Logo: to the web site of Uppsala University

While the critics of nuclear power previously focused on safety risks, they now point to how modern nuclear power plant constructions are plagued by cost increases and excruciating delays, most recently in Finland's new Olkiluoto 3-plant which was finally commissioned in early 2023. These problems are avoidable, however. In the 1970s and 1980s, Sweden and Finland managed to build 14 new reactors without any costly delays. Stepwise, sequential expansion, continuous improvements, and knowledge transfer based on long-term partnerships were a crucial part of this forgotten achievement, After 14 years of delays and repeated budget overruns, Finland has commissioned its new large nuclear reactor Olkiluoto 3. The many problems that plagued its construction since its start in 2005 have also been highlighted in international media (1). But why was Olkiluoto 3 so late and expensive-and what can other projects and countries learn from this experience? From one per year to 18 years for one For nuclear power critics, the delays and budget overruns are a direct consequence of the complexity of these clear power plants and thus a reason to continue opposing new nuclear power. However, when comparing Olkiluoto 3 with Sweden's nuclear power expansion in 1972-1985 and the earlier Finnish projects Olkiluoto 1 and Olkiluoto 2, a quite different picture emerges.

Efter 14 års försening och till flerdubblad kostnad, som främst den franska staten fick stå för, tar Finland nu i bruk sin nya stora kärnkraftsreaktor Olkiluoto 3. De många problem som kantat dess tillblivelse sedan byggstarten 2005 har också uppmärksammats i svenska medier.1 Men varför blev Olkiluoto 3 så sen och dyr – och vad kan Sverige lära?