Sweden has shut down one of four nuclear reactors at its largest power station after over forty years of operation, with operators citing a lack of profitability
Nuclear power has a high fixed operations and maintenance cost. Even if a reactor is shut down, it still needs security, operations, radiation protection, maintenance, etc. personnel. As far as...
Nuclear power has a high fixed operations and maintenance cost. Even if a reactor is shut down, it still needs security, operations, radiation protection, maintenance, etc. personnel. As far as the specific maintenance goes, it looks like the Swedish regulator was requiring the installation of an independent core cooling system, capable of cooling the reactor for 72 hours without outside intervention. It's very expensive to retrofit that into into a larger system not originally designed for it.
I'm wondering what the "costly maintenance" was? It doesn't seem very promising if they're both expensive to build and expensive to maintain.
Nuclear power has a high fixed operations and maintenance cost. Even if a reactor is shut down, it still needs security, operations, radiation protection, maintenance, etc. personnel. As far as the specific maintenance goes, it looks like the Swedish regulator was requiring the installation of an independent core cooling system, capable of cooling the reactor for 72 hours without outside intervention. It's very expensive to retrofit that into into a larger system not originally designed for it.