I costi per le centrali nucleari sizewell c aumentano significativamente da £ 20 a £ 38 miliardi prima dell’inizio della costruzione

Ah yes, the traditional British pastime: doubling the budget before laying a single brick

Classification of the facts in the media: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cev03wer0p2o

> The cost of building the Sizewell C nuclear power plant in Suffolk has jumped to £38bn, adding £1 a month to household energy bills for at least a decade.
>
> The previous official figure for the project was £20bn, but the plant’s joint managing director Julia Pyke said earlier estimates did not account for inflation or risk.
>
> The government confirmed on Tuesday that it would take a stake in the power plant, and announced that it had secured investment from a number of businesses, including British Gas-owner Centrica.

> Ms Pyke said the nuclear plant would “cost consumers about £1 a month during the construction phase,” adding up to a “small annual charge”.
>
> The government’s stake in the project is 44.9%, while Centrica, EDF, La Caisse and Amber Infrastructure will also have holdings in exchange for funding.
>
> Alison Downes, director of pressure group Stop Sizewell C, said the project had “only crawled over the line thanks to guarantees that the public purse, not private investors, will carry the can for the inevitable cost overruns”.
>
> She added: “It is astounding that it is only now, as contracts are being signed, that the government has confessed that Sizewell C’s cost has almost doubled to an eye watering £38bn – a figure that will only go up.”

> “The only significant difference between the slowly unfolding economic blunder of Hinkley C and the forthcoming economic disaster of Sizewell C is that Hinkley’s predictable construction problems, delays and cost overruns were borne by EDF,” he said.
>
> “EDF know they can’t afford to make that mistake again, and so this time those costs will be borne by you, the British public.”

… who could have thought of that … everyone.

For context the construction cost represent 0.025€ per kWh over the minimum expected lifetime of the project.
Of course operating costs will add up but despite the sticker price it’s peanuts when you break down the numbers.

Maybe the Government’s hoping that the new mini-reactors will become commercially viable and build several of those instead of one big one.

Can we not get that German solar farm team on this project to sort it out?

Lol

Nuclear is being intentionally sabotaged by the bureaucracy. It’s happening all over the world, but especially in the West.

Nuclear is the only clean, non-intermittent form of energy production.

If the TGV was made today, seventy-nine competitive tenders would need to be allocated, plus four private research contracts for the feasibility w.r.t. rail wear and aerodynamics, a pack of eighteen jet turbines would need to be contracted as a minimum production run, followed by a competitive tender for system integration. This would require three years of work just to get started and acquire all the private contracts and check them.

Then the train would explode on the first run because a contract was not quite written in the most restrictive way possible, causing an ‘efficient’ private contractor to ‘save’ 35 cents per jet turbine on a pressure manifold. Nobody would be fined because technically the contract was respected.

By the end, a single train costing 15B Euros would be put into service with tickets averaging 350 Euros in order to repay the public-private partnership operating it; the inefficiency of big government projects would be decried, and the system would never be developed further due to excessive costs and the expiration of contracts.