IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aen/journl/1991si-a12.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Chapter 12 - A Private Contractor's Approach to Decommissioning Costs

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas LaGuardia

Abstract

Generic cost estimates are important in giving a general impression about the magnitude of the overall task of decommissioning. Site-specific cost estimates, however, are necessary for each individual power plant so that differences in design, site, and history will be reflected as accurately as possible. Thomas LaGuardia has more experience in preparing such estimates than anyone else in the U.S. In this chapter he gives an insider's view of cost estimates which will be valuable to the utility operator who wants to know whether an estimate is adequate without being overinflated, to the regulator who is responsible to the citizens, and to the public who ultimately will pay the bills. He discusses various types of contracts such as fixed price, time and materials, cost-plus -fixed-fee, and utility-to-DOC fixed price, recommending the use of fixed-price contracts for subcontractors and a cost-plus-fixed or incentive fee for the primary contractor. He stresses the need for site-specific estimates.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas LaGuardia, 1991. "Chapter 12 - A Private Contractor's Approach to Decommissioning Costs," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Special I), pages 157-172.
    • Handle: RePEc:aen:journl:1991si-a12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.iaee.org/en/publications/ejarticle.aspx?id=997
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to IAEE members and subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Williams, Daniel G., 2007. "U.S. nuclear plant decommissioning funding adequacy -- by individual funds, utilities, reactors, and industry-wide -- assessed by Monte Carlo and baseline trend methods: 1998, 2000, 2001, and 2004," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 1050-1100, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F0 - International Economics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aen:journl:1991si-a12. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: David Williams (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaeeeea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.