HUGE(!) Deal in Nuclear Power yesterday!

[DGS49]

From 1440 news:

"A new reactor unit at Georgia’s Vogtle nuclear power plant went into commercial operation yesterday, capping a 15-year expansion that makes the site the single biggest producer of carbon-free energy in the country.

The reactor, known as Unit 4, comes online less than a year after the similarly built Unit 3 was flipped on—together they were the first nuclear reactors constructed from scratch in the US in more than 30 years. The plant is expected to produce 30 million megawatt-hours of power annually, or roughly 23% of Georgia's total power consumption (though it will also service customers in Florida and Alabama).

The project was expected to begin producing power in 2016, but experienced significant delays and unexpected costs, driving the final price tag from $14B to $35B. Customer rates were raised a total of 10% to help cover financing.

A single half-inch uranium pellet produces roughly the same amount of energy as 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas or 1 ton of coal. See how commercial nuclear reactors work here."

I worked at Westinghouse Electric in 2010-2012 as in-house counsel in Purchasing. We were buying equipment (pumps, compressors, valves, etc.) that were required by our customer to have a two-year warranty after startup. Think about that. We bought the stuff in 2006-20012, it was delivered to the site, and the warranty STARTED YESTERDAY! Every couple years, Weatinghouse had to go back to those vendors and PAY FOR yet another extension on their warranties. We/they ended up paying many times the acquisition cost of the equipment in extended warranty surcharges.

When I was with Westinghouse, we knew all this. We didn't know exactly how long it would take for the plant to start up, but we knew were losing barrels of money on equipment alone, plus hundreds of millions on field change orders; this was the first time anyone had built an AP1000 reactor (several plants under construction at the same time). Westinghouse management was reporting to the parent company, Toshiba, that the project was still going to be profitable.

Believe it or not, this is one of THREE hundred-million dollar fiasco's I worked on in my long and spotted career. But this one was surely the biggest.

 

[jwoodie]

From 1440 news:

"A new reactor unit at Georgia’s Vogtle nuclear power plant went into commercial operation yesterday, capping a 15-year expansion that makes the site the single biggest producer of carbon-free energy in the country.

The reactor, known as Unit 4, comes online less than a year after the similarly built Unit 3 was flipped on—together they were the first nuclear reactors constructed from scratch in the US in more than 30 years. The plant is expected to produce 30 million megawatt-hours of power annually, or roughly 23% of Georgia's total power consumption (though it will also service customers in Florida and Alabama).

The project was expected to begin producing power in 2016, but experienced significant delays and unexpected costs, driving the final price tag from $14B to $35B. Customer rates were raised a total of 10% to help cover financing.

A single half-inch uranium pellet produces roughly the same amount of energy as 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas or 1 ton of coal. See how commercial nuclear reactors work here."

I worked at Westinghouse Electric in 2010-2012 as in-house counsel in Purchasing. We were buying equipment (pumps, compressors, valves, etc.) that were required by our customer to have a two-year warranty after startup. Think about that. We bought the stuff in 2006-20012, it was delivered to the site, and the warranty STARTED YESTERDAY! Every couple years, Weatinghouse had to go back to those vendors and PAY FOR yet another extension on their warranties. We/they ended up paying many times the acquisition cost of the equipment in extended warranty surcharges.

When I was with Westinghouse, we knew all this. We didn't know exactly how long it would take for the plant to start up, but we knew were losing barrels of money on equipment alone, plus hundreds of millions on field change orders; this was the first time anyone had built an AP1000 reactor (several plants under construction at the same time). Westinghouse management was reporting to the parent company, Toshiba, that the project was still going to be profitable.

Believe it or not, this is one of THREE hundred-million dollar fiasco's I worked on in my long and spotted career. But this one was surely the biggest.

So you are a big nuclear power fan?

 

[ReinyDays]

From 1440 news:

"A new reactor unit at Georgia’s Vogtle nuclear power plant went into commercial operation yesterday, capping a 15-year expansion that makes the site the single biggest producer of carbon-free energy in the country.

The reactor, known as Unit 4, comes online less than a year after the similarly built Unit 3 was flipped on—together they were the first nuclear reactors constructed from scratch in the US in more than 30 years. The plant is expected to produce 30 million megawatt-hours of power annually, or roughly 23% of Georgia's total power consumption (though it will also service customers in Florida and Alabama).

The project was expected to begin producing power in 2016, but experienced significant delays and unexpected costs, driving the final price tag from $14B to $35B. Customer rates were raised a total of 10% to help cover financing.

A single half-inch uranium pellet produces roughly the same amount of energy as 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas or 1 ton of coal. See how commercial nuclear reactors work here."

I worked at Westinghouse Electric in 2010-2012 as in-house counsel in Purchasing. We were buying equipment (pumps, compressors, valves, etc.) that were required by our customer to have a two-year warranty after startup. Think about that. We bought the stuff in 2006-20012, it was delivered to the site, and the warranty STARTED YESTERDAY! Every couple years, Weatinghouse had to go back to those vendors and PAY FOR yet another extension on their warranties. We/they ended up paying many times the acquisition cost of the equipment in extended warranty surcharges.

When I was with Westinghouse, we knew all this. We didn't know exactly how long it would take for the plant to start up, but we knew were losing barrels of money on equipment alone, plus hundreds of millions on field change orders; this was the first time anyone had built an AP1000 reactor (several plants under construction at the same time). Westinghouse management was reporting to the parent company, Toshiba, that the project was still going to be profitable.

Believe it or not, this is one of THREE hundred-million dollar fiasco's I worked on in my long and spotted career. But this one was surely the biggest.

Wait ... Westinghouse went bankrupt over this ... who finished the reactor core? ... the Chinese? ...

Bet on Nuclear Power sends Westinghouse into Bankruptcy -- Seattle Times -- March 29th, 2017

 

[elektra]

From 1440 news:

"A new reactor unit at Georgia’s Vogtle nuclear power plant went into commercial operation yesterday, capping a 15-year expansion that makes the site the single biggest producer of carbon-free energy in the country.

The reactor, known as Unit 4, comes online less than a year after the similarly built Unit 3 was flipped on—together they were the first nuclear reactors constructed from scratch in the US in more than 30 years. The plant is expected to produce 30 million megawatt-hours of power annually, or roughly 23% of Georgia's total power consumption (though it will also service customers in Florida and Alabama).

The project was expected to begin producing power in 2016, but experienced significant delays and unexpected costs, driving the final price tag from $14B to $35B. Customer rates were raised a total of 10% to help cover financing.

A single half-inch uranium pellet produces roughly the same amount of energy as 17,000 cubic feet of natural gas or 1 ton of coal. See how commercial nuclear reactors work here."

I worked at Westinghouse Electric in 2010-2012 as in-house counsel in Purchasing. We were buying equipment (pumps, compressors, valves, etc.) that were required by our customer to have a two-year warranty after startup. Think about that. We bought the stuff in 2006-20012, it was delivered to the site, and the warranty STARTED YESTERDAY! Every couple years, Weatinghouse had to go back to those vendors and PAY FOR yet another extension on their warranties. We/they ended up paying many times the acquisition cost of the equipment in extended warranty surcharges.

When I was with Westinghouse, we knew all this. We didn't know exactly how long it would take for the plant to start up, but we knew were losing barrels of money on equipment alone, plus hundreds of millions on field change orders; this was the first time anyone had built an AP1000 reactor (several plants under construction at the same time). Westinghouse management was reporting to the parent company, Toshiba, that the project was still going to be profitable.

Believe it or not, this is one of THREE hundred-million dollar fiasco's I worked on in my long and spotted career. But this one was surely the biggest.

I have done work at the redac at waltz mill

 

[elektra]

Wait ... Westinghouse went bankrupt over this ... who finished the reactor core? ... the Chinese? ...

Bet on Nuclear Power sends Westinghouse into Bankruptcy -- Seattle Times -- March 29th, 2017

We gave all our heavy foundry and machining equipment to foriegn countries.

We dont even have a machine shop that can machine the reactor head

 

[San Souci]

So you are a big nuclear power fan?

Yes. And totally against Solar and Wind Boondoggles.

 

[DGS49]

I am a huge supporter of nuclear power. Following the failure of Westinghouse it a bit confusing. The name, "Westinghouse Electric Co." is owned by CBS, and was licensed by Toshiba. Toshiba bought the general contractor, Chicago Bridge & Iron ("CB&I"), thinking that that would eliminate the hundreds of millions in claims, but the sellers retained those legal rights, bringing about a huge fiasco.

From all indications, the AP1000 is a wonderful design, one that would have prevented the disasters in Japan (Fukishima?), but the first time you build anything in the field you are going to have massive problems with drawing errors, interfaces, etc., and fixing a problem in the field costs many times more than in the engineering department. For those who know the lingo, the AP1000 is a Pressurized Water Reactor, as opposed to a Boiling Water Reactor, a much safer design.

Piling on top of that was a mountain of NRC administrative and quality requirements.

The result is that the future of nuclear ("Nuke-u-ler") power is in small modular reactors (SMR's) that can be manufactured in a plant and assembled on site. Multiple units can be erected on the same site for greater power requirements.

 

[elektra]

The result is that the future of nuclear ("Nuke-u-ler") power is in small modular reactors (SMR's) that can be manufactured in a plant and assembled on site. Multiple units can be erected on the same site for greater power requirements.

Multiple small units at one site the size of an AP1000 will cost more. There is the thing called, Economy of Scale. At least that is what I read at World Nuclear news.

 

[elektra]

From all indications, the AP1000 is a wonderful design, one that would have prevented the disasters in Japan (Fukishima?),

The General Electric designed BWR's of Fukishima. We had at least 6 or 7 operating prior to Fukishima. I am pretty sure we have at least a few still operating. Fermi being one.

When did GE design the Mark 1 BWR, the early 1960's. Did they even use a computer, and if they did it was as big as a medium sized warehouse. A 30 year old calculator would have more computing power, if the did design the Mark 1 with a computer.

Just imagine the incredible advances since the 1950's when GE first designed a BWR.

 

[Jarlaxle]

The General Electric designed BWR's of Fukishima. We had at least 6 or 7 operating prior to Fukishima. I am pretty sure we have at least a few still operating. Fermi being one.

When did GE design the Mark 1 BWR, the early 1960's. Did they even use a computer, and if they did it was as big as a medium sized warehouse. A 30 year old calculator would have more computing power, if the did design the Mark 1 with a computer.

Just imagine the incredible advances since the 1950's when GE first designed a BWR.

Most reactors in service in the US are ancient. Fukushima went critical in the early 70s, and many US reactors date to about that era. The last new nuclear power plant in the US (Seabrook, NH) broke ground during the Ford administration!

 

[elektra]

Most reactors in service in the US are ancient. Fukushima went critical in the early 70s, and many US reactors date to about that era. The last new nuclear power plant in the US (Seabrook, NH) broke ground during the Ford administration!

Watts bar is the newest, came online in 2016
The oldest is Nine Mile Point, around 52 years old.

Great proven reactors. I would say it is misleading to call them ancient. All our PWR's have been upgraded with major component replacements. All new steam generators, with different materials. All new reactor heads of a different design. Safety features that did not exist before Three Mile Island.

 

[ReinyDays]

I am a huge supporter of nuclear power. Following the failure of Westinghouse it a bit confusing. The name, "Westinghouse Electric Co." is owned by CBS, and was licensed by Toshiba. Toshiba bought the general contractor, Chicago Bridge & Iron ("CB&I"), thinking that that would eliminate the hundreds of millions in claims, but the sellers retained those legal rights, bringing about a huge fiasco.

From all indications, the AP1000 is a wonderful design, one that would have prevented the disasters in Japan (Fukishima?), but the first time you build anything in the field you are going to have massive problems with drawing errors, interfaces, etc., and fixing a problem in the field costs many times more than in the engineering department. For those who know the lingo, the AP1000 is a Pressurized Water Reactor, as opposed to a Boiling Water Reactor, a much safer design.

Piling on top of that was a mountain of NRC administrative and quality requirements.

The result is that the future of nuclear ("Nuke-u-ler") power is in small modular reactors (SMR's) that can be manufactured in a plant and assembled on site. Multiple units can be erected on the same site for greater power requirements.

The AP1000 stops tsunamis? ... or the core is cool 30 minutes after a SCRAM? ... please walk us through this ... the grid is dead, the emergency generators won't start ... all the cooling water in your primary system has boiled ... what stops your fuel rod sheathing from melting? ... FYI tungsten melts at 3400ºC ...

For the record, it's the Chinese who manufacture the AP1400 and AP1700 ... the Westinghouse product is obsolete now ... the problem with the small units is they can't be put where they're needed most ... Gaza, Iraq, North Korea ... Sudan, Congo, Gambia ... give these governments weapons-grade plutonium and they will make (and use) nuclear weapons ...

The Chinese products can be guarded and still provide electricity to the poorest regions of the world ... like Mississippi or Myanmar ... the Commies own the patents, what are we gonna do? ...

 

[Jarlaxle]

Watts bar is the newest, came online in 2016
The oldest is Nine Mile Point, around 52 years old.

Great proven reactors. I would say it is misleading to call them ancient. All our PWR's have been upgraded with major component replacements. All new steam generators, with different materials. All new reactor heads of a different design. Safety features that did not exist before Three Mile Island.

Watts Bar started construction in 1973. It's been expanded, but the power plant has been there 50 years.

 

[para bellum]

Multiple small units at one site the size of an AP1000 will cost more. There is the thing called, Economy of Scale. At least that is what I read at World Nuclear news.

As a manufacturer I can tell you that economy of scale usually means the more of something you produce, the lower the per-unit cost will be.

There are certain costs that will be the same for every unit- the amount of materials and labor that goes into a particular item are fixed costs. But there are also engineering and setup costs that are non-recurring expenses, and those can be amortized over the entire production run, instead of being absorbed by the first one.

So you would not get economy of scale with one big unique reactor, but you would by producing multiple smaller reactors that are identical.

That doesn't necessarily mean that the dollars per megawatt would be lower, because there are more factors than just the number of components that go into a reactor, but that's above my pay-grade.

It does mean that if you produce 20 units of the same reactor, the per-unit cost should be lower than if you only produce one...

 

[elektra]

As a manufacturer I can tell you that economy of scale usually means the more of something you produce, the lower the per-unit cost will be.

Exactly, the more electricity one unit can produce, the lower the cost will be.

 

[elektra]

It does mean that if you produce 20 units of the same reactor, the per-unit cost should be lower than if you only produce one...

I agree,