International Project Risk Management for Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) Construction: Featuring Comparative Analysis with Fossil and Gas Power Plants

Abstract

The concern of risk management has continuously increased in international construction projects. International projects have a high level of risk and complexity, which results in greater possibilities of cost overruns and schedule conflicts when compared with local projects. Therefore, the goal of risk management is to improve project performance by systematically identifying and assessing project risks, developing strategies to reduce or avoid risks and to maximize opportunities. However, there have been very limited studies in systemized risk management methods due to the unstructured nature of the risk items and knowledge, especially for nuclear power plant projects. In order to address this issue, this paper proposes a standardized risk management methodology for nuclear power plant (NPP) construction with a capability of comparing distinctive risk characteristics among fossil, gas, and nuclear power plants. The proposed methodology includes standard risk classifications and structured risk evaluation techniques in terms of likelihood, impact, and weightings for different types of power plants. It also defines risk packages and risk paths for effective manipulation in a structured manner. The proposed methodology, variables, and initial values were identified by an extensive literature review and expert interviews. Finally, a customizable prototype of risk management system in power-plant construction projects was proposed in order to examine the viability. Implications of this paper reveal that the nuclear power plant has much higher risks in all areas when compared with fossil and gas power plants. It was stressed, throughout this study, that the risk factors of nuclear power plant construction need to be continuously monitored and evaluated in order to explore sustainable nuclear power plants.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 29 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.