Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 17 submissions in the queue.
posted by cmn32480 on Sunday May 01 2016, @03:51PM   Printer-friendly
from the dollars-and-cents dept.

Ed Davey has an interesting story at BBC about the proposed nuclear plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset, UK which at $35 billion will be the most expensive object ever put together on Earth. For that sum you could build a small forest of Burj Khalifas - the world's tallest building, in Dubai, which each cost $1.5bn, you could build almost six Large Hadron Colliders, built under the border between France and Switzerland to unlock the secrets of the universe, and at a cost a mere $5.8bn, or you could build five Oakland Bay Bridges in San Francisco, designed to withstand the strongest earthquake seismologists would expect within the next 1,500 years at a cost of $6.5bn. "Nuclear power plants are the most complicated piece of equipment we make," says Steve Thomas. "Cost of nuclear power plants has tended to go up throughout history as accidents happen and we design measures to deal with the risk."

But what about historical buildings like the the pyramids. Although working out the cost of something built more than 4,500 years ago presents numerous challenges, in 2012 the Turner Construction Company estimated it could build the Great Pyramid of Giza for $5.0bn. That includes about $730m for stone and $58m for 12 cranes. Labor is a minor cost as it is projected that a mere 600 staff would be necessary. In contrast, it took 20,000 people to build the original pyramid with a total of 77.6 million days' labor. Using the current Egyptian minimum wage of $5.73 a day, that gives a labor cost of $445m. But whatever the most expensive object on Earth is, up in the sky is something that eclipses all of these things. The International Space Station. Price tag: $110bn.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 03 2016, @04:08AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 03 2016, @04:08AM (#340631)

    Thank you for looking that up. I wonder whether Greenpeace included the decommissioning costs.

  • (Score: 2) by Aiwendil on Tuesday May 03 2016, @09:10AM

    by Aiwendil (531) on Tuesday May 03 2016, @09:10AM (#340727) Journal

    (Everying in euro and eurocent, multiply by 1.15 to get to usd and us cent)

    Let's do a quick "back of the envelope", since no-one actually has fully decommisioned a non-research/non-military nuclear plant yet it is all estimates. Depending on source it will (in today's money) cost between 0.15bn (sweden (PWR, BWR)) to 1.5bn (ignalia in lithuania (RBMK)) € for each reactor.

    In the case of Hinkley Point C we are talking about big reactors of 1600MWe net each (normal is in the 1100MWe size), capacity factor 92% , lifespan 60 years.

    1600 * 0.92 * 24 * 365 =12,894,720 (MWh/year).
    Or about 13bn kWh per year.

    This tells us an extra cost of 1 to 10c per kWh is enough to add per kWh if we want it paid off in one year. If we go for 50 years it will be at 0.02 to 0.2c per kWh...