Это видео недоступно.
Сожалеем об этом.
New behind the scenes site tour unveiled of Hinkley Point C | July 2024
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 авг 2024
- Hinkley Point C has released a new video showing work underway to install the heart of the new nuclear power station.
Take a look and join Simon Parsons as he lifts the lid on preparation to install the first nuclear reactor, steam generators and the world's largest turbine - the Arabelle.
#Nuclear #NetZero #BuiltByUs
I previously worked at Hinkley B, and other stations, but this is just colossal in comparison. Can't wait for a feature documentary to come out when complete.
You're in for a long wait 🤣
Absolutely fascinating. I had no idea of the scale of it. BIG CARL FTW!
Come on Labour, we need more of these to reach net zero and energy security. 4 more would (total of 6 power 36 million homes. At £35 Billion each, but British built, 6 Hinckley Points would achieve those vital goals and give a big boost to the economy. As core infrastructure investment this would be absolutely justified.
They would likely become way cheaper as you build more of them too.
@@mohammedfarismakhdoom9867 totaly would, like they said unit 2 is already 30% or so faster than unit 1. that and manufacturing has been set up now so that time loss is also gone too
@@laveturnerjones3954 Vogtle was the same, unit 4 was 30% cheaper than unit #4.
These alone aren't necessarily the only option - Rolls Royce 's small modular reactor design definitely has a future in all this.
@@iamtheoneandonly_ I totally agree. But power demand is going to rise dramatically as transport transitions to electric and AI requires huge amounts of power I think we will need all the power production we can achieve - a mix of SMRs and larger scale nuclear power plants. I hope Rolls Royce gets the contract from the government.
We need to see more of this throughout Europe!
France is definitely the shining star amongst the EU for nuclear.
@@iamtheoneandonly_ As a Brit, the french have it so right and the Germans have it so wrong
Fantastic update. Well done all! I'm proud to have the project in UK.
I'm absolutely disgusted Britain is wasting so much money on a project that will run for just 50 year and then remain a contaminated wasteland for the rest of eternity: a massive are of land completely off limits to humans or animals; an area condemned with nuclear pollution and costing millions per year to 'clean up', maintain and secure.
Proud to have been involved for so many years ❤
Me too! I am also so proud
Your children and grandchildren will condemn the insane construction. The instant this power station goes live that patch of Britain will be contaminated. For 50 years they will get really expansive, tax payer subsidised electricity and then the place will be shut, cordoned off, million per year spend controlling nuclear contamination and a large patch of Britain will be off limits to humans and animals, farming and housing for the best part of 10,000 years. Your grandchildren will see the folly of nuclear power but will be paying for it dearly.
We should just keep building these, it'll only get quicker and cheaper.
And for every one you build there will be a big patch of England that will be contaminated for 10,000 years, never to be returned to farmland or housing - just cordoned off and costing millions per year for most of eternity.
Fantastic video. Really engaging and informative. Well done to everyone and looking forward to seeing the outcome.
Nice to see the progress being made; hopefully the Labour Party (e.g. Ed Milliband) are taking note of the de-risking taking place when thinking about Sizewell C (and beyond).
They are more worried about migrants and giving little kiddies the vote
😅Ed Milliband thinking about nuclear😅. Not yet heard that word pass his lips.
@@chrisgrahma5064 SMRs have his "absolute support". LMRs are still waiting.
We need much more of this! Thank you for your effort
Excellent video on real progress being made on a fantastic and essential project
The designers,architects and engineers never cease to amaze me.The things that seem impossible are possible in the quest of human endeavour.
What's amazing is that the price went so out of control. When others suceed at a reasonable cost (UAE) then ypu know something is wrong.
0:47 You may be working on a nuclear power plant, but sometimes you just got to bring a big stick
I'm sure the 2"x4" was nuclear certified!
@@asabriggs6426and cost a million
I was here yesterday. Very cool 👍
That’s some insane skilled engineering!
Excellent work of team UK PLC
Is it on time and how long until completion, thanks
That site is absolutely massive must be one of the worlds biggest construction sites
Excellent stuff. Just a pity that we have to rely on overseas companies to build it!
According to the Hinkley Point C Socio-economic Impact Report 2024, "64% of the value of Hinkley Point C goes to British businesses". The reactor, steam generators and turbine cost surprisingly little ... google "Shin Hanul 3 and 4 component contract" and you will see these components cost perhaps a billion GBP per unit for an APR-1400 reactor. The majority of the complexity is civil engineering, dealing with the ONR and other stakeholders as well as financing.
And 50% funded by the Chinese Nuclear Corporation!
Blair/Brown ignored and demonised nuclear power and Cameron did the same till eventually they realised the lights WOULD go out so Cameron and his wee mate Osborne went with a begging bowl and cosied up to the Chinese government. You couldn't make it up!
50% funded by the French, 50% funded by the Chinese Nuclear Corporation!
Blair/Brown ignored and demonised nuclear power and Cameron did the same till eventually they realised the lights WOULD go out so Cameron and his wee mate Osborne went with a
50% funded by the French, 50% funded by the Chinese Nuclear Corporation!
Blair/Brown ignored and demonised nuclear power and Cameron did the same till eventually they realised the lights WOULD go out so Cameron and his wee mate Osborne went with a begging bowl to the Chinese government. You couldn't make it up!
Please consider uploading future videos in 4K!
Canadians helped too
Hopefully it drops the regional cost of electricity they way it did in Finland.
WOW absolutely bonkers 🤯🤯🤯🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑🤑
We trust it has a better fate than Nelsons Column and wonder at such a peculiar comparison. Good luck to Hinkley Point C,
This is the rolls Royce era
Good that the work seems to be progressing well, so that Rachel Reeves can't cancel it
Top notch..
Holyyyy crap!! How many cranes are you operating at the same time???
Where dyou plug it in? 🤔
Good job men.
Nice , congratulations !
It will cost 46 billion USD for 3.26 GW. The most expensive reactor in the world. US Vogtle reactor (2.2 GW) costs $34 billion USD.
Absolute insanity. You could install 3.26GW of solar PV in a few weeks with a thousand or so people - cost - about £400mil.
@@mb-3faze
You will need about 5 million 400w solar panels taking up an area of 9.5 Km2 which is about 3x bigger than this site.
That's with the solar panels being 100% efficient.
@@kmcat I'm glad you did some calculations. I used to be totally pro nuclear and then I started thinking (particularly after the catastrophic disaster at Fukushima - a large area now which will be forever contaminated).
The truth is there is plenty of room for solar PV even in the UK. China installed 5 nuclear powerstations-worth of solar PV *every single week* last year. To spend 43 billion on a paltry 3.2GW is stupid - that £1,500 per household in the UK. At £1,500 you could install a PV array on every one of those households (or on equivalent commercial rooftops). With that amount of PV you would generate 98,000GWhrs of electricity - even in rainy old Britain. The max this sizewell plant will produce is 28,000GWhrs per year. Once install, the power from PV is completely free - not so for nuclear which will demand subsidies - so expect your bills to go up.
@@mb-3faze You also need power diversity in a power network. You also need to cover time when both wind and PV are unable to cover demand.
I always think the fuel used in nuclear power needs to be reviewed again as its original review was taking into account the make of nuclear bombs
@@kmcat Just FYI there's a great website where you can see the instantaneous generation mix for the UK grid. youtube kicks out all links so I'll just say that if you type 'grid' (no quotes) then a dot then the address 'iamkate' and then the usual bit at the end you'll get the page. It's very interesting. It's public data, rather nicely presented.
When will Wlfa power station on Anglesey be built?
This is one hell of an obsession with biggest...
so what about the radioactive waste once its up and running
vitrification, google it
Will it work ……
You need more cranes
Still shifting Highly Radioactive/Enriched Uranium fuel rods onto a small train about 20 metres from a Primary School in Bridgewater ?
I think you need to do some reading
everything designed in france, turbine, core and steam generators designed and built in france
yep, to think the uk were world leaders
This is the future
Is it still under construction? Is this a nuclear power plant or a cathedral?
no it a nuclear reactor power plant using a design that has never been built on time, on budget or commissioned either. In China and France and non Britain.
Why can't you answer? I'm interested?
Hinkley Point D when?
Could some of the waste heat be used to heat greenhouses, so to grow vegetables in the winter?
Some nuclear plants send their waste heat for heating, but at this moment there's no such project for HPC
Some big farms are already doing this in the south
Not easily because steam turbines lose efficiency with higher condenser temperatures and that limits the temperature of the water available for heating.
The Soviets did that with the exhaust of some of their reactors. Dukovany does it too im Eastern Europe.
@@anthonybernstein1626That's why you charge a cost for heating steam. Still way lower than natural gas heat.
Did he mention how late it was or how much over budget? 5 years late at least and 100% over budget...
Amazing thanks for sharing this with us
Fun fact:I guess it will run before the French one 😂😂
looks good, id prefer to hear of some large scale battery's that can help harness the wind energy we produce rather than sell it off though
Your of great interest...💡...the power of the future* is in your hands 👋
I think you need some more cranes.
yes we want cheap bills for once
Great example of how building nuclear is going to result in cost blowouts and high power bills. Not even mentioned in the video.
Not true at all, cost overruns fall on the investors. The price to bill payers is fixed.
@@enemyofthestatewearein7945 What happens when investors go out backwards? Its a signal to other investors not to touch nuclear. Besides when investors fail, guess who picks up the tab?
@@enemyofthestatewearein7945 until investors come crying about how they are suffering, like the Thame water lot.
Hinkley Point C, generously subsidised by the French taxpayer.
Im all for nuclear, what would be the price per megawatt after all these cost overruns. It just won't be worth it
fusion reactor will be finish faster and cleaner too late
Yeah in another 50yrs
@@davefarmery8180 🤣🤣
I wish, fingers crossed
so 5 of these and we can have cheap electric, seems easy to me.
As an engineer that built these in the 70's I ask three questions.
1. What is the sales price per kwh of generated electricity. Bear in mind that solar costs for large scale farms 1.4 pence per kwh.
2. Why wasn't this a lower cost and more efficient thorium reactor.
3. What is the time to complete and the xpected lifespan.
Hello!
1. £92.50/MWh is strike price but could fall to £89.50 if Size well C approved.
2. Thorium extraction, refining, etc is not as cost effective as uranium. However if you had a specific reactor type in mind to compare against the (EPR PWR) I could give a better answer
3. Estimated both reactors to be commissioned 2029-2031 (in about 5 to 7 years) with a 60 years lifespan, in comparison Hinkley B was 46years and Hinkley A was 35years.
@iamtheoneandonly_ 1. That makes the electricity prohibitively expensive at 7 times the price of solar. When I was involved in building power stations the cost was about 2 pence per kwh. So someone is paying through the nose for it now.
2. LEU currently costs £ 2300/kg whereas thorium is at top end of the price £120/kg. Also thorium is readily available in a usable format in 1000's of tons. So I do not understand your extraction comment.
But I thank you for your kind reply.
@@BrianArnold-fh6ks I think that they use MOX rather than LEU now. Not entirely sure myself either about processing or availability of thorium, but I'm glad to be of some help.
Solar panels have to be replaced every 10 or 15 years and don't work at night or when covered in snow .
> Bear in mind that solar costs for large scale farms 1.4 pence per kwh.
Contract For Difference AR5 has large-scale solar at £47/MWh in 2012 prices = so about £60/MWh in current prices. AR4 was £45.99/MWh. So 1.4p/kWh looks wrong by a factor of 4.
Oh my God and I was trying to go there to work in Tesco’s and you are building a nuclear power Plant there 😡😡😡😡
And the news is that Spain is producing too much solar energy already...
Not at night they're not.
😂
:-) British velder with makeup is amazing, but probably not for velding.
Great update, but can you please stick with shots for a few more seconds and get rid of the ridiculous, jumpy editing style? You can't see anything properly and it's very distracting.
🇬🇧👍🙂
Solar wind and battery can be built for millions and take years to finish, Nuclear Power takes billions of dollars and requires decades. Then the nuclear plant will run around 30 years (which is typical) and you have a high level spent fuel problem that needs to be buried for 10,000 years. However, the DOE hasn't approved transport routes, transport casks, or a national repository after 60 years of trying. No one is willing to expend the political capital to get this done. The result is in the US we have 92 nuclear power stations with high level spent fuel "temporarily" stored in their backyards.
Using first principles, it's self-evident that PV and wind turbines only work at one-third of installed capacity. Nothing is more subsidised than highly diffuse, intermittent wind veins and sunboards. Erratic renewables (AKA unreliables) create subsidised jobs, not useful, reliable, taxable, utilitarian, energy-dense, or stable energy...and only a halfwit would consider batteries (which have very little specific energy density) for grid-scale backup.
not to mention the gas and coal burners required to gap fill
For a comparison of how the 2x1000MW already started and the construction site of the other four 1000MW look like. The construction of the first two began in 2002, and the first of them was launched in 2013, despite many protests by fishermen and many sanctions by the manufacturer in the RF.
The second of them was launched in 2016. The price per piece was 1.3 billion USD.
In the same power plant, since 2017, another 2x1000MW is on display at a price of USD 2.7 billion each, and from 2021 another 2x1000MW at a price of USD 3.35 billion each. The reason for the price increase is the condition of the insurance to fully indemnify anyone in the event that the power plant causes damage to property or health, which has discouraged other global manufacturers of subsidized equipment, who do not provide such guarantees anywhere, and therefore not even in the UK "ruclips.net/video/chUZSlJTYQc/видео.html".
P.S. exactly how much power does it provide to power 6 million homes? In reality, no one knows because each household has its own discretionary consumption which changes by own rules :-)
How is this cost effective compared to wind and storage.
An engineering feat nonetheless
Wind is nice and cheap; and the storage works great where we have a few hour low wind part - but not if we're low wind for say a week; no one has large energy storage for that long yet, and we do get those very low wind periods; when that happens on a still cold winter we're pretty stuck with no stored solar or wind. It's not often it happens for that long, but we do get them; and frequently when it does it's low wind across the whole of western europe, so everyone is tight on power so has little to share.
Nuclear pp design life is 50 years, can recoup the CAPEX within first 5 years of operation. After 50 years, the plant can be refurbished and upgraded. Wind turbine's design life is 15 years and occupying large area of land, after 15 years need to rebuild from scratch.
You missed the most important part and most dangerous one, the waste
@@Luandrew91 Which in the grand scheme isn’t that dangerous. Especially given EDFs commitment to carbon neutrality, I’m inclined to think they will be reprocessing their used fuel at La Harve.
The maintenance of wind is insane, cheap to install but expensive to keep running
who knew that the brits could do what america can't.
the french actually
EDF owned by Energy of France 😅😅😅👎🇬🇧
Having different manufacturing defects between unit one and unit two is great to know. 😂😂😂
well at least it's been documented here if nowhere else
Who's paying for this 48 billion French cross Chinese venture?
EDF uk are massively in debt and we will be paying for it.
cricky, would have thought it would be finished by now
I'm not anti nuclear. But there is a serious waste legacy issue across the globe never mind in the UK!
How much power do we actually need?
It's not really net zero is it...
Nothing is net zero except your sun tan
It cannot be zero carbon. #1. you need fuel that gets extracted and transported across the world by Deisel engined machines. Steel made using coke and transported across the globe etc. and when in operation, staff driving their petrol cars to work and suppliers bringing in thier trucks. then you'll need to extract, transport and store spent fuel ( kept for a very long time). So please be accurate before claiming the green high ground. And when we have electric vehicles, unless your supply chain is 100% non Co2 emitting you cannot claim to be carbon neutral - ever
same with anything, do you think wind turbines grow on trees?
3:13 the only two women on site lol...
I hope the French will not only build this site, but also will run and superwise it afterwards. Because as we know from historical events like Sellafield and Dounreay nuclear catastrophes, brits and nuclear science are bad combination!
The events you are referencing were on the edge of nuclear generation and development. The Brit’s built the first commercial nuclear power plant, called caulder hall. After yeas of generating safely British energy’s was handed over to edf, which will also operate hinkley
Why Go for such an incredible expensive plant? We Need to Pay a Price higher than market Price.
Let's hope it never has occasion to go super-critical and turn the land for tens, or hundreds, of miles around into unusable wasteland. Nuclear fission based energy generation has it's place in a cleaner energy future, but that place is, ideally, small and transient.
so how many have gone pop in europe?
EDF you robbing bastards
not really, when you consider the scale and monetary risk
Zero carbon energy 😅, it leaves our grandchildren a massive impact. Yep I know they are more efficient but, hey let's stop believing the Zero Carbon story.
Meanwhile, China installed 5 nuclear power stations worth of solar PV *per week* last year.
waist of money build cheap solar and give people to put on roofs and you don't need this dirty cheap energy of course people will use free energy and government don't want it
I’m sure people would be upto their waist in solar panels to replace this power plant
Who pays all that? Is our Standing charge? It's more than half pound per day even before we consume a single Kwh...
As far as I know It will be paid by selling the electricity at a higher cost than normal price.
To be more precise, there is a Contract for difference (CfD). The price is £92.50/MWh (in 2012 prices), adjusted to inflation for the first 35 years of operation. That means that this will be the selling price independently if market price is lower (likely) or higher (unlikely). The rest of the NPP's life (design life is 60 years, but operation for 80-100 years is possible), electricity will be sell at market price. The base strike price could fall to £89.50/MWh if Sizewell NPP gets constructed.
Regards
@pedroenguita1875 Thanks, Pedro, for the detailed reply. Very interesting.
Note that the Sizewell C FAQ reports that (going through the Regulated Asset Base model)
"""
The Government estimates consumers will pay on average less than £1 per month during construction.
"""
which helps reduce the financing charges of the project.
@@asabriggs6426 Thanks for the information. One the key problems of Hinkley Point's cost is the high interest rate (9%) that Electricite de France uses. So, lowering it is of paramount importance if you want to reduce the cost of Sizewell. Whether this system is the best one is a question I cannot answer. Regards
@@asabriggs6426 Thanks for the information.
One of the key factors of Hinkley Point's high cost is the high cost of financing in Electricité de France accounts (9%). So, in order to low the cost of Sizewell it is a good idea to lower the financing interest.
Whether this is a good plan or not is a question I cannot answer.
Regards
Zero carbon elictricity is such a silly statement... probably to placate the masses and politicians paranoia. Still great project and build!
Hinkley point C, where billions of pounds were wasted on frivoloties and hubris. Looking forward to pay it off with the new more expensive electricity bills once the reactor goes online and delivers over- priced electricity.
with the cost of gas and oil going up, it will be cheap by the time production starts
How can it claim to be zero carbon when none of the construction materials have been factored in? None of the mining for materials such as fuel is factored in? None of the transport of materials is factored in? None of the storage of waste fuel is factored in? None of the decommissioning is factored in?
What about the crazy high price of energy buyback? Didn't government sign off on a crazily high price? Who will pay that money? Tax and bill payers will pay dearly for this.
The price was not high compared with energy prices a year or two ago. Also the price is not high when compared with Drax (£100/MWh 2012 prices = £138.16/MWh 2024 prices) , Lynemouth (£105/MWh 2012 prices = £145.02/MWh 2024 prices) or Hornsea 1 (£40.000/MWh 2012 prices = £196.18/MWh 2024 prices). Search for the CfD register to see who will be paid what.
@jackking5567 Try searching for "Environmental Product Declaration of electricity from Sizewell B nuclear power station"; the numbers are there, and of course are debated, but around 6g/kWh is pretty low. A person's CO2 emissions from breathing are in the 500g/day to 1000g/day.
The EROI of Nuclear is massively better than Wind or Solar, thus the carbon content per MWh is actually lower for Nuclear. This is because although a a lot of concrete is used, the energy produced is massive, whereas wind and solar use less materials but produce relatively little energy. So for every unit of energy more material is required.
Expensive electric price, over budget and unwanted