Give me strength

Published: January 17, 2013 at 6:02pm

The Malta Independent carries a story about the construction of a power plant and LNG terminal in Wales, describing the length of time each took to construct.

Somebody immediately rushed in to say that this was an unfair comparison, because the one proposed by Labour is 200MW and the ones in the report about Wales is 500MW. She then used a ‘pro rata’ calculation to work out how long Labour’s would take to build, based on the length of time taken to build the one in Wales.

I wonder how she fared in those ‘trick’ questions in maths at school. You know the sort: if it takes one man an hour to walk six kilometres, how long does it take six men to walk the same distance?

As videos and reports of real-life examples spread through the internet, the standard Labour response has become: “Oh, but that one is bigger than ours, so if that took seven years then ours will take two.”

Hardly.

Aaron Delia says:
17 January 2013

@Charmaine these things does not work like that, with the same thinking if you make pasta for 2 persons in 20 mins it doesn’t mean you can make the same pasta for 1 person in 10 mins !!, Because certain things does not change much in quantity or volume.

Charmaine Inguanez says:
17 January 2013

Interesting. This project is more than twice the size of the one proposed by PL and it would be expected that it takes longer to build. Using a pro-rata in terms of megawatts, if it takes 3 to 4 years to build a 500MW plant then it would take around 2 years to build a 200MW plant. The same principle can be applied to the building of 2 LNG tanks including civil works instead of 5 tanks.




26 Comments Comment

  1. jack says:

    Actually, it is possible (or probable) that the smaller the scale of the project (or rather the greater the derogation from the industry norm) the greater the intricacies of the task.

  2. Bubu says:

    Well, to be fair Tonio Fenech used the same reasoning to calculate the costs for a 200MW station by comparing to the cost for the 150MW station proposed by Bateman.

    That didn’t sound right to me either, but perhaps power stations are costed based on MW. I don’t know.

    • Min Jaf says:

      Mela ghal fejn ftaht halqek jekk ma tafx.

    • canon says:

      The cost is not proportional to the MW, but certainly a 200MW power staion costs more than a 150 MW one. Tonio Fenech was correct.

    • Angus Black says:

      Tonio made the comparison of cost difference not time to build difference.

      It stands to reasons that if a PS needs three turbines to produce 150MW of electricity, it would need four to produce 200MW.

      Are you assuming that the winning bidder would receive the same payment for a 200MW plant as he would for 150MW?

      It doesn’t matter who builds the PS. Tonio was comparing likes with likes i.e. Bateman plant for 150MW vs. Bateman plant for 200MW.

      I don’t think you can find fault with anything that Tonio Fenech has put forward.

      He presented facts and expert opinions as compared to a skimpy overview of Joseph’s (aptly put) Alice in Wonderland project, which he now realizes he cannot do in 23 months so he slithered into the background and pushed to the forefront, future scapegoats.

      I suspect that Anglu will have company soon enough.

    • admin says:

      The cost of a power station is indeed calculated on a per MW basis.

      But the delivery time is not related to size. It takes as long to deliver a tonne of steel as it does to deliver three tonnes.

      • canon says:

        A power station has to be designed. Amongst other things, it involves electrical, mechanical and civil engineers. When tendering, the tenderer has to give a breakdown of the works and a breakdown of the plant they intend to install.

  3. SM says:

    Why is this vegetable’s vote worth as much as mine?

  4. Josette Jones says:

    “Miss! Miss! Miss!”

    “Raise your hand, Charmaine.”

    “Miss! Miss! Miss! Miss! Miss!”

    *sigh* “Tell me.”

    “Why don’t they build twenty little 10 megawatt plants and have it all ready by the summer?”

  5. Neil Dent says:

    10 minutes, do I get a prize?

    Seriously though, every five years we’re given a reminder of their all consuming thirst for power.

    “Let’s just get up those Kastillja steps, and then we’ll just wing it, boys.”

    There is absolutely no sense of gravity about them, and the ones who actually do have a decent IQ just can’t be relied upon thanks to the red haze.

  6. H.P. Baxxter says:

    Mine’s bigger than yours, ciccio. That’s why it takes me longer.

    • ciccio says:

      Baxxter, I admit, my chimney is smaller than yours. That’s because my plant is cleaner cause it runs on gas, of which I keep a nearby deposit for security of supply.

      • H.P. Baxxter says:

        How do you fit your tanks into your pants?

        Oh god, ciccio! What have we become? The hopelessness of this campaign has turned us into a couple of schoolboys giggling at penis jokes.

      • ciccio says:

        Futur fis-sod, Baxxter.

  7. rjc says:

    Wouldn’t be surprised at all that the workings of the PL have been done that way.

    How else could they have arrived at such ridiculous figures and timings.

  8. U Le! says:

    Is this the only Jekyll and Hide country on the surface of this planet?

  9. MM says:

    Babu, you are correct. Build costs for this type of plant are usually in $ per kW or MW. So construction costs can roughly be scaled pro-rata.

    Some exceptions exist, eg. certain types of plant come in standard sizes. You generally find that for a range of MW output you have an associated specific cost per MW (see links below).

    Project completion time cannot be scaled using the same criteria – eg. most of the studies will practically take the same time.

    Delivery time for, say, two tonnes of steel will not be twice as long as that for one tonne, and so on.

    There are various other factors that need to be entered into the equation and each project needs to be evaluated on its own merit. General completion times for this type of plant are of 20-30 months from start on site (that’s assuming no red tape is involved).

    One major factor likely to drive (up or down) the completion time is the delivery lead time associated with the power-generating units themselves. That is why they are so keen to place an order.

    http://bv.com/docs/reports-studies/nrel-cost-report.pdf

    http://www.jcmiras.net/surge/p130.htm

  10. anthony says:

    Poor Charmaine Inguanez.

    Bless her.

  11. C says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised that Labour are on the lead in the polls with such brilliant and highly intelligent individuals so abundant.

  12. Conservative says:

    There are various matters that raise my hackles here.

    (a) Why is that that everyone has the answer to every political issue, be it legislative, juridical, ecclesiastical, canonical, engineering, maritime, or historical?

    Why is it that in Malta, everyone is ready with the most mind-numbing stupid replies to the most complex questions?

    How can Charmaine Inguanez have any remote clue as to how long it takes to build a power plant? Can I bet my last farthing that she has no remote clue what LNG stands for?

    (b) Which equivalent developed country would hinge the outcome of its general elections on a power plant or utility tariffs? Is that country stark bloody raving mad?

    What about the issues that matter, that really matter, the bread and butter issues, such as –

    (a) education
    (b) health and health care funding
    (c) pensions and pension reform
    (d) the state and health of the job market
    (e) the economy in general
    (f) the trade balance
    (g) the country’s competitiveness
    (f) corruption

    Am I really the only one who feels so frustrated that I could demolish my Scotch decanter at one go, of an evening, after having read this blog and others?

    Where is sanity? Is it confined to Mount Carmel Hospital? Are the rest stark, staring mad? Absolute lunatics?

Leave a Comment