11 Comments
User's avatar
Vicki Lesley's avatar

Staggering numbers. I remember the 2017 Christmas turkeys promise. Whatever happened to Vincent de Rivaz..?!

Expand full comment
David Toke's avatar

He left as a 'surprise' in October 2017. I don't know whether that had anything do do with not being able to cook his turkey on Hinkley power that christmas. https://www.thetimes.com/article/edf-chief-who-ran-hinkley-nuclear-project-makes-surprise-exit-fmv802fkl?region=global

Expand full comment
Vicki Lesley's avatar

Interesting timing…

Expand full comment
Chilan Gogo's avatar

Retired with a huge pension. Il s’en fou🖕!!

Expand full comment
Nickrl's avatar

There are two reactors at Hinkley so maybe 2035 is reasonable for the 2nd unit although how an earth we get from Calder Hall built in under 4yrs 70yrs ago to the Hinkley timescales given all the modern construction plant and techniques now at our disposal is beyond me.

We should have bought the Sth Korean design which is have to be quicker to build and less costly although again another example of how the UK has sunk so low in its engineering capability from being world leaders to world laggards.

Expand full comment
David Toke's avatar

I don’t think buying a different reactor type would make that much difference. See my arguments about how nuclear power in the West is bound to be very expensive: https://davidtoke.substack.com/p/why-nuclear-power-plant-are-so-expensive

Expand full comment
D. O.'s avatar

Nuclear technology is unique because it has got more and more expensive over time. Most technologies get cheaper and cheaper over time because people discover new and cheaper ways of doing things.

The fundamental problem with nuclear power is the longer people operate nuclear power stations around the world the more ways people find there are for things to go wrong. That then leads to fixes for these problems which increase costs and build time.

It turns out it is easy to make a reactor that works most of the time but very hard and very expensive to make one that never has a disaster.

Expand full comment
Nickrl's avatar

It was unknown 70yrs ago yet its build out was fast and its safety record impeccable. This is an example of a wider malaise across our society where its become 100% safety at any cost laudable but unaffordable.

Expand full comment
David Milborrow's avatar

David. Interesting-but not surprising. A little while ago I compared the trajectory of HPC costs with those of the US reactor now building. To my surprise they were very similar.

Despite the hype I have little faith that SMRs will do any better.

Perhaps fusion is the answer !!!

Best wishes

David

Expand full comment
Darrel Henschell's avatar

Actually...

Fusion Is A Terrible Way to Make Electricity - Princeton Physicist Who Worked On It For 25 Years

https://thebulletin.org/2018/02/iter-is-a-showcase-for-the-drawbacks-of-fusion-energy/

In video form:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrUWoywZRt8

Expand full comment
Felix MacNeill's avatar

Thanks Darrel - that's a pretty damning report!

Expand full comment