Recognitions:
Gold Member

 Quote by Astronuc The NPPs like the AP1000, EPR and USAPWR are supposed to be constructed in 5 years or 60 months. I don't know if that's from first pour, or when they start excavation for the basemat.
I have seen that same build time estimate. Apparently the reality is different. Georgia is spending money on construction now, but will not sell any electricity from reactors 3,4 before 2017.

 According to SC folks I know, the part of the site where V3 and 4 are going was still largely undeveloped.
No doubt. By existing site I mean that, for example, road access and electrical transmission are already in place, evacuation plans still apply, and so on.

 Quote by mheslep I'd see that prediction too. Apparently the reality is different. Georgia is spending money on construction now, but will sell electricity from 3,4 before 2017. No doubt. By existing site I mean that, for example, road access and electrical transmission are already in place, evacuation plans still apply, and so on.
I don't know all the details, but they do benefit from the fact that it's adjacent or included in keys areas of the current site.

Most of the new NPPs being planned by existing nuclear utilities have been sited at existing sites, many of which had been originally designed for 2, 3 or 4 units (STNP, Comanche Peak, Grand Gulf, River Bend, North Anna, . . . .). Others, e.g. Amarillo, are looking at entirely new sites.

 Recognitions: Gold Member Fuqing reactor construction on China's SE coast, one the of the "22 nuclear reactors under construction" in China. "[H]omegrown design based on France's existing light-water reactors." http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/25112/?a=f

 Quote by mheslep Fuqing reactor construction on China's SE coast, one the of the "22 nuclear reactors under construction" in China. "[H]omegrown design based on France's existing light-water reactors." http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/25112/?a=f
Hm, good name for a plant.

Japan gets organised for nuclear exports
05 May 2010
 Quote by WNN A new company should be formed later this year to support Japanese exports of nuclear power technology and knowledge. The Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry (Meti) has agreed to set up the firm with involvement from utilities the Tokyo, Chubu and Kansai electric power companies as well as with reactor vendors Toshiba, Hitachi and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. The Innovation Network of Japan - a joint venture of government and industry - may also join. The move is seen as a reaction to South Korea's success in exporting to the United Arab Emirates and directed towards winning new nuclear contracts with the emerging nuclear countries of south-east Asia.
Source: World Nuclear News

 "The move is seen as a reaction to South Korea's success in exporting to the United Arab Emirates and directed towards winning new nuclear contracts with the emerging nuclear countries of south-east Asia." Maybe Toshiba (/ Westinghouse / ABB / CE) should have tried marketing their System 80+ design themselves. I wonder if they have any scope of supply in the Korean version to be supplied to UAE.
 Admin Here's a surprise - Dominion selects APWR for North Anna http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...a-1005104.html Dominion had previously expressed interest in the ESBWR. Generally it's not a good idea to mix technologies (e.g., PWR and BWR) at one site. The lead utility on Mitsubishi's US-APWR is Luminant (TXU) with two units planned for Comanche Peak near Ft. Worth, Tx (actually Glen Rose in Somervell County, Tx).

 Quote by Astronuc Here's a surprise - Dominion selects APWR for North Anna http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...a-1005104.html Dominion had previously expressed interest in the ESBWR. Generally it's not a good idea to mix technologies (e.g., PWR and BWR) at one site. The lead utility on Mitsubishi's US-APWR is Luminant (TXU) with two units planned for Comanche Peak near Ft. Worth, Tx (actually Glen Rose in Somervell County, Tx).
Heh, I called it!

We haven't decided to build it yet though, only selected the type if we do.

Rolls-Royce has announced the opening of two new university centres dedicated to nuclear technology at Imperial College in London and the University of Manchester.

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...s-1105108.html

 Colin Smith, Rolls-Royce's director of engineering and technology, attended opening ceremonies at both institutions, which he described as proven centres of excellence for nuclear science. "Rolls-Royce is well placed to deliver world-class engineering and manufacturing capability to support the delivery of global nuclear power programs and we are delighted that these new UTC collaborations will help us remain at the cutting edge of technology," he said.
U of M has the Dalton Nuclear Institute.
http://www.dalton.manchester.ac.uk/

Recognitions:
Gold Member
 Quote by Astronuc Rolls-Royce has announced the opening of two new university centres dedicated to nuclear technology at Imperial College in London and the University of Manchester. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...s-1105108.html U of M has the Dalton Nuclear Institute. http://www.dalton.manchester.ac.uk/
Curious, given the UK has no new nuclear plans that Ive seen.

 Quote by mheslep Curious, given the UK has no new nuclear plans that I've seen.
EDF completes UK nuclear line-up
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7532542.stm
 The next generation of nuclear generators will most likely be built on existing sites owned by British Energy. Dungeness in Kent, Sizewell in Suffolk, Bradwell in Essex and Hinkley Point in Somerset are among the most likely sites for new-build, according to industry insiders.
Possibly 4 EPRs.

Recognitions:
Gold Member
 Quote by Astronuc EDF completes UK nuclear line-up http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7532542.stm Possibly 4 EPRs.
 Quote by BBC news after the government gave the go-ahead for the rebirth of the nuclear industry early this year.
Really? I'd missed that. I had thought one of the reasons behind the UK's expensive offshore wind push was because more nuclear was not on the table.

Recognitions:
Gold Member
Same article - disconcerting waste handling behavior in France

 [...]A couple of recent incidents in France have made such concerns pertinent. In July, 100 workers at EDF's Tricastin power plant in Bollene, southern France, were contaminated as waste particles escaped from a pipe during maintenance work. Medical checks found the workers were all fine as the contamination was mild, but it nevertheless pointed to a lack of control. And only a few weeks earlier, an adjacent Areva subsidiary failed to notify the locals until late in the afternoon the day after some 75kg of liquid containing unenriched uranium leaked into the ground water. The leak was taken seriously. Locals were told to stop drinking tap water; swimming pools were covered up; farmers and gardeners stopped watering their crops.

 Quote by mheslep Really? I'd missed that. I had thought one of the reasons behind the UK's expensive offshore wind push was because more nuclear was not on the table.
Well - there are various plans. What path those plans will actually take is anyone's guess. At the moment, the UK needs to establish a new and hopefully functional government.

Construction work delayed at Levy as costs rise
http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...se-0705105.htm
07 May 2010
 Progress Energy has announced that it has postponed major construction activities at the proposed Levy nuclear power plant in Florida until it has received a licence for the plant. At the same time, the estimated cost for the project has increased by up to $5 billion. The company said that it has delayed work on the Levy project for several reasons, including: the need to reduce capital spending to avoid short term rate increases; a recent downgrading to Progress Energy Florida's credit ratings; a delay in the licensing timeline; the current economic climate; and continued uncertainty about federal and state energy policies, including carbon regulation. Progress says that, according to the current schedule, it expects the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) to issue the combined construction and operating licence (COL) for Levy in late 2012. The company said that at that time it will "update its assessment of the project and schedule to ensure that it continues to be in the best interests of customers and shareholders." . . . . Escalating costs will likely delay/slow the renaissance. Recognitions: Gold Member  Quote by Astronuc Construction work delayed at Levy as costs rise http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN...se-0705105.htm 07 May 2010 Escalating costs will likely delay/slow the renaissance.  Meanwhile, Progress said that its current estimate for the cost of the proposed Levy plant is between$17.2 billion and $22.5 billion.$22.5 billion for one 2.2 GWe plant + transmission? Begin operation in 2019? What the hell? Forget new big-plant nuclear, at least how it's done now in the US, with that price level and schedule.

 Quote by mheslep Same article - disconcerting waste handling behavior in France
It's much of the usual beat up crap I think.

As usual, let's answer the questions you never see in the press.

Was there any off-site impact?
Was there any impact on anybody's health, either plant workers or off-site persons?