versus Nuclear

versus Nuclear

Rather than try to sort out all the smoke-and-mirrors statistics that seem to surround the nuclear power plants, we will not try to make a comparison with GEOCOGEN.

Why do we say that? It seems like the real monetary information for every nuclear project is announced with a number of different financial figures for construction, erection, completion, initial maintenance requirements, overruns, modifications and similar items, and it becomes impossible for an outsider to determine exactly how much the thing costs. In addition, it seems to have become “normal” for massive delays and overruns to smudge the numbers even more. Point in case: the nuclear reactor under construction on the Finnish Island of Olkiluoto is having troubles with quality assurance, completion, and cost overruns (Bloomberg Businessweek, June 24, 2010, 8:52 AM EDT):

June 24 (Bloomberg) — Areva SA, the French nuclear-reactor builder, took a new provision for cost overruns at a plant it’s building in Finland, leaving the door open for more charges as the project is still 2 1/2 years away from completion.
The company said yesterday it will book a charge of about 400 million euros ($491 million) in the first half as Finnish customer Teollisuuden Voima Oyj said this month the OL3 plant will start nuclear operations at the end of 2012 rather than by a previous June 2012 deadline.

The article goes on to say that the total of the overruns (to date) is almost as much as the initial cost estimate of 3 billion Euros, and there are still 2-1/2 years (from the date of the report) before the construction is completed – about 3 years behind schedule.

So, based on the above, what is the cost? And what is the schedule? Hard to tell. A rough estimate, based on what we are reading here, is that the cost per MW of capacity is 5,7 billion Euros for 1600 MW capacity, or about Euro 3500 per MW, and that is only the new reactor, not a complete power plant. And the schedule? Well, it looks like 7 years – from sometime in 2005 to the end of 2012, but the story is not finished there, either. There is no certainty that it will be finished at the end of 2012.

There are more problems in determining the real cost of the uranium fuel rods as well, which determine an important part of the operating costs. But we won’t go into that here, it’s just too confusing.

If you were hoping for a head-to-head comparison, we’re sorry to disappoint you, but it is tough fighting against a sponge. Maybe the US DOE figures from the previous comparison will help you create some clarity – here’s the table again.

   Download the table here
. .