- 26 Μάιος 2023, 11:21
#819070
mirage έγραψε:Vagnar έγραψε:Φαν φακτ, πριν κάποιες βδομάδες πήρε μπρος ο νέος πυρηνικός αντιδραστήρας στην Φινλανδία, έφτιαξε και ο καιρός εκεί στον βορρά και μειώθηκε κάπως και η ζήτηση ρεύματος, που έφτασε η χονδρική τιμή στις χώρες εκεί τριγύρω μερικές ώρες να είναι 0. 0 €/kWh
Φάν φάκτ, πόσο καιρό τους πήρε να τελειώσει το πρότζεκτ, και πόσο κόστισε;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto ... ower_PlantThe Olkiluoto Nuclear Power Plant (Finnish: Olkiluodon ydinvoimalaitos, Swedish: Olkiluoto kärnkraftverk) is one of Finland's two nuclear power plants, the other being the two-unit Loviisa Nuclear Power Plant. The plant is owned and operated by Teollisuuden Voima, and is located on Olkiluoto Island, on the shore of the Gulf of Bothnia, in the municipality of Eurajoki in western Finland, about 20 kilometres (12 mi) from the town of Rauma and about 50 kilometres (31 mi) from the city of Pori.
The Olkiluoto plant consists of two boiling water reactors (BWRs), each with a capacity of 890 MW, and one EPR type reactor (unit 3) with a capacity of 1,600 MW.[1] This makes unit 3 currently the most powerful nuclear power plant unit in Europe and the third most powerful globally.[2][3] Construction of unit 3 began in 2005. Commercial operation began on 1 May 2023,[4] after being originally scheduled for May 2009.[5][6]
Αντί για 4 χρόνια, τους πήρε λίιιιιιγοοοοο παραπάνω βλέπω!
18 εντάξει, νομίζω και η Πτολεμαϊδα 5 κάπου τόσο δεν έκανε;
Ο λόγος για την καθυστέρηση:
The delays have been due to various problems with planning, supervision, and workmanship,[17] and have been the subject of an inquiry by STUK, the Finnish nuclear safety regulator.[50] The first problems that surfaced were irregularities in the foundation concrete, and caused a delay of months. Later, it was found that subcontractors had provided heavy forgings that were not up to project standards and which had to be re-cast. An apparent problem constructing the reactor's unique double-containment structure also caused delays, as the welders had not been given proper instructions.[50]
In 2009, Petteri Tiippana, the director of STUK's nuclear power plant division, told the BBC that it was difficult to deliver nuclear power plant projects on schedule because builders were not used to working to the exacting standards required on nuclear construction sites, since so few new reactors had been built in recent years.[51]
και
In 2010, Jukka Laaksonen, Director General of STUK at that time, analyzed reasons for the delay:[52]
Many nuclear power plants were constructed in Europe in the 1970s and 1980s. After that there was a long break in the construction, and experienced experts retired.
Areva did not have experience in construction of nuclear power plants. In all the earlier projects in which Areva supplied the reactor, Électricité de France was responsible for the construction management. Many experienced subcontractors had left the business, and Areva had to find new subcontractors and to coach them in nuclear manufacturing.
The original schedule, four years from construction start to grid connection, was too ambitious for a first-of-a-kind plant that is larger than any earlier reactor.
The project started very slowly because Areva was not adequately prepared. When the construction permit was given in 2005, parts of the detailed design were not yet available. Areva did not recognize how much additional work was needed to complete it. The construction started to proceed in a controlled manner two years later.
Areva was not used to STUK's regulatory approach with an early focus on the quality of structures and components. Manufacturing information and a quality control plan must be approved by both the licensee and STUK before manufacturing of the most important components is allowed to start. Inspections with hold points are made during the manufacturing.
The large size of the reactor and the application of new technologies brought major challenges. Some manufacturing technologies had not been used before. For instance, new welding techniques were used in the reactor pressure vessel. Many large components, such as pressurizer forgings and some reactor internal parts, had to be re-manufactured once or twice to achieve the specified quality.
TVO's key persons did not have experience from management of a large construction project.
Construction of the turbine succeeded better under the responsibility of Siemens. Installations of the main turbine equipment were completed about one year behind the original schedule.[52]
Κόστος:
The main contractor, Areva, is building the unit for a fixed price of €3 billion, so in principle, any construction costs above that price fall on Areva. In July 2012, those overruns were estimated at more than €2 billion,[44] and in December 2012, Areva estimated that the full cost of building the reactor would be about €8.5 billion, well over the previous estimate of €6.4 billion.[56][57] Because of the delays, TVO and Areva both sought compensation from each other through the International Court of Arbitration.
In October 2013, TVO's demand for compensation from Areva had risen to €1.8 billion, and Areva's from TVO to €2.6 billion.[58] In December 2013, Areva increased its demand to €2.7 billion.[59] On 10 March 2018 French newspaper Le Monde announced that Areva and TVO had reached an agreement.[60] A day later, TVO confirmed that Areva would pay it €450 million in compensation over the delays and lost income.[61] The agreement would settle all legal actions between the two companies. With the settlement, TVO disclosed its total investment to be around €5.5 billion. Areva had accumulated losses of €5.5 billion. The total cost of the project, therefore, is estimated to be €11 billion.[62]
Το εντυπωσιακό είναι πως ο εργολάβος (Aveva) πλήρωσε ένα τεράστιο κόστος και δεν πληρώθηκε από την κυβέρνηση, ό,τι ακριβώς γίνεται και στην Ελλάδα (ΝΟΤ).
Άρα, έχεις 11δις για 1600MW. Πρέπει να υπολογίσεις βέβαια την διάρκεια ζωής του έργου, το κόστος παραγωγής, κλπ κλπ.
Πολύ ή λίγο, δεν έχω ιδέα. Αλλά σε κάθε περίπτωση, δεν κρίνεται ένα τέτοιο έργο μέσα σε λίγα χρόνια.
Οι εναλλακτικές ποιες θα ήταν για την Φινλανδία; ΦΑ συνδυασμένου κύκλου; Είδαμε πόσο καλά πήγε αυτό στην Ελλάδα πάντως.
