From the link: ATLANTA, April 29, 2024 /PRNewswire/ – Georgia Power declared today that Plant Vogtle Unit 4 has entered commercial operation and is now serving customers and the State of Georgia. The new unit, which can produce enough electricity to power an estimated 500,000 homes and businesses, will provide reliable, emissions-free energy to customers for at least 60 to 80 years. Vogtle Unit 3 entered commercial operation on July 31, 2023.
With all four units now in operation, Plant Vogtle is the largest generator of clean energy in the nation, expected to produce more than 30 million megawatt hours of electricity each year.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Palo Verde in Arizona was previously the largest nuclear power plant in the US, with a combined capacity of 3930 MWe. Vogtle now has a combined total capacity of 4530 MWe, with four units in commercial operation.
Construction on Units 3 and 4 began in 2009, with Unit 3 entering commercial operation on July 31, 2023, and Unit 4 expected to be operational in the second quarter of 2024.
So it looks like they came in a little ahead of schedule. But that is still 15 years. I would like to see all the red tape getting cut and being built in 5 years. If they can build Hoover Dam in 5 years they should be able to do a nuclear plant. At least I would think so maybe I am wrong.
They did not come in ahead of schedule. Southern Company promised 5 years from first concrets pour. They are at least 5 years behind sechedule and $15 Billion over budget.
Hoover Dam was simple compared to a large nuclear power plant. No comparison in complexity, massive equipment built to nuclear standards, and regulations. For example the 306-ton reactor vessel was fabricated by Doosan Heavy Industries in South Korea, shipped through the Port of Savannah and arrived at the construction site via train on a specialized rail car.
The Chinese do well in constructing their plants in 6 or 7 years. Here is one example:
Yangjiang-6 started construction December 2013. Start of construction, according to the IAEA, is when the first nuclear-grade concrete is poured for the reactor building. Yangjiang-6 started producing electricity in June 2019, and entered commercial operation a month later. So, that is about 5-1/2 years from first concrete to full operation.
China’s advantage is that they have built a large number of plants in the last 15 to 20 years, so they are getting good at it. The more you perform a task, the better and more efficient you will get at it. That is simple human behavior, even for something as complicated as a nuclear power plant.
Building just one or two plants doesn’t give enough experience over a large workforce, so experience is lost. A new workforce on a new project then needs to start from the beginning again, to relearn all of the lessons over again. Where will the Vogtle construction workforce go now? I don’t know, but they aren’t going to any new nuclear project, because there aren’t any new projects approved for construction in the US.
I read that they were scheduled to come in at the 2nd quarter of 2024.
In my experience, everyone had a harder time doing something than anyone else did. I don’t see any nuclear plants being called the 7th wonder of the world, but maybe someday.
Yes I could have been wrong about that too, after googling more I found they had delays and cost over runs. Geez, I was hoping for a happy story to this.
Yangilng is not the same reactor as Vogtle 4. You should be comparing apples to apples.
Sanmen 2 is an AP1000 just like Vogtle 4. China started construction on Sanmen 2 in December 2009 and went to commercial operation in November 2018 which mean it took 9 years to build from first concrete to full operation.
That is what the new Smal Modular Reactors (SMRs) are supposed to achieve. Except that there are over 30 different types of SMR being designed and getting regulatory approvals. And we do not have a firm cost and schedule for any ot them. We are not going to build any more Westinghouse AP1000 plants in US. Westinghouse is now going to the AP300 SMR.
Yangjiang-6 is more similar to Vogtle-4 than it is different. Both are ~1 GW pressurized water reactors (PWRs), using similar uranium-oxide fuel with light water moderation. Operating temperatures and pressures are similar in both plants.
The Sanmen plants were the first AP1000 plants built anywhere, along with the sister Haiyang plants in China. First-of-a-kind plants like that are going to take longer to build the first time, compared to a well established design.
China continues to build AP1000 plants, although the newer plants are called CAP1000, since they are more indigenous to China. They have also designed and are building the larger CAP1400 which will have larger MW output.
Some of the SMR designs are intended to be built with several small reactors installed at one site. NuScale is one such design, with up to 12 reactors in one plant. The total output would be around 600 - 700 MW, which is about half the size of one of the Vogtle plants.
If the US construction firms can get some experience building SMRs, then maybe they can scale up to larger designs down the road. Nuclear power is generally more cost-effective with larger plants. But the utilities need to take a longer term perspective on things. Start small, then work your way up. Such is life, in many respects.
All pressurized water reactors (PWRs) uranium-oxide fuel with light water moderation. Operating temperatures and pressures are similar in all PWR plants. So they are not exacrly the same. Maybe there are less safety features on the Yangliang-6 reactor. Does it have the airplane impact requirements? There are so many features and items that can be differnt between Vogtle-4 and Yangliang-6.
These larger nuclear plants are the ones with all the cos and schedule problems everywhere. Look at the French EPR problems - they are having cost and schedule overruns at every new nuclear plant they have sold/built.
Not everywhere. I already gave China as an example. See the PRIS database for construction times from first concrete to commercial operation. Because they have a large construction organization, they can apply lessons learned from one project to another, and can build in reasonable times, with reportedly reasonable costs (VERY reasonable costs, if the numbers are accurate.) We also need to remember about the COVID-19 pandemic causing mayhem for supply chains and work schedules in many parts of the world. China was not immune to those problems. Neither was Vogtle.
South Korea has done fairly well in the past, as well as Japan. See the construction times for the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa ABWRs in the 1990s. Four year construction times for #6 and #7!
The haters always assume that if one nuclear power project takes longer than expected, then every nuclear project always takes that long, everywhere. The truth is somewhat different.
You did not provide any data on the initial cost and schedule for any of these plants. In fact you had to go back 30 years to find Japan ABWR construction times. So your post is worthless for anyone wanting to understand the cost and schedule overuns for these nuclear power projects.
You are Wrong. You are the one that cherry picks one or two nuclear plants that were built years ago only on schedule negecting budget. And then you tell us that every nuclear plant can be built on schedule and on budget. I do not know of any nuclear power plant that was built in the last 25 years. I also do not know of any nuclear power plant in the world that is currently in construction that is on schedule and on budget .
Nuclear power salesmen never admit the truth about cost and schedule.