Why dismantle nuclear power plants?

Oil, gas, coal, nuclear (PWR, EPR, hot fusion, ITER), gas and coal thermal power plants, cogeneration, tri-generation. Peakoil, depletion, economics, technologies and geopolitical strategies. Prices, pollution, economic and social costs ...
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554

Re: Re:




by moinsdewatt » 12/01/18, 21:46

Nuclear: the dismantling puzzle for EDF

Boursorama with AFP the 12 / 01 / 2018

The task is immense to reform the oldest reactors in service in France, 2e world producer of nuclear electricity. EDF appears confident despite delays and cost explosion.

EDF displays international ambitions in terms of nuclear decommissioning. But the sector has yet to prove its worth in France, the second largest producer of nuclear electricity in the world, where the task remains immense and the delays numerous. "We are dismantling nine reactors in France. We consider that our know-how can put us in a very good position to gain real good market shares internationally," said Sylvain Granger, director of deconstruction projects at EDF.

A "staggering" ambition for the former PS MP Barbara Romagnan, author of a parliamentary report which underlined, at the beginning of 2017, the "undervalued" costs and the growing delays of these projects. "None of these French reactors has yet been completely dismantled, although they were shut down between 1985 and 1997," she argues. Elsewhere in the world, 17 reactor vessels (over 100 megawatts, MW) have been dismantled, in the United States, Germany, and Spain, according to the Institute for Radiation Protection and Safety (IRSN).

AT CHOOZ, EDF "IS AHEAD" ON THE PLANNING

In Chooz (Ardennes), EDF's most advanced site, the dismantling of the vessel, the final and most delicate step, began in 2017. But the cutting of its internal components was suspended after the contamination, in June, a Swedish employee of Westinghouse, to whom EDF has subcontracted this operation. This level 1 incident on the Ines scale (International nuclear event scale, which classifies nuclear events from 0 to 7), has "no impact on the schedule", ensures EDF Sylvain Granger.

The tank itself will only be cut from mid-2019 to the end of 2020, for the work to be completed in 2022. But nearly 4.500 tonnes of radioactive waste were removed, or nearly 60% of the radioactive waste from this demolition, and EDF is "ahead of its schedule", adds the company. Eighty people work on this sub-contracted site mainly to Westinghouse (heavyweight in the sector), Nuvia (Vinci) and Polinorsud (New Areva). The bill should approach 500 million euros, according to EDF. With its 300 MW, "Chooz A" was three to five times less powerful than current reactors.

THE SUPERPHÉNIX EXPERIENCE

EDF also highlights the experience acquired with Superphénix, the 1.200 MW plutonium breeder located in Creys-Malville, 70 km from Lyon. "The Japanese are very interested", welcomes Sylvain Granger. On this site, nearly 6.000 m3 of sodium were evacuated from the reactor between 2010 and 2014, transformed into soda and trapped in 70.000 m3 of concrete. An extremely delicate operation because the sodium ignites on contact with water and air.

During the dismantling of a much smaller reactor (30 MW) but having, like Superphénix, the specificity of working with sodium, and called Rapsodie, an explosion had made a death in 1994 in Cadarache (Bouches-du-Rhône). But the dismantling of the giant tank (25 m diameter for 20 m high) of Superphénix should begin in 2020 and end in 2026, with six years behind schedule 2006.

EDF PASSED THREE TIMES IN 2017

And EDF, which had been sentenced in 2016 for not respecting a formal notice from the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN), was again pinned three times in 2017, a year marked by a "fire that affected waste polluted with sodium during the night of July 4 to 5 ". The nuclear gendarme raises problems of labeling waste, a lack of supervision of subcontractors, and "dysfunctions" during a crisis exercise. On this site, the dismantling bill is estimated at 1 to 2 billion euros, according to a parliamentary report. 350 people work on the breeder, including 80 EDF employees.

In addition, one of the subcontractors of the Superphenix New Areva site was pinned down in December, on the La Hague site (Manche), where nearly 600 people are working on the demolition of a former nuclear waste reprocessing plant. , for "failures", classified as a level 1 incident. There, around 7.000 m3 of waste were evacuated, according to New Areva. 43.000 m3 remain. The main dismantling activities are estimated at around 4 billion euros by 2035. A site which is delayed by fifteen years, according to the Institute for Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety (IRSN).

AGING STRUCTURES

Another major delay, for six reactors of the so-called “natural uranium graphite gas” (UNGG) generation, EDF “postponed the overall end of dismantling until the beginning of the 2000st century”, according to ASN. These reactors in Saint-Laurent-des-Eaux (Loir-et-Cher), Bugey (Ain), and Chinon (Indre-et-Loire). In 2020, EDF promised a complete dismantling by 2025-XNUMX. This postponement, which "raises the question of the aging of the civil engineering structures of the reactor chambers", is linked to "technical feasibility problems", notes the IRSN, specifying that "there is no storage today. hui available for graphite ".

About 17.000 tons of radioactive graphite must leave the six power stations concerned, according to EDF, while the fate of the most radioactive nuclear waste is also not resolved. The volume of waste from dismantling is estimated at more than 2,3 million m3, according to the parliamentary report.

79 BILLION EUROS TO UNMOBILIZE ALL REACTORS

Another very late project, the dismantling of Brennilis (Finistère), "of great complexity" according to EDF, is today announced for after 2030, more than 45 years after the shutdown of this 70 MW reactor which has worked 18 years. This delay is linked to legal recourse, but also to incidents, such as a fire in the reactor enclosure in 2015.

As for the dismantling of the 58 reactors in operation, EDF wants to be "confident": their technology is the same as that of Chooz A (pressurized water reactors). But in the meantime, due to a lack of a timetable, the industrial nuclear dismantling sector, already facing recruitment problems, is slow to structure itself. EDF estimates 79 billion euros the cost of dismantling all its reactors in France, said Thursday, January 11, the company that spoke in 2000 16 billion euros.

http://www.boursorama.com/actualites/nu ... b7e9bc0128
1 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by sen-no-sen » 12/01/18, 23:13

79 billion according to EDF, yeah ... so will have to count on a minimum of 150 billion! : Lol:
Electricity bill risks to inflate quickly! :|
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79454
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 11096

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by Christophe » 13/01/18, 03:23

I think, knowing a little lack of vision of financial managers of EDF and nuclear in general (EPR ...), we can count on 5 10 times more!

Unless they apply the "confinement" method that we have advised on this subject precisely :) It's a gift guys, made in econology!
0 x
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by Janic » 13/01/18, 08:30

some, a little "old" perhaps remember that the solution envisaged at one time was precisely to cover the power stations stopped by a massive concrete dome leaving a sort of heap in place. Solution considered for Fukushima it seems to me !? To make them ski slopes too? : Evil:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 16247
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5278

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by Remundo » 13/01/18, 08:55

I already have the intuition that we will finish more on something finely con than on a confinement to read this:
sen-no-sen wrote:79 billion according to EDF, yeah ... so will have to count on a minimum of 150 billion! : Lol:
Electricity bill risks to inflate quickly! :|

it's incredible that EDF is talking about 16 billion in 2000 and 79 billion in 2017 ...

multiply by 5. it is reminiscent of the EPR costs that would have cost 4-5 billion and will end up at 15 billion.

The opinion of Bardal the Rational on this topic.
0 x
Image
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by sen-no-sen » 13/01/18, 11:52

Remundo wrote:it's incredible that EDF is talking about 16 billion in 2000 and 79 billion in 2017 ...

multiply by 5. it is reminiscent of the EPR costs that would have cost 4-5 billion and will end up at 15 billion.

The opinion of Bardal the Rational on this topic.


Fortunately EDF is anticipating, it necessarily have to provision all that! : Lol:
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
Bardal
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 509
Registration: 01/07/16, 10:41
Location: 56 and 45
x 198

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by Bardal » 13/01/18, 12:19

Well, if you had to comment on all the fantasies that come out on the internet in the energy field ...

Between the 9 millions of deaths of Corinne Lepage, the inflexibility of remundo, the productions of proximity energy of the worshipers of the sun, the low cost of the German Enr ...

On the other hand, there are some figures that are not invented and deserve to be commented on:

- 500 millions for Chooz, demonstrator site, and with specificities, it is not expensive, and well within the limits of the evaluations ... that leads to a global note of about thirty billion € ...
- 16 Mds (in fact, it is 17,2), it is the amount of the provisions for the dismantling evaluated by Edf in the 80 years; 30 years later the amount has doubled, it will not shock any economist (at that time the smic revolved around 1200F / month, today it is 6 times higher).
- Superphénix's note is salty? Yes, especially for an electoral agreement leading to a foolish decision, and also an electoral catastrophe for its authors ... It is even more salty when we consider that Superphénix was designed to incinerate the most dangerous nuclear waste, waste that from now on we will keep with a thought moved for those who have made us such a legacy ...

But finally, in the end, we are still far from 500 billion German spent to keep their 12000 annual deaths due to lignite (12000, but -it is true without LE death of Cadarache of 1994).

Especially hope that the incoherence (and irrationality éh éh) political decisions affecting this area will finally stop ...
Let's hope so, but have no certainty ...

ps the nuclear power plants have again varied their power 40% today ... Would still be that you warn that it is not possible, Remundo, it will end up we fart in the mouth all that ... Vive Xenonphobia !!!
0 x
sicetaitsimple
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 9882
Registration: 31/10/16, 18:51
Location: Lower Normandy
x 2697

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by sicetaitsimple » 13/01/18, 13:09

When talking in Md €, the numbers quickly climb to the curtains ...

I recall that I am in favor of the development of renewables, to avoid any ambiguity.

But the cost of supporting the development of "new" renewable generators (plus a small part of gas cogeneration) in France will still cost around 6,4® for the 2018 year, and that this annual charge should in all likelihood continue to increase in the coming years. This for a contribution to French electricity production is very modest for the moment, less than 10%.

Download the first document of this link for more details:

http://www.cre.fr/documents/deliberatio ... /cspe-2018
0 x
User avatar
Remundo
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 16247
Registration: 15/10/07, 16:05
Location: Clermont Ferrand
x 5278

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by Remundo » 13/01/18, 13:22

bardal wrote:ps the nuclear power plants have again varied their power 40% today ... Would still be that you warn that it is not possible, Remundo, it will end up we fart in the mouth all that ... Vive Xenonphobia !!!

I never said that it was not possible or that it pee in the mouth. I have said that this poses problems-extra costs of exploitation and I maintain it.

You kicked in touch while talking about something else. You Rational enlightened.
0 x
Image
Janic
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 19224
Registration: 29/10/10, 13:27
Location: bourgogne
x 3491

Re: Why dismantle nuclear power plants?




by Janic » 13/01/18, 14:19

well, if you had to comment on all the fantasies that come out on the internet in the field of energy
Between the 9 millions of deaths of Corinne Lepage, the inflexibility of remundo, the productions of proximity energy of the worshipers of the sun, the low cost of the German Enr ...

You're right, do not believe all the fantasies that come out on the internet, and so your comments obviously, to start with that: " Between the 9 million dead Corinne Lepage But where did he get that? On the internet of course!
In Kyiv and Chernobyl, we were told the statements of UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, mentioning in 2000 the "nine million victims of Chernobyl", including three million children requiring continuous medical treatment
http://www.philomag.com/lepoque/tcherno ... umain-5685

But it is not 9 million dead but victims. It goes from allergies to death obviously. But the figures do not only consider the immediate victims in Ukraine, but wherever the radioactive cloud has deposited, and there millions are climbing fast.
On the other hand, there are some figures that are not invented and deserve to be commented on:
- 16 Mds (in fact, it is 17,2), it is the amount of the provisions for the dismantling evaluated by Edf in the 80 years; 30 years later the amount has doubled, it will not shock any economist (at that time the smic revolved around 1200F / month, today it is 6 times higher).

It is true that annual inflation and particularly the changeover from the franc to the euro has upset many values ​​and their equivalence. Except that the SMIC calculated on the basis of 100 has progressively passed to higher coefficients which will become the new 100 basis for the new calculations. In more clear: a maneuver in base 100 passed in base 130, for example, and thus saw his salary increase and the professional (base 130) saw his salary to remain still in new base 100 and all the wages superior to 100 (old 130) not moving either.
It is even more salty when we consider that Superphénix was designed to incinerate the most dangerous waste nuclear waste, which we will keep from now on with a thought moved for those who have made such a legacy ...

the first leg was first military nuclear became civilian to pass the pill.
There are other much simpler and cheaper ways to safely dispose of nuclear waste, the first and simplest of which is not to produce such other non-polluting energies.
But finally, in the end, we are still far from the 500 billion German spent to keep their annual 12000 deaths due to lignite (12000, but-it is true without the death of Cadarache 1994).

Nuclear pollution nobler than lignite? It does not exist ! the pollution is not the same simply and a coal mine, once stopped (even if it is not the top so far), no longer pollutes and no longer produces pollutant problems in the very long term
Especially hope that the incoherence (and irrationality éh éh) political decisions affecting this area will finally stop ...
Let's hope so, but have no certainty ...

Eh eh! Political decisions change constantly depending on the ballots (except as currently and for a limited time) when the assembly holds full powers in the service of a single decision-maker (does this recount recent history?) as well as powerful lobbies that influence politics. : Evil:
0 x
"We make science with facts, like making a house with stones: but an accumulation of facts is no more a science than a pile of stones is a house" Henri Poincaré

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Go back to "Fossil energies: oil, gas, coal and nuclear electricity (fission and fusion)"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 150 guests