Photo by: Duane Daws
Nuclear power plant (NPP) projects are, everywhere, politically important, complex and long-term programmes, World Nuclear University (WNU) lecturer Milt Caplan pointed out at the recent WNU one-day course at the University of Pretoria. “Nuclear decisions are always highly political,” he highlighted. “Decisions are made at the top by Presidents and Cabinets.”
There are certain criteria that have to be met to ensure a successful NPP programme. These are: a well-designed, economic plant; a stable regulatory regime; risk sharing amongst all project stakeholders; a strong project team; and extensive project planning.
“We’re working towards confidence [by meeting these criteria],” he explained. “We need that confidence. You have to feel that the project is doable.
“Often, the focus is too much on the design and technical issues,” he noted. “This is a mature industry. Essentially, all the commercially available designs can provide the desired performance.”
The major stakeholders involved in an NPP project are government, the market (that is, the customers for the electricity to be generated), the utility (that will run the NPP), the vendor (selling the NPP), the regulator (“a very important role”) and the investors/lenders. Regarding the vendors, key questions to ask include: Can they put their best team on your project or are they already heavily committed elsewhere? and How good is their English?
“Really, projects are about managing risk,” he affirmed. “You have to try and identify risks ahead of time. These projects are large and complex. Project risks are related to the relatively long project schedules and high capital costs of nuclear plants.”
There are two main means of managing NPP project risks. One is to build a standardised plant. The other is to have strong project management. “These are not small projects to coordinate. They are very, very large.” Of course, risk is not restricted to nuclear projects. “Doing nothing is not risk free,” he pointed out. “Alternatives, [whether fossil fuel or renewables], are not risk free.”
The development of a nuclear project takes as much time as, or even more than, the actual construction of the NPP. Key iisues that have to be considered include the total generating capacity required, the size of the individual reactors, the project team that the vendor will assign to the programme, the supply chain (local and international) and the commercial conditions prevailing at the time. “You need to evaluate the supply chain, to understand it and know who you are dealing with.”
For a successful programme, the starting point must be the establishment of the objectives to be achieved. (For example, how much electricity must be generated? How much must local industry be stimulated and developed? How much risk is acceptable? How much must it cost?) These objectives must be aligned, so that they do not conflict with each other. (Increasing localisation and decreasing risk tend to be contradictory, for example.)
Having properly set clear objectives, the next step is to decide on the procurement model to be adopted. Then there is the institutional model to oversee the programme. Thereafter, the skills and capabilities that will be needed have to be determined. Finally, the necessary training and development programmes need to be implemented. “When you are investing into nuclear, you’re investing in people,” he argued. “It requires high skills. Nuclear is not really a technology business, but a people business. In nuclear, three-quarters of the operating costs are people.” Government and industry will have to be partners in all these steps.
The fundamental aim is to deliver a successful project. “That is the word you need to focus on: success,” asserted Caplan.