one. They agreed to deliver the Finnish plant on turnkey basis and are facing billions in losses because the quoted price is something like 1/3 of the final cost.
- natmaka 5y ago> the 2 units at Civaux Nuclear Power Plant, took 13 and 11 years from construction start in 1988/1991 to commercial operation in 2002: At the time France was simultaneously building many reactors, see: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_r%C3%A9acteurs_nucl%C3%A9aires_en_France#/media/Fichier:Chrono-parc-nucleaire-francais.svg https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_r%C3%A9acteurs_nucl%... Some say that Flamanville-3 is a failure because it should be built along with many other reactors. This seems ridiculous to me, as if the problems (lack of adequate applied skill, bad project management... there is a complete official report about the causes, written by M. Folz) would be alleviated by parallelizing projects (it would instead worsen their effects and add delays). > if they published optimistic numbers because they thought that there was more institutional tolerance In France institutional tolerance for the nuclear industry is at its max. Start in 2007, to be delivered in 2012, nothing delivered in 2021 and 5.6 times over-budget... and no-one even talks about calling it off. Even better: M. Macron wants to start new projects!
- toyg 5y ago> In France institutional tolerance for the nuclear industry is at its max. At this point, it's more of a jobs-program than an energy-program - like a lot of US defence spending.