EPR, to the dregs for EDF and Areva?

[Did67]

Well, the spot market sees only a very small share of electricity supplies.

The bulk is traded on long term contracts and is not in the spot market. For example most of the current of industrialists.

Yes exactly. Thank you for correcting.

The fact remains that the "average price" 365 days a year of current, even negotiated, is low because, over certain periods, there is a plethora of current from other sources ... However, a power station is difficult to modulate.

View: https://entreprises-collectivites.engie ... az-baisse/

I do not know if at 30 and a few euros the MWh, an old plant is profitable ...?

[Did67]

There is no need to close Fessenheim. I hope that the next government after the elections will do the right thing to cancel this decision.

I hope that consumption will go down enough and that alternative energies will develop sufficiently (I speak on a European scale) so that Fessenheim becomes useless!

Governments do not weigh much in the big balances of large groups! It will happen to EdF what happened to Mittal: closure for non-profitability (or extra cost of upgrading)!

[moinsdewatt]

Governments no longer weigh much in the great balances of large groups! It will happen to EdF what happened to Mittal: closure for non-profitability (or extra cost of upgrading)!

the French State being a shareholder at about 85% of EDF, it is the state that will raise the rates of kW.h
And that's all.

[Did67]

Except that it's unpopular, and the state often backs down from its responsibilities - now, we may soon have a president who does everything to be unpopular, so it will be a boon ... ???

And except that EdF no longer has a monopoly. For the moment, a majority of customers remain at the regulated tariff, which will eventually disappear ... EdF therefore retains its advantage. But if we follow the history of FranceTélécom, we have seen that Orange had to cut back on its margins and "follow" certain competitors, despite the historical advantage ...

This is, of course, only an opinion. I am not seeing. But I wish those who are "electrified" to death a lot of fun!

[Christophe]

It's not yet won for the EPR ...

http://lexpansion.lexpress.fr/actualite ... 21647.html

Experts examine the tank of the Flamanville EPR

A meeting of experts began Monday at the headquarters of the Nuclear Safety Authority. The objective is to formulate an opinion on the state of the tank of the EPR of Flamanville.

The discussions must last two days. A group of experts began Monday, at the headquarters of the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) near Paris a meeting at the end of which he must give an opinion on the state of the tank EPR from Flamanville.

A handful of anti-nuclear activists, opposed to the homologation of this tank on which anomalies were detected, were gathered around 8H45 in front of the ASN in Montrouge, in the Hauts-de-Seine.

Tests are in progress

Areva had detected late 2014 excessive carbon concentration in the steel bottom and the tank lid of the EPR Flamanville (Channel). Consequence: it could potentially make it less resistant, while it is an essential part, the second barrier against radioactivity in a reactor.

(...)

[moinsdewatt]

EDF obtains a conditional start of the Flamanville EPR

AFP 28 / 06 / 2017

The EPR Flamanville (Channel) can start well with its initial tank, despite its anomalies, but EDF will have to change its lid by the end 2024 and increase its controls on this equipment, an option that the electrician still hopes to avoid.

The characteristics of the bottom and the lid of the tank, on which a fault was detected at the end of 2014, are "sufficient" to allow the EPR to function, but the lid can only "be used for a limited period", fixed at the end of 2024, the president of the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN), Pierre-Franck Chevet, said on Wednesday at a press conference.

This is "very good news for the EPR" commented Laurent Thieffry, director of the Flamanville project at EDF, during a conference call.

After more than two years of procedures and tests of an "unprecedented" scale, according to Mr. Chevet, the nuclear gendarme issued a preliminary opinion on Wednesday, eagerly awaited in this crucial issue for the French atomic sector, before a final decision in October, after consultations.



The anomalies detected constitute "a reduction in the safety margins", ASN explained.

In addition to replacing the cover which will cost the electrician 100 million euros, it therefore requires EDF to "carry out additional periodic checks to ensure that there are no subsequent faults" on the bottom of the tank. .

Such controls are currently not feasible on the lid, hence the demand to replace it.

But EDF is not resigning itself and intends to "make its best efforts" to develop a control method "within two years" and to return to ASN "to formulate a new request as to the future of the cover", affirmed Mr. Thieffry.

In the meantime, the 1.650 MW reactor will be able to operate without "any" restriction, particularly in terms of power.

- Passed order -

EDF confirmed, however, that in April it ordered a Japanese supplier a forge, that is to say a blank form that then allows to manufacture a lid, said Mr. Thieffry.

With ASN's decision, "we are going to transform this anticipation of the forged order into a complete anticipation of the order for a new cover", which will be partly manufactured at an Areva site in France, he adds.

EDF has already replaced the cover of around fifty reactors operating in the French fleet.

The group also confirmed Wednesday the start of the end EPR 2018, for commercial commissioning in 2019, when the initial schedule was based on 2012.

Excessive carbon concentration was detected at the end of 2014 on the bottom steel and the tank lid forged at the Creusot Forge plant in Areva, potentially weakening their strength, while the tank is a key equipment in the containment of the radioactivity of a reactor.

If it is confirmed in October, ASN's decision will also lift the last condition put by Brussels to the recapitalization of 5 billion euros from Areva, as part of its restructuring, scheduled for the third quarter of this year.

- Tarnished showcase -

The EPR, the first French model of a third-generation reactor, was supposed to be a showcase for the French nuclear industry, but the two prototypes still under construction - Flamanville and the one under construction in Finland - have accumulated setbacks.

The cost of the Flamanville EPR has tripled to 10,5 billion since the start of the project.

Twenty Greenpeace activists demonstrated Wednesday morning in front of the EPR Flamanville, against the start of the reactor.

"It's completely irresponsible! This means that for six years the EPR would operate with a defective and uncontrolled cover," protested Yannick Rousselet, responsible for nuclear campaign at Greenpeace, in a written statement.

"ASN went to bed before pressure from industrialists EDF and AREVA," he accused.

Four more EPRs are under construction, two in China, in Taishan, the first of which is due to start this year, and two in England.

The Chinese EPR tanks were also forged by Areva in Le Creusot, but EDF claims to have been able "to make the Taishan tanks benefit from the entire justification process" carried out in Flamanville.

http://www.boursorama.com/actualites/ed ... c97cd6325c

[Christophe]

but the cover can only "be used for a limited period", fixed at the end of 2024,

It's a joke? 2024 is tomorrow at the scale of an EPR:

a) Frankly seen as it started, I doubt that the EPR will start production before 2024. At the time, there were 2 or 3 years between the first discrepancy and the connection to the network in "classic" PWR reactors. ..

b) If it starts before, say at best the first divergence in 2019, production in 2021-2022 (I do not think that a few months are enough as indicated in the article), it should be stopped to change the cover about 3- 4 years later?

I think a cover change right now is the best option economically speaking ... hoping the next one is good (not on !!)

[Did67]

Undoubtedly behind all this, there is a bitter dispute between EdF and ASN, some elements of which we could "guess" in "previous positions".

Basically, EdF, who played the Coué method (or the big bluff): "there is a fault, but that has no impact on safety", and trying to put ASN in front of a fait accompli (announcing Basically, that the authorization to operate will be granted so that the work continues as if nothing had happened - we must reassure shareholders and bankers! do not forget the gigantic debt of EdF - while no decision was taken).

ASN has asked for a series of tests and tests and it would not be surprising if the question is not, technically, also "settled": roughly, the cover would resist but it could tire more quickly ... C ' is what I thought I understood. In this case, it is difficult for ASN to take a negative decision (refusal to start up - the system would work in safety initially), for lack of technical arguments. But she has the option of requesting an early replacement, as faster fatigue would be proven. And there, it is in its role of "renewal of authorizations" (often following modifications). So she announces that there will be a modification requirement.

ASN does not have to comment on whether it is economical, realistic, feasible or not. She says: "it is a reliable system, it can be started" or "there is a fault, it must be repaired before starting". It would seem that it is in between: "It will hold, but not very long; therefore it will be necessary to replace in 2024". And to EdF to get rid of: replace before or drive a little and stop / replace. It is a management decision, essentially an economic one, that ASN does not have to manage. This is the operator's problem.

[Did67]

And they continue, cons ...!

More than ever, this alleged appreciation of a teacher is topical: "Has hit rock bottom, but it's still digging ...". In this case, it is the deficit.

Hinkley Point: EDF raises costs for two EPR reactors

The electrician, confirming information from the "World", announced that the cost of the future British nuclear power plant was increasing by 1,8 billion euros. Construction is also likely to take several months late.

THE ECONOMY WORLD | 03.07.2017 to 15h49 | By Jean-Michel Bezat

After a "comprehensive review" of the project over several months, EDF announced Monday, 3 July, an upward revision (+ 1,845 billion euros) of the cost of two EPR reactors that the group built in Hinkley Point, in southwestern England, confirming a World Information (dated 25-26 June). That will bring the cost to 22,4 billion, an increase of 8% compared to the initial estimate, said the general manager of EDF Energy, British subsidiary of the French group. Vincent de Rivaz did not specify whether EDF will bear all of this first slip or whether it will be shared with its partner China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN), which finances a third of the project.

This revision is explained, according to him, by the ongoing changes in the design of the EPR reactor (control command, ventilation, etc.) requested by the UK nuclear safety authority and the revision of the "volume and sequencing of on-site work", which started in March. It also attributes it to "the progressive implementation of supplier contracts", which are reviewed since the final investment decision was voted in September 2016 with almost a year behind the original schedule.
A "risk" of skidding nine and fifteen months

EDF has already signed major agreements with Bouygues, which provides civil engineering, and major suppliers of equipment manufacturers such as General Electric, which bought the turbines from Alstom for nuclear power plants, and Areva. Due to the undersizing of the Creusot Forge plant in Areva, the Hinkley Point EPR tanks will be forged in Japan. They are not concerned by the defects detected on that of Flamanville (Channel), said Mr. de Rivaz.

To this extra cost is added a first postponement - expected - of the start date of the reactors, even if Mr de Rivaz emphasizes that the teams must "remain mobilized" to meet the initial goal of 2025 end commissioning. In fact, EDF mentions a "risk" of slippage of fifteen months for the first EPR and nine months for the second. This would result in a cost of 861 million, which would add to 1,845 billion. These delays are inevitable, according to several experts, to the extent that UK RPAs are different from others, including that of Flamanville, and that the British industry has not built reactors for twenty years.

EDF recognizes that the expected rate of return of the project will fall from 9,2% to 8,5% and even 8,2%, which remains very comfortable. On the other hand, Mr de Rivaz claims that this slippage will have "no consequences" on the contract signed in 2013 between the British government and the company operating the plant. It guarantees to EDF and CGN a remuneration of 92,5 pounds (105 euros) per megawatt hour (MWh) for thirty-five years. The leader assures that these fifteen months are "well within" the delay beyond which London is entitled to reduce this guaranteed price.

Very high risk project

"The yard is progressing according to schedule," says the boss of EDF Energy. And the beginning of the construction as such, marked by the first concrete of the reactor building, is still planned "mi-2019". With a flat of size: it depends on the finalization of the final reactor design, planned end 2018, "whose schedule is tense". For now, the construction started in March consists mainly of earthworks and road connections.

In France, the majority of EDF unions had called for a postponement of the project, believing that it jeopardizes the future of the company. Hinkley Point remains a very high risk project for EDF. The group is heavily indebted (37,4 billion euros), weakened by a sharp decline in wholesale electricity prices in recent years and sluggish consumption. It has also undertaken an expensive renovation and security of its French fleet of 58 reactors, even though it has made the commitment to invest in renewable energy and energy efficiency services.

It was the government of Tony Blair who decided, in 2006, to relaunch the British nuclear program against a park of plants that will reach the end of life in the 2020 years. After ten years of preparation and jolts, these two EPR supposed to ensure alone 7% of the electricity of the British still do not unanimity across the Channel. In late June, the National Audit Office, the equivalent of the Court of Auditors, ruled that the guaranteed price of 105 euros per MWh - far above the market price of 35-37 euros - could increase the consumer bill of 34 billion euros over thirty-five years.

Learn more about http://www.lemonde.fr/economie/article/ ... _3234.html

Small note: who remembers the arrogance of Proglio, boss of EdF, and friend of Sarko, explaining that it is AREVA who does not know how to do it, that if it were EdF, we would see, etc., etc. .. Here it is EdF who has the project management.

[moinsdewatt]

The Flamanville EPR expected at full power in November 2019

Posted on 11 / 07 / 2017 Infos Reuters PARIS

The EPR nuclear reactor of the Flamanville power station (Manche) will start its production trials 25 May 2019 and will reach full power the November 16 of the same year, according to a provisional calendar provided Tuesday by EDF.

A spokesman for the group at the same time confirmed that the start of the reactor - that is to say the first fuel loading - was planned for the end 2018.

EDF had previously indicated that the EPR production tests were scheduled for the second quarter 2019 and that its ramp-up would take place in the fourth quarter.

At the end of June, the Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) gave a green light in principle to the commissioning of the Flamanville EPR tank, although the cover of this equipment could not be used beyond 2024.

Announced at three billion euros at the presentation of the project in 2004, the Flamanville EPR was initially to enter into service in 2012.

But repeated difficulties on the site and in the supply of certain equipment have repeatedly forced EDF to postpone this date and to increase the cost of the project, estimated at 10,5 billion euros since September 2015.

http://www.usinenouvelle.com/article/l- ... 19.N564897