▲ | preisschild 7 months ago | |
That happens when you only build a SINGLE reactor unit after decades of building nothing. Keep improving the design (EPR2) and keep building and the costs and build times will come down. | ||
▲ | natmaka 7 months ago | parent [-] | |
> only build a SINGLE reactor unit after decades of building nothing Nope. The most recent nuclear reactor (Civaux-2) was delivered in France in 1999. The project aiming at building an EPR in France (Flamanville) started in 2004, and it was a work-in-progress on the field in 2007. Where are those "decades"? Moreover an EPR was sold to Finland before, and work started in 2005. Then a pair was sold to China. Then another pair to the U.-K. All 6 are very late and have huge overcosts. If those 6 are in your opinion a "SINGLE reactor" let's swap my single dollar for your six bucks. Not to count attempts to stem other projects (even in France, at Penly) by offering it to India, Slovenia, USA through UniStar Nuclear, Czech Republic, United Arab Emirates... The prospect weren't thrilled by patent problems at then ongoing projects. There was a tangible will. As usual this isn't sufficient to succeed. |