The size of the nuclear build in Texas, Mr. Chapman included, rivals that taking place in China. Not many people realize how much development in the nuclear field is taking place in the heart of Texas, which is also the home of the U.S. oil industry.
http://djysrv.blogspot.com/2008/...ize-of-
new.html
Dan:
I agree. I have visited Texas more in the past year for discussions about new build than any other state.
Though it is a bit counterintuitive, the long history of the very profitable oil industry is one of the reasons why Texans are so interested now in nuclear power. They have a deep understanding of the importance and potential profits of energy production and they know that their traditional energy sources are petering out.
While they have cash in their pockets, it is time to seek the next big thing, and there is no way to export their windy plains to some other location. Wind power may work for them at home, but it does not give them a marketable product that can fill the world's needs like the oil that they have used for so long.
The other nice thing about Texans is that they do not take kindly to interference in their projects from outsiders and they have the confidence that they can succeed in projects that scare others off.
Rod, is his project one or two EPRs?
David
David, NRC filings show 2 Unistar EPRs.
I'm not gifted with telepathy nor claim any specific insight in Chapman's mind but I find interesting that he switched to EPRs rather than the initial ABWRs. More than net power or technology, I'm ready to bet Chapman decided for Unistar because the offer is fully-integrated turnkey: Areva for the nuclear island and the general architecture, Alstom for the power generation systems, Bechtel as general contractor and Constellation/EDF for training, maintenance and operation.
It looks like Areva is trying to replicate in the US the model they've always used in France with a lot of success. They departed from it for Olkiluoto-3 to be nice and politically correct with the locals and they are biting their b***s now. For Flamanville-3, it's back to the tried and true: only known contractors, 100% control and bozos need not apply.
GE and Westinghouse are going to need to get on-board this model or they are not going to sell a lot of reactors if all of their projects look like the Progress and FPL jokes. One of kind designs all over again? Will those guys ever learn anything?
Fifi:
I think you understand the decision very well. I have had the opportunity to meet and talk with Michael Wallace, one of the primary leaders at Constellation who has been involved with the formation of Unistar Nuclear from the very beginning.
There is no accident that the company continues to talk about "fleets" of reactors - Mike Wallace went through the same nuclear power course of instruction as I did. He was a Rickover selected engineering officer on submarines and apparently took away some significant lessons from his five years of service. He is one of the few top leaders in the industry that has actually built a reactor; he was responsible for the completion of Braidwood and Bryson Nuclear stations for Commonwealth Edison.
I have never met Mr. Chapman, but I know a few people who have. He is experienced at developing complex projects, knows how to pick partners who can help him succeed and knows how to make good decisions based on all available information. As shown by his decision to switch to the EPR from the ABWR, he does not hesitate to change his mind if better information comes along that makes the initial decision incorrect.
I do not think that the path that this team is following is the ONLY one that will succeed, but it is a GOOD path that has been proven in the past. The chances for success seem pretty high to me.
Commenting by HaloScan
