| Why is nuclear power player in Finland? |
|
|
|
In Finland, it is engineers who have the last word on nuclear power. That is why nuclear power in Finland is shorter interruptions for maintenance and upgrades than in Sweden. On average the two Asea-built reactors TVO1 and TVO2 in Olkiluokto on the Finnish west coast, just 12 days of the Court of stopping versus 22 days on average for the Swedish Aseareaktorerna F1 and F2 in Forsmark across the Baltic Sea. Since the early 1980s, when the first Finnish reactor went into operation, Finland has been able to keep its nuclear power plants to 95 percent, year after year. For Vattenfall owned F1 and F2 are the corresponding operating availability only 90-91 percent on average between 1984 and 2007. The explanation, according to Magnus von Bonsdorff that TVO had full focus on just the operation and availability. The engineers have been allowed to decide. It has, among other things meant that Finland retains a large, strategic spare parts inventory for quick replacement of parts that work less well. Instead of making repairs under time pressure has been able to quickly replace all components. The replacement parts refurbished and placed in storage to be on alert "said Magnus von Bonsdorff. It costs money to hold stocks, but it has paid off through the quiet booths have been brought down. - In Sweden, savings programs in the 1990s and later went out over the long-term maintenance. If you have a bunch of economists who only think of capital as perceived inventory as a problem, "he says. Finland has also invested in its own staff in order to have full control of audits, modifications and power increases - and well prepared for contingencies. Sweden has a much greater reliance on consultants and other outside specialists. - During the great modernization work at TVO between 1990 and 1995, we made a conscious effort on the new, younger people who were placed into the modernist ring work and then come out as veterans, "said Magnus von Bonsdorff. The Swedish Nuclear Power representatives from Eon and Vattenfall asked at the seminar sorry for the bad planning last year when the Swedish nuclear power only went for half time during the coldest winter in many years. - We have underestimated the complexity and time required for the major upgrades that we are in the middle in. In the future we will have a better planning horizon, saying, for example, Per-Olof Waessman, director of nuclear safety at Vattenfall. And Ingemar Engkvist CEO of Eon Nuclear Sweden, said that OKG will postpone the planned upgrade of the reactor, O2 in Oskarshamn to 2012-2013 in order not to risk anything in the winter. |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
