122

So it’s not environmentalists that filed suit to not let them use the water rights they acquired? Not the environmentalists who filed suit to protect some animal on the land they want to build on? Not the environmentalists who filed suit under the clean air act (for the construction activities)?

123

The cost increases $10 billion from the original proposal.

Are you trying to tell me the lawsuits costs $10 billion to litigate?

That’s insane. And no, not the reason costs ballooned.

124

The delay and increased cost projection had nothing to do with Westinghouse declaring chapter 11 bankruptcy after the problems in Georgia & South Carolina?

125

The reason is largely due to the problems Westinghouse had with the AP1000 in Georgia and South Carolina causing them to file for chapter 11

126

Totally. These are management failures.

127

bang for the buck here means the amount of energy per amount of plant capacity. sorry i thought that was obvious, and more pertinent

take a breath

129

It makes a lot more sense for “bang for the buck” to mean the cost of generating power.

130

Yet that’s not how you originally used it. Strange

131

No, the costs escalate due to inflation due to the delays. But there are also added costs for the lawyers with each lawsuit.

132

Inflation due to delays, huh.

That’s a 17% annual rate of inflation. You gonna to with that?

133

How so? The cost projection was $13-16 billion in 2010 yet in 2013 they still hadn’t even cleared the hurdles with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission meaning the delay was not caused by lawsuits

134

A lot of it is estimated costs.

You know they havn’t even let the contract for construction of the building yet (they hope to get that done soon). Once they have that, they will have a more firm number.

It’s like the new Prison they are building in Utah. The costs went up significantly from when it was proposed to when they actuall got the bids in.

Litigation is a huge expense.

If they are renting office space that goes up

All kinds of expenses that can go up from an original estimate. Example, the water rights cost more than they originally planned and the litigation associated with envoro wakos after they got the water rights.

135

It seems to me you have no idea what actually was responsible for the balllooning costs.

But you decided to blame it on the “wackos”.

What was the cost of the litigation?

136

Just on the water rights issue. It started in State district court. Then went to Utah court of appeals, then to the Utah supreme court. After that they weren’t happy and they tried in federal district court but got show down.

That took over three years and thousands of billable hours by attorneys.

137

And the cost is?

138

Couldn’t tell you. But multiple attorneys and hundreds of dollar and hour billing thousands of hours . . . .

139

Is not billions of dollars

140

I’ll finish that sentence for you.

They don’t cost billions of dollars.

It’s a scapegoat to cover their own mismanagement and to cover the extremely high cost of nuclear power.

141

Didn’t say billions I said it adds to the cost.

So does litigation add to the cost of things?

142

Never said billions.

Does millions of dollars in litigation add to the cost of a project?

yes or no.