Sanku wrote:
I also remember "others" poking holes in your argument and laying some of your articles of faith bare. So yeah; although you dont have to use material in the open source and have a macho "mano to mano" duel of ideas; I find that fairly juvenile.
I am not in the mood to reinvent the wheel for you and if you find that as an excuse to vilify and go on another YB rampage that YBs are doing; that will be just what I expect.
If you are remotely sane; go back to the last point where you ran from the discussion where others pointed out the lack of strength in your arguments and carry on from there.
Cheers... Enjoy your day its rather late without power in India
Since you are under the impression that I ran away from the last discussion, let me tell you that if either you or Rien had read the link I posted in its entirety, you nor he would have asked the questions relating to cost. But since you do not appear to read anything and only post whats on your mind, let me educate you, much against my desires.
Rien said:
The company(NRG) plans to use reactors from General Electric Co. (GE ) and Hitachi Ltd. (HIT ) that have been installed in Japan. This time around, the industry is aiming to build new plants for $1,500 to $2,000 per kilowatt of capacity, compared with a peak, inflation-adjusted cost of about $4,000 in the 1970s.
Trouble is, the cheapest plants built recently, all outside the U.S., have cost more than $2,000 per kilowatt. .....
.... Idev's numbers are contradicted by any nuclear reactor company. The cheapest quote any company is willing to make is 1500 dollars per kilowatt. France only has those numbers because the upfront investment is now paid off. So many decades later they are finally reaping profits.
.......The problem with the example Idev is using is that the plant is now fully paid off. After twenty years a nuclear power plant will finally be showing profit! While a utility can show profit in less than four years with a coal or gas fired plant. A nuclear plant can't even be built in that time.
So Rien appears fixated on the installed cost per MW of nuclear power and the cost of subsequently produced electricity per kwh as of now as opposed to that produced from written down plants.
The following quote is para 7 under the heading, "Reactor Engineering".
http://www.uic.com.au/nip28.htm
In mid 2004 the board of EdF decided in principle to build the first demonstration unit of an expected series of 1630 MWe Areva NP EPRs, and this decision was confirmed in May 2006, after public debate. The overnight capital cost is expected to be EUR 3.3 billion, and power from it EUR 4.6 c/kWh - about the same as from new combined cycle gas turbine at current gas prices and with no carbon emission charge. Series production costs are projected at about 20% less. EDF then submitted a construction licence application. Site works at Flamanville on the Normandy coast should be complete and the first concrete poured about the end of 2007, with construction taking 57 months and completion expected in May 2012. In January 2007 EdF ordered the main nuclear part of the reactor from Areva. The turbine section was ordered in 2006 from Alstom. This meant that 85% of the plant's projected EUR 3.3 billion cost (US$ 2700/kW) was locked in. (Finland is also building an EPR unit at Olkiluoto.)
What are the salient points from the this para:
1.Capital costs for 1630MWe is Euro 3.3 Billion i.e. USD 2700/MW for this new experimental reactor. The reason France historically reduced its capital costs was by standardizing on 1/2 designs. That is how they achieved Rs 1.60/kwh.
2.This is current cost construction not some historical written down cost.
3. Cost per kwh from this new EPR reactor will be 4.6 euro cents i.e. Rs 2.40-Rs 2.50 per kwh. If you are unaware, NPCIL is currently producing nuclear power at Rs 3 per kwh and their aim is to reduce it to Rs 2 per kwh. I am sure that if NPCIL could produce power from a new generation reactor such as the EPR at Rs. 2.40-Rs2.50 per kwh, they will be very happy.
Also in August 2005 EdF announced that it plans to replace its 58 present reactors with EPRs. By the time they build Reactor No. 10, their $2700MW cost will be down substantially and by the time they build Reactor No. 50, their cost per kwh will likely fall to their historical average of 3 cents per kwh i.e. Rs. 1.60/kwh.
So Mr. sanku, please do some reading before shouting to the galleries. And I hope you now realize that time should not be wasted responding to certain posts where the posters have done no reading of their own inspite of the links being provided.