navitron
 
Renewable Energy and Sustainability Forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Anyone wishing to register as a new member on the forum is strongly recommended to use a "proper" email address - following recent spam/hack attempts on the forum, all security is set to "high", and "disposable" email addresses like Gmail, Yahoo and Hotmail tend to be viewed with suspicion, and the application rejected if there is any doubt whatsoever
 
Recent Articles: Navitron Partners With Solax to Help Create A More Sustainable Future | Navitron Calls for Increased Carbon Footprint Reduction In Light of Earth Overshoot Day | A plea from The David School - Issue 18
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Hinkley Point C nuclear plant to run £2.9bn over budget  (Read 680 times)
dimengineer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2288


« Reply #15 on: September 26, 2019, 07:35:14 PM »

Does it though? Sizewell will be on a different funding model, and Iím sure there will be a strong lobby for the correct idea that building more of the same design with the same construction teams ultimately reduces cost/time?

But isn't is still a bit wierd that the 3rd station to be built - and they are still getting it "wrong". What is going on? 3rd of a kind, much of the issues should have been resolved, surely?
I know if I do projects (OK, much, much smaller scale) if I do a third of a kind - it's not far off turning the handle.
Logged

21 tube Kloben Panel/250L Megaflow, 1.68kWp Solar PV - 7 x 240W Sanyo Panels. Morso Squirrel WBS
RIT
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2015


« Reply #16 on: September 26, 2019, 09:45:37 PM »

Does it though? Sizewell will be on a different funding model, and Iím sure there will be a strong lobby for the correct idea that building more of the same design with the same construction teams ultimately reduces cost/time?

But isn't is still a bit wierd that the 3rd station to be built - and they are still getting it "wrong". What is going on? 3rd of a kind, much of the issues should have been resolved, surely?
I know if I do projects (OK, much, much smaller scale) if I do a third of a kind - it's not far off turning the handle.

Well, to be honest, they are getting better at it. HPC is currently "ONLY" £2.9B over budget and maybe a year late. Compare that to the first and second attempt and HPC looks like it's going well Smiley After a few more attempts they may be able to compete with 2017 wind contracts.
Logged

2.4kW PV system, output can be seen at  - https://pvoutput.org/list.jsp?userid=49083

Why bother? - well, there is no planet B
splyn
Full Member
***
Online Online

Posts: 220


« Reply #17 on: September 27, 2019, 01:31:05 AM »

But isn't is still a bit wierd that the 3rd station to be built - and they are still getting it "wrong". What is going on? 3rd of a kind, much of the issues should have been resolved, surely?
I know if I do projects (OK, much, much smaller scale) if I do a third of a kind - it's not far off turning the handle.

All three reactors are being built in different countries and thus under three different regulators, each (I assume) having different opinions about design changes they believe are necessary for safe operation. I guess most of the design and build standards will be common to all three countries but there are bound to be unique requirements and differing expectations as to acceptable quality, given that no civil servant wants to be remembered in history as the one who overlooked some obvious or obscure fault which subsequently led to some catastrophe which could be blamed on them. Design changes occuring late in development are typically extremely expensive so I'd guess this could be a significant factor in the seemingly slow learning/cost curve.

I assume a major reason for the apparent success of the Chinese developments is down to a different balance between the regulators and the developers - the regulators will no doubt be under a lot of pressure to ensure they are finding ways to make the project a success rather than finding ways to stop it - given that there's no doubt that the safest nuclear reactor is one that never gets completed. Let's hope that the Chinese have got that balance right and continue to maintain it - time will tell.

Another factor is that different contractors will presumably have been used for some major parts of the construction, especially civil works. So whilst EDF will have learnt lessons from earlier problems and failures, those contractors won't have gained the experience - even with tight/close supervision by EDF there will inevitably be some costs resulting. For example, a PassivHaus built by an inexperienced company, even if surpervised by an expert, is bound to be far more costly and slower than one built by experienced builders.

Also, three developments isn't many to encounter and address the many different ways things can go wrong - I bet they got the concrete right after Finland, but Hinckley is bound to have had new problems not encountered at the other sites.
Logged
M
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 5075



« Reply #18 on: September 27, 2019, 09:03:32 AM »

Does it though? Sizewell will be on a different funding model, and Iím sure there will be a strong lobby for the correct idea that building more of the same design with the same construction teams ultimately reduces cost/time?

But isn't is still a bit wierd that the 3rd station to be built - and they are still getting it "wrong". What is going on? 3rd of a kind, much of the issues should have been resolved, surely?
I know if I do projects (OK, much, much smaller scale) if I do a third of a kind - it's not far off turning the handle.

Well, to be honest, they are getting better at it. HPC is currently "ONLY" £2.9B over budget and maybe a year late. Compare that to the first and second attempt and HPC looks like it's going well Smiley After a few more attempts they may be able to compete with 2017 wind contracts.

He he.

But, two things to remember, HPC's costs were far higher to start than the original French & Finnish prices, to take account of lessons learned, but already over budget.

And, as I recall, the 15 months behind confirmation, was actually first suggested just a few months after work started ...... I kid you not?
Logged

Just call me Mart.     Cardiff: 5.58kWp PV - (3.58kWp SE3500 + 2kWp SE2200 WNW)
dan_b
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4101


WWW
« Reply #19 on: September 27, 2019, 09:55:53 AM »

Seem to remember the original plan was to be cooking our Christmas dinners on Hinkley electrons by 2017?
Logged

3.06kWp SolarEdge system with a split array:
2.18kWp 10x South facing, plus 4x West facing 880W

Mk1 ImmerSUN DHW diverter
4kW PowerVault Battery
billi
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8926



WWW
« Reply #20 on: September 27, 2019, 12:01:04 PM »

Quote
t raised its estimate for the project, in Somerset, to between £21.5bn and £22.5bn, blaming "challenging ground conditions".
    hysteria    superb engineering  from the start  facepalm
Logged

1.6 kw and 2.4 kw   PV array  , Outback MX 60 and FM80 charge controller  ,24 volt 1600 AH Battery ,6 Kw Victron inverter charger, 1.1 kw high head hydro turbine as a back up generator , 5 kw woodburner, 36 solar tubes with 360 l water tank, 1.6 kw  windturbine
dimengineer
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2288


« Reply #21 on: September 27, 2019, 04:26:34 PM »

Seem to remember the original plan was to be cooking our Christmas dinners on Hinkley electrons by 2017?

To be fair, that did assume gettting the go ahead rather earlier than it did. It only ACTUALLY started construction in 2017.
Logged

21 tube Kloben Panel/250L Megaflow, 1.68kWp Solar PV - 7 x 240W Sanyo Panels. Morso Squirrel WBS
M
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 5075



« Reply #22 on: September 28, 2019, 04:48:04 PM »

Seem to remember the original plan was to be cooking our Christmas dinners on Hinkley electrons by 2017?

To be fair, that did assume gettting the go ahead rather earlier than it did. It only ACTUALLY started construction in 2017.

Or, to put it another way, the assumptions/claims made by those that try to promote nuclear as viable, are unrealistic.
Logged

Just call me Mart.     Cardiff: 5.58kWp PV - (3.58kWp SE3500 + 2kWp SE2200 WNW)
Philip R
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1470


« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2019, 12:39:40 AM »

Dan B, Original Hinkley C would have been providing power to the grid in 2006/7 had it been built as Sizewell B sister. Did not happen because planning permission was allowed to lapse in 1997. 

M, Hinkley construction start was delayed because of major delays in finalising permissions for locating the construction camp.

The overrun in cost is not unexpected, Many major projects in the UK overrun on cost. Is it because continual procrastination regarding policy/finance lead to repeated delays, thus, increasing the cost.

On the TV news this week, it was discussed that the effects of climate change are accelerating. Sea level set to rise over a metre in the next century.The costs of this are truely massive, £$Trillions! So a bit of cost overrun on a first of a kind in UK is really no big deal. Look on the +ve side, longer construction, more PAYE to HMRC.
Philip R
Logged
M
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 5075



« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2019, 08:37:46 AM »

On the TV news this week, it was discussed that the effects of climate change are accelerating. Sea level set to rise over a metre in the next century.The costs of this are truely massive, £$Trillions! So a bit of cost overrun on a first of a kind in UK is really no big deal. Look on the +ve side, longer construction, more PAYE to HMRC.
Philip R

Which actually supports the arguments against nuclear, since it's not low carbon when you add in the FF emissions during the additional build time v's a RE alternative, and it's not low carbon when you include the lost clean generation from choosing a far more expensive generation source (bang for your buck), v's cheap RE.
Logged

Just call me Mart.     Cardiff: 5.58kWp PV - (3.58kWp SE3500 + 2kWp SE2200 WNW)
brackwell
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2994


« Reply #25 on: September 29, 2019, 08:57:57 AM »

This is only still going on because of the French gov. No Co would be able to absorb the cost overuns and delay associated with building the 3 nuclear stations. And the EU is not supposed to support lame ducks but here we have a totally bankrupt company working on our shores !!
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!