Flaw found in [under construction] French nuclear reactor - subpar steel in the pressure vessel.
bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-33469774
bbc.co.ukPosted Jul 9, 2015, 9:27 PM UTC
1320
bbc.co.ukThis is a known issue and BBC does not bring anything new to the table. A new destructive test will be performed to determine the toughness of the Flamanville reactor and reactor lid.
This is a material fault, not a design fault. The British EPR case is solid. UK need new reators to avoid fossil fuels and high cost renewables.
2
This is a known issue and BBC does not bring anything new to the table
True, but the author is notoriously anti-nuclear, so he's got to put his spin on it.
The British case isn't affected because they haven't started building the British reactors yet... LWR RPVs are pretty generic - there's no particular reason a vessel couldn't be procured from somewhere like Japan Steel Works or Doosan Heavy if Areva really can't get their shit together. Not saying the EPR is perfect, but this is an issue with one particular manufacturing plant, not with the EPR design itself.
1
Thanks.
1
Looks like poor old Hinkley C will never get built at this rate.
1
The EPR is a mess. At its size, it's clearly on the wrong size of the economies of scale curve given all the construction delays. Hinkley C should be multiple units of a smaller design.
2
I don't think there's anything wrong with its size. Korea builds PWRs even larger in output, up to 1.8 GWe, they just do it for 1/7th the price.
2
As far as I can tell their largest ones are 1,4GW? France has a few 1,5GW plants already.
2
My mistake. I was thinking of the APWR (japanese design) which is up to 1.7 GWe.
1
But this is just a materials issue isn't it? They need tighter controls on the steel processing and the scrap they use but this isn't anything too new.
2
By size it is not that much bigger than other reactors. The high power level is a matter of good design.
1
They know what the issue is in this case though, they just need to change the processing method.
The way they are processing the ingots is causing highly segregated regions to intersect the surface, this is a known issue and they just need to change the method they use to go from ingot to barrel.
2
or a competent builder will just do it instead.
1
The new build at wylfa will probably be up and running before hinkley.
1
That is not likely since EDF Energy already have the Hinkley deal prepared. Someone also need to deal with all the politics. The fossil and renewable lobbyists will do anything to stop new nuclear. Nuclear deals struck after Hinkley will be much easier and cheaper though.
1
I did mean it more as a throwaway comment but I wouldn't be surprised if it did turn out to be true. The epr has just been a endless series of problems so far in olkiluoto and flamanville, both technical and financial. Even if the abwr hasn't passed the GDA yet, I still reckon it has a chance of catching up and possibly overtaking hinkley as abwr have previously been completed in time and under budget in Japan and Taiwan.
1
ABWR have proven to have low build times yes but it have never been built in Europe. EPR have been under the scrutiny of Finish rigid and strict regulators, French competent regulators, British new regulators, and partly under American regulation too. All this in a after-fukushima world.
1
This submission has been randomly featured in r/serendipity, a bot-driven subreddit discovery engine. More here: http://www.reddit.com/r/Serendipity/comments/3czvoe/flaw_found_in_under_construction_french_nuclear/
1
This looks like a QA fuckup of epic proportions. The manufacturer really screwed them on this. If the article is accurate they will need a new reactor vessel.
Here's a fun line in the article:
If that is the case, I have a couple of sets of tarps they could use as a reactor vessel. I think they need a scientist or engineer proofreading articles like this.
Chinese manufacturer, color me unsurprised.
These are made at a French forge. Why would you believe they are made in China?