The Grand Finale is here. We wrestle with the question of whether nuclear can find its groove and the positive learning rates that have eluded it so frequently. Vogtle unit 4 came in 40% cheaper than unit 3. Can those gains continue downwards? Is Vogtle 5 more likely to follow this cost reduction curve compared to a new AP1000 elsewhere?
The discussion focuses on the lessons learned from the Vogtle nuclear projects, emphasizing the importance of standardizing reactor designs and improving project management to enhance efficiency and reduce costs. Krellenstein comments on the need to build another AP1000 reactor quickly and highlights the challenges of managing multiple reactor designs simultaneously. He stresses the significance of a centralized development organization to retain lessons learned and ensure timely project delivery.
James Krellenstein is a nuclear energy consultant and founder. He has extensively studied the construction of AP1000 reactors, particularly the Vogtle project in Georgia. Krellenstein is currently working on developing a nuclear project delivery organization modeled after independent power producers in the gas turbine industry.
In a nutshell
The interview discusses the aftermath of the Vogtle AP1000 reactor construction project, exploring lessons learned and their implications for future nuclear builds in the United States. Krellenstein argues for standardization in reactor design and project management, emphasizing the importance of building on existing knowledge rather than pursuing multiple novel designs simultaneously.
Topics covered
• Lessons learned from the Vogtle AP1000 construction project
• The importance of design stability and standardization in nuclear projects
• Challenges in the U.S. nuclear supply chain
• The role of project management and developer organizations in nuclear construction
• Comparison of AP1000 construction in China vs. the United States
• The future of nuclear energy in the U.S. energy landscape
• The debate between standardization and innovation in nuclear technology
• The impact of regulatory processes on nuclear project development
Key takeaways
• The next AP1000 reactor build should be significantly cheaper and faster due to lessons learned from Vogtle
• Standardization of reactor design and project management is crucial for reducing costs and construction times
• The U.S. needs to develop a centralized developer organization to retain knowledge and improve project delivery across multiple sites
• Chinese AP1000 builds are progressing much faster than initial builds, demonstrating the potential for improvement
• The nuclear industry should focus on reliable, affordable power generation rather than pursuing "sexy" or disruptive technologies
Deeper dive
Krellenstein provides detailed insights into the AP1000 construction process and its challenges. He notes that the Vogtle project faced three primary issues: an incomplete design, supply chain breakdowns, and a lack of experienced labor. These factors led to significant delays and cost overruns.
The AP1000 design is highly modularized, which theoretically allows for faster construction. Krellenstein points out that in China, where multiple AP1000s are being built, the construction time for key modules has decreased by about 75% compared to initial builds. This demonstrates the potential for significant improvement through standardization and experience.
Regarding regulatory processes, Krellenstein explains that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Part 52 process, introduced in 1987, allows for a standardized design certification. This process makes the reactor design part of the regulatory code, potentially streamlining future builds. However, he notes that the Vogtle project still required 188 license amendment requests, highlighting the ongoing challenges in maintaining design stability.
Krellenstein argues for the development of a centralized developer organization for nuclear projects in the U.S., similar to independent power producers in the gas turbine industry. He contends that this approach could help retain knowledge and improve project delivery across multiple sites, addressing a key structural issue in the U.S. nuclear industry.
Share this post