Tennessee/TVA to be first to build modular nuclear power plants

[LouderVol]

I'm a quasi-nerd. Not enough to know the ins and outs of nuclear reactors. But it seems developers are having problems constructing them at anything close to their initial cost estimate.

unfortunately she doesn't go into any detail on the why costs have gone up. at least not really. I really doubt the actual construction of the facility took and cost 3x as much as expected. the reactor itself, sure, the facility that houses it, doubtful.

here in the states NIMBY adds millions if not billions to the cost, and drags out the time.

I do also wonder if there is a bit of the Boeing mindset going on. Why actually build something for 1 billion dollars that may fail, and you are liable for; when you can get 5 billion dollars, and not build anything, so you are never liable for it.

 

[ButchPlz]

unfortunately she doesn't go into any detail on the why costs have gone up. at least not really. I really doubt the actual construction of the facility took and cost 3x as much as expected. the reactor itself, sure, the facility that houses it, doubtful.

here in the states NIMBY adds millions if not billions to the cost, and drags out the time.

I do also wonder if there is a bit of the Boeing mindset going on. Why actually build something for 1 billion dollars that may fail, and you are liable for; when you can get 5 billion dollars, and not build anything, so you are never liable for it.

It's definitely both of these things. People don't realize that most of the bureaucratic red tape idiocy we deal with is driven by NIMBYism. Some of it justified, much of it not.

 

[LouderVol]

It's definitely both of these things. People don't realize that most of the bureaucratic red tape idiocy we deal with is driven by NIMBYism. Some of it justified, much of it not.

the issue I have with it, is that there doesn't have to be a deadline on it. if one round of NIMBYism fails, they can just launch another, and another, and another. forcing the developers to spend tons of money, doing something that generates little if any positive, and just drags out the process without making it any better.

 

[marcusluvsvols]

the issue I have with it, is that there doesn't have to be a deadline on it. if one round of NIMBYism fails, they can just launch another, and another, and another. forcing the developers to spend tons of money, doing something that generates little if any positive, and just drags out the process without making it any better.

Yep. Unlike many other things, WHERE electricity is generated is extremely important. Every foot that power has to travel whether aerial lines or buried means lost current. The % of produced power that is lost in the grid is already huge. In order to be even somewhat efficient, power needs to be generated in the same area where it is used. So the NIMBY attitudes absolutely kill this industry not just in efficiency, but when it comes to nuclear the fearmongering has all but brought progress to a dead stop. As many here already know, there will be no transition to electric vehicles without a massive building program of power plants...on a scale never seen before. Politicians keep kicking this can further down the road even as the grid is falling apart. Hell, we still havent spent the projected $2BN needed to protect the current grid from an EMP attack. We are extremely vulnerable to EMPs which could fry everything with a circuit board and bring this nation to its knees. We have horrible leadership pertaining to infrastructure.

 

[Orangeburst]

Yep. Unlike many other things, WHERE electricity is generated is extremely important. Every foot that power has to travel whether aerial lines or buried means lost current. The % of produced power that is lost in the grid is already huge. In order to be even somewhat efficient, power needs to be generated in the same area where it is used. So the NIMBY attitudes absolutely kill this industry not just in efficiency, but when it comes to nuclear the fearmongering has all but brought progress to a dead stop. As many here already know, there will be no transition to electric vehicles without a massive building program of power plants...on a scale never seen before. Politicians keep kicking this can further down the road even as the grid is falling apart. Hell, we still havent spent the projected $2BN needed to protect the current grid from an EMP attack. We are extremely vulnerable to EMPs which could fry everything with a circuit board and bring this nation to its knees. We have horrible leadership pertaining to infrastructure.

everything is so incredibly expensive..look at the Interstate system..we couldnt build it today..
GA SR-400 isgonna cost $4B for expansion of 16 miles..

 

[Orangeslice13]

unfortunately she doesn't go into any detail on the why costs have gone up. at least not really. I really doubt the actual construction of the facility took and cost 3x as much as expected. the reactor itself, sure, the facility that houses it, doubtful.

here in the states NIMBY adds millions if not billions to the cost, and drags out the time.

I do also wonder if there is a bit of the Boeing mindset going on. Why actually build something for 1 billion dollars that may fail, and you are liable for; when you can get 5 billion dollars, and not build anything, so you are never liable for it.

“What had happened was….”


Here’s a story I was told by my father who was senior construction engineer at sequoia nuke plant.
At one point they were told that 85% of their man hours had to be spent working on “the main line” to make this happen you had to do stupid unproductive things. Sequoia decided not to follow this rule. Browns ferry did. After 2 years that rule went away because sequoia went on line and Browns ferry was still years away.

Never underestimate the government’s ability to waste money and **** **** up.

 

[LouderVol]

“What had happened was….”


Here’s a story I was told by my father who was senior construction engineer at sequoia nuke plant.
At one point they were told that 85% of their man hours had to be spent working on “the main line” to make this happen you had to do stupid unproductive things. Sequoia decided not to follow this rule. Browns ferry did. After 2 years that rule went away because sequoia went on line and Browns ferry was still years away.

Never underestimate the government’s ability to waste money and **** **** up.

the circular chain of approvals never helps either.

 

[Orangeburst]

I did a project at Browns Ferry that took up abou 2 hourly months of my time, over period of year plus..something like that. Many days never even got dressed..lol..Absolutely incredible amount of documentation. Made a better margin than any other job I ever had for such equipment, so I didnt mind.

 

[Vol737]

I'm a quasi-nerd. Not enough to know the ins and outs of nuclear reactors. But it seems developers are having problems constructing them at anything close to their initial cost estimate.

Or does simple economics come into play here? Developers/manufacturers see the shift in demand toward their product and the the cost seems to increase almost immediately. Idk. Highly capital, regulatory and research intensive, so probably a lot in play. I know even less ins and outs other than reactors have a core where nuclear fission occurs, generates heat, gotta keep it cool, gotta be around a lot of water and that water usually has fish in it with three eyes and extra appendages.

 

[Velo Vol]

unfortunately she doesn't go into any detail on the why costs have gone up. at least not really. I really doubt the actual construction of the facility took and cost 3x as much as expected. the reactor itself, sure, the facility that houses it, doubtful.

He doesn't get into all the financial details, but the second half of this video describes how the project to build the first of these power plants was a disaster.

Eventually someone else will get it right, one assumes. But there are reasons to be skeptical until it actually happens.

 

[Wireless1]

He doesn't get into all the financial details, but the second half of this video describes how the project to build the first of these power plants was a disaster.

Eventually someone else will get it right, one assumes. But there are reasons to be skeptical until it actually happens.

So where are the 3X+ cost overruns being generated on the SMRs.... somebody is getting that money.

 

[Smokey X]

I'm a quasi-nerd. Not enough to know the ins and outs of nuclear reactors. But it seems developers are having problems constructing them at anything close to their initial cost estimate.

my simplified initial reaction to this is to take the "initial estimate" with a great big grain of salt. If the video referenced it then I missed it.
Who provided the estimate? OEM....well they are trying to sell as many as possible so there is that.
Engineering/constructing firm....They are obviously in it to make money and the good ones, (i.e. Bechtel, Fluor, etc.) will have literally everything spelled out contractually that the utility or whatever wants. The rub comes in when everything isn't identified contractually and changes have to be made after the contract is signed. Separate and additional charges on top of the "initial estimate".
And what about supply chain issues and delays....who pays for those....not likely the E/C Company.
In general, the Utility, etc. will take in the shorts if they don't have their act together.

 

[Orangeburst]

I have seen a major engineering firm for TVA, cant remember which one, provide 500 page specification for IDR, like a $300K job,..they cut and pasted from other projects as specified equipment was contradictory in scope, and not just a few lines but whole sections. I mean how is it even possible to compile such crap? This doesnt help the bidder or end user.

Was it suppossed to impress someone? Were they getting paid by the hour? Bidders dont have time for this ****..The engineering firm should be ashamed.

 

[Orangeburst]

as an example, they specified stainless steel tanks, with epoxy coatings, which is redundant in itself. Just why pay 5 times more for something that already lasts for 30 plus years? this wasnt even nuclear.

 

[RavinDave]

I did a project at Browns Ferry that took up abou 2 hourly months of my time, over period of year plus..something like that. Many days never even got dressed..lol..Absolutely incredible amount of documentation. Made a better margin than any other job I ever had for such equipment, so I didnt mind.

Some of my tax dollars went in your pocket?

 

[Orangeburst]

Some of my tax dollars went in your pocket?

back in 2003..around 10K iirc..

 

[Godfatha]

back in 2003..around 10K iirc..

I view it as getting some of your tax dollars back

 

[Orangeburst]

I view it as getting some of your tax dollars back

@RavinDave is a commie
great forklift driver, but a commie

 

[Wireless1]

since it’s government and rate payer money nobody seems to care, so let’s require some expensive change orders and drag our feet, everybody expects the time line to get longer with any utility project. Costs go up, rate payers get a rate increase.
Would be interesting for Elon to use his own money to make them. I’d trust the estimate he gave for what he would be selling them

 

[LouderVol]

as an example, they specified stainless steel tanks, with epoxy coatings, which is redundant in itself. Just why pay 5 times more for something that already lasts for 30 plus years? this wasnt even nuclear.

as someone who writes those specs its probably any number of things.

1. pure laziness, like you said straight copy and paste.
2. someone legit not knowing what they are doing. 13 years into the business I can still can't tell you why we would want half of this stuff specified the way it is.
3. Rush job, changed requirements, or confusion. there might have been a partial spec, and last minute the developer wanted the full specs and there wasn't time to work thru everything so copy paste was the only option. sometimes only important sections get any attention and actually customised, while the rest can catch up. sometimes a new requirement/piece of equipment comes in to the job late, and there isn't enough time to catch it in the specs and chase all the changes across 500 pages of specs. could be some older process or related system required the additional epoxy coating.
4. apathy born of countless jobs where the contractors/suppliers just supply whatever the hell they want anyway. so its not even worth spending the time on it.
5. some past experience where that particular combo was needed, but only one or the other was specced as such. some scars take a long time to fade.
6. if you aren't careful, ie fully autistic and checking literally every line of the 500 page specs they get updated by whatever system you use, and there can be small changes that slip in. especially if its some proprietary system, or code based reference system you aren't going to catch what used to refer to a stainless steel tank now refers to a stainless steel tank with epoxy unless you are specifically looking for it. even if you refer to it by part number of whatever it could just be one bad key stroke orders something completely different.
7. cheap CYA. spec something that is over the top, especially if its a big piece of equipment or somewhere that is going to be next to impossible to get to or replace. even if its covered under warranty some things are prohibitive in trying to replace.
8. past experience saying the only thing widely available is the SS with epoxy. its weird, but you work enough jobs you find situations where the more complicated thing is easier to get. I had one townhome project where you couldn't get the 2" aerated concrete panels that was specced, but you could get an insulated aerated panels that was 2" of aerated concrete on either side of rigid insulation, shipped as one piece. its weird but it happens. I had another project where Galvanized steel for conduit was more expensive than the SS conduit.
9. its a way to cheat for qualified manufacturers, or specific ones you want. knowing that you want a specific manufacturer, but you have to include other manufacturers due to it being a public job, you throw in something the "bad" manufacturers can't provide. that leaves only the one manufacturer you want as able to meet the spec. and this doesn't have to be a corruption issue, just you know you don't want to work with some manufacturers and you need a way to weed them out, because you know they will come in cheaper.
10. union job/requirement
11. specs are only half the job, you need the drawings to work to. and if the spec writers aren't paying enough attention it may not match the design. or the designer may not tell the spec writer about the specifics for the job.

 

[Orangeslice13]

as someone who writes those specs its probably any number of things.

1. pure laziness, like you said straight copy and paste.
2. someone legit not knowing what they are doing. 13 years into the business I can still can't tell you why we would want half of this stuff specified the way it is.
3. Rush job, changed requirements, or confusion. there might have been a partial spec, and last minute the developer wanted the full specs and there wasn't time to work thru everything so copy paste was the only option. sometimes only important sections get any attention and actually customised, while the rest can catch up. sometimes a new requirement/piece of equipment comes in to the job late, and there isn't enough time to catch it in the specs and chase all the changes across 500 pages of specs. could be some older process or related system required the additional epoxy coating.
4. apathy born of countless jobs where the contractors/suppliers just supply whatever the hell they want anyway. so its not even worth spending the time on it.
5. some past experience where that particular combo was needed, but only one or the other was specced as such. some scars take a long time to fade.
6. if you aren't careful, ie fully autistic and checking literally every line of the 500 page specs they get updated by whatever system you use, and there can be small changes that slip in. especially if its some proprietary system, or code based reference system you aren't going to catch what used to refer to a stainless steel tank now refers to a stainless steel tank with epoxy unless you are specifically looking for it. even if you refer to it by part number of whatever it could just be one bad key stroke orders something completely different.
7. cheap CYA. spec something that is over the top, especially if its a big piece of equipment or somewhere that is going to be next to impossible to get to or replace. even if its covered under warranty some things are prohibitive in trying to replace.
8. past experience saying the only thing widely available is the SS with epoxy. its weird, but you work enough jobs you find situations where the more complicated thing is easier to get. I had one townhome project where you couldn't get the 2" aerated concrete panels that was specced, but you could get an insulated aerated panels that was 2" of aerated concrete on either side of rigid insulation, shipped as one piece. its weird but it happens. I had another project where Galvanized steel for conduit was more expensive than the SS conduit.
9. its a way to cheat for qualified manufacturers, or specific ones you want. knowing that you want a specific manufacturer, but you have to include other manufacturers due to it being a public job, you throw in something the "bad" manufacturers can't provide. that leaves only the one manufacturer you want as able to meet the spec. and this doesn't have to be a corruption issue, just you know you don't want to work with some manufacturers and you need a way to weed them out, because you know they will come in cheaper.
10. union job/requirement
11. specs are only half the job, you need the drawings to work to. and if the spec writers aren't paying enough attention it may not match the design. or the designer may not tell the spec writer about the specifics for the job.

Because the gawds of code said so.