Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

But the "negative learning" was exactly because they abandoned the standardized approach.

"Conversely, the gradual erosion of EDF’s determination to standardize (caving in to proposals of numerous design changes in the wake of the ‘‘frenchifying’’ of the Westinghouse de- sign—the P’4 reactor series—and above all to the new N4 reactor design pushed by the CEA), as well as the abrupt slowdown of the expansion program after 1981, paved the way towards a gradual demise of the French success model, as borne out in lengthened construction times and ever higher cost escalation towards the end of the program (cf. Section 4 below)."

https://endexiresearch.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2020...



I don’t get the need to lie?

If you read the article you will clearly see that for all generations it got more expensive over time.

The first, the second, the third and fourth.

All of them. Standardization did not make it cheaper.


That's a direct quote I copy-pasted from the article.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯


I don’t see any standardization wins in this graph. It points up throughout the entire program.

Flamanville 3 and the EPR2s are incomprehensibly far above even the last one.

https://i.imgur.com/97E0zdn.jpeg


The text I quoted is the last paragraph of section 3, page 5 of the article.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: