Economic Viability of Metallic Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor ......Electrorefining Annualthroughput:32.94tHM Throughputperbatch:45.75kgHM/batch Volumeofmoltensalt:2,900kg LiCl-KCl/batch—1unit

Hindawi Publishing CorporationScience and Technology of Nuclear InstallationsVolume 2013 Article ID 412349 10 pageshttpdxdoiorg1011552013412349

Research ArticleEconomic Viability of Metallic Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Fuelin Korea

S K Kim1 W I Ko1 and Yoon Hee Lee2

1 Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute 1045 Daedeokdaero Yuseung-Gu Daejeon 305-353 Republic of Korea2Department of Nuclear and Quantum Engineering Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology 291 Daehakro Yuseong-GuDaejeon 305-353 Republic of Korea

Correspondence should be addressed to S K Kim sgkim1kaerirekr

Received 7 November 2012 Revised 18 February 2013 Accepted 19 February 2013

Academic Editor Michael F Simpson

Copyright copy 2013 S K Kim et alThis is an open access article distributed under theCreative CommonsAttribution License whichpermits unrestricted use distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the original work is properly cited

This paper evaluates whether SFR metallic nuclear fuel can be economical To make this determination the cost of SFCF (SFRfuel cycle facilities) was estimated and the break-even point of the manufacturing cost of SFR metallic nuclear fuel for directdisposal option was then calculated As a result of the cost estimation the levelized unit cost (LUC) for SFCF was calculated tobe 5311 $kgHM and the break-even point was calculated to be $5267kgHM Therefore the cost difference between LUC andthe break-even point is not only small but is also within the relevant range of the uncertainty level of Class 3 in accordance with ageneric cost estimate classification matrix of AACE (the Association for the Advancement of Cost Engineering) This means it isvery difficult to judge the economical feasibility of SFR metallic nuclear fuel because as of today there are no commercial facilitiesin Korea or the world The economic feasibility of SFR metallic nuclear fuel however will be enhanced if the mass production ofSFCF becomes possible in the future

1 Introduction

Since the accident in the nuclear power plant in FukushimaJapan occurred some advanced countries are attemptingto better manage their nuclear power generation and spentfuel In addition these countries are carrying forward thedevelopment of alternative energy such as solar heat andwindpower however for now there is no appropriate alternativeelectric power production that can substitute for nuclearenergy For now there are limitations for alternative energyto replace nuclear energy and for the recycling of uraniumthe method of recycling spent fuel accumulated in nuclearpower plants or in intermediate storage facilities in an SFR(sodium-cooled fast reactor) is judged to have sufficientinvestment value To develop a sodium-cooled fast reactor(SFR) however the part that should be reviewed priorly inthe aspect of economic feasibility is to judge its economicfeasibility and compare it with direct disposalThis is becausedirect disposal is known to be economical in the alternativesof nuclear fuel cycle Therefore it is necessary to calculatethe break-even point by comparing the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel

cycle cost which considers themanufacturing cost of the SFRmetallic nuclear fuel with the direct disposal cost

Korea is presently operating 21 nuclear power plant unitsand has plans to continuously increase the capacity of nuclearpower generation in the future However the operation ofnuclear power plants inevitably causes the generation of spentfuel In addition the capacity of Korearsquos present temporarystorage facilities for spent fuel will become lower than therequired storage capacity in each nuclear power plant site andwill reach the saturation condition in 2016

According to the 2009 yearbook ofKorearsquos nuclear energywe have a plan to manage the spent fuel generated fromnuclear power plants through the installation of a highdensity storage rack the transferring between units and theinstallation of a dry storage facility at each nuclear powerplant site Therefore for a continuous increase in nuclearenergy we should fundamentally solve the problem of spentfuel presently accumulated in nuclear power plants Theselection of a site however for interim storage or a repositoryfor spent fuel is recognized as a big obstacle Therefore tosolve the problem of a shortage of natural uranium and

2 Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations

to decrease the scale of a high-level waste repository therecycling of spent fuel is inevitable In addition to increasethe efficiency of uranium use the development of an SFR andSFR fuel cycle facilities (SFCF) is necessary

Pyroprocess which is a dry reprocessing method con-verts the spent fuel into metal in high-temperature moltensalt phase and decreases the volume of the spent fuel toincrease its economic feasibility of disposal innovatively [1]

Namely the technology of the Pyro-SFRnuclear fuel cycleis one of the alternatives that can fundamentally solve theproblem of spent fuel management and is known to be anadvanced technology with high proliferation resistance [2]

Some experts however still have doubt whether Pyro-SFR nuclear cycle technology is feasible in terms of tech-nology know-how and economics Therefore to introducefacilities related to the SFR nuclear cycle not only continuousresearch on the manufacture process of SFR metallic nuclearfuel but also the review of the economic feasibility of thepyroprocess for SFR spent fuel is required

This paper defines the design requirements of SFRnuclearfuel manufacturing facilities and calculates the manufactur-ing cost of SFR nuclear fuel using the engineering cost esti-mationmethod In addition by comparing the direct disposalcost with the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle cost the break-even point of the SFR metallic nuclear fuel manufacture costwas elicited This is because the manufacturing cost of SFRmetallic nuclear fuel is a major cost driver of the Pyro-SFRnuclear fuel cycle cost

2 Conceptual Design of SFR Facility

To calculate the break-even point of the manufacturing costof SFR metallic nuclear fuel we should first calculate thePyro-SFR nuclear cycle cost based on Figures 1 and 2 andto do this we should estimate the cost of the manufacturefacilities of the SFR nuclear fuel Therefore a conceptualdesign of SFR facilities as shown in Figure 1 is necessaryThe engineering cost estimation method using a conceptualdesign is for now a realistic method with high reliability [3]and can calculate the cost of SFR nuclear fuel in manufactur-ing facilities

We can calculate the cost of investment in the facilitiesused for SFR nuclear fuel manufacturing as well as the oper-ation and maintenance cost (OampM) and decontaminationand decommissioning (DampD) cost from the bottom up Thecost calculation of SFRmetallic nuclear fuel manufacturing isshown in Figure 3

21 Major Function of SFR Fuel Cycle Facility (SFCF) TheSFR fuel cycle facility (SFCF) recycles the spent fuel dis-charged from the SFR of 6 units of a 600MWe as shownFigure 2

In the main manufacture facility after going through thehead-end processes such as inspection dissolution cuttingand removing sodium of the spent fuel uranium is collectedthrough the electrorefining process [4] and by collecting theremaining uranium and TRU (transuranium) through theelectrowinning process [5]

Table 1 Design standard of SFR fuel cycle facilities

Capacity

Annual SFR SF3294 tHMyr (912 tTRUyr) SF of SFR 6unit (600MWe per unit)

Manufacturing ofSFR new fuel

HM 3862 tHMyr TRU 114 tTRUyrannual manufacturing of fuel rod327139yr annual fuel assemblies1207yr

Plant function Head-end process pyroprocessmanufacturing of SFR nuclear fuel

Annual load factor 55 200 dayyearDesign lifetime 60 yearInput material UTRURE metal ingot SFR spent fuel

Output material initial and make-up SFR new fuel waste(ceramic metal)

Fuel compositionFuel composition U-206 wt TRU-10wtMA composition lt5wtRE composition lt5wtInjection Sodium

The collected uranium and U-TRU ingot are recycled asSFR nuclear fuel after going through the metallic nuclear fuelmanufacture process [6]

In addition in KAPF (Korea Advanced PyroprocessFacility Plus) uranium metal (U metal UTRU metal)produced by treating light-water nuclear reactor (PWR) spentfuel in the pyroprocess is supplied to the SFR nuclear fuelmanufacturing facility and used for the initial core andsupplement

22 Design Requirement and Criteria Thedesign standard ofSFCF (SFR fuel cycle facility) is shown in Table 1

23 Reference Spent Fuel of SFR It is assumed that thereference SFR spent fuel is cooled in the storage tank for 5years or longer after being taken out from the SFR and theaverage burnup is 91429MWdtHMThe composition of themajor nuclear material before and after the burnup is shownin Table 2

3 Material Flow of SFR Nuclear Fuel

To calculate the cost of the Pyro-SFR nuclear cycle thenuclear material balance of each process was calculated Todo this if we look at the flow of the manufacturing processthe core process of the SFR nuclear fuel manufacture facilityis largely divided into the head-end process the pyroprocessand the SFR nuclear fuel manufacture process

The flow of pyroprocess is as shown in Figure 4 Thepyroprocess was done in an argon gas atmosphere with littleair (le50 ppm O

2)

The SFR nuclear fuel manufacturing facility receives theSFR spent fuel of 3294 tHM annually based on 200 days

Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations 3

Utilitiesbuilding

Gasstation

SFR fuel cycle facility

Administrationbuilding

Wastestorage

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

Stagingstorage area

Figure 1 The sketch of SFR fuel cycle facility

21 tUyr

Electrorefiningwinning

Assemblyfabrication

Fuelfabrication

UTRU productprocessing

Disassemblyand chopping

Salttreatment

recycle

Waste

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

281tHMyr(227 tRUyr)

054 tUyr

386 tHMyr(113TRUyr)

329tTRUyr(91tTRUyr)

SFR SF

117 tHMyr(91 tTRUyr)

Exteriorpyroprocess

facility

Figure 2 The mass flow diagram of SFR fuel cycle facility

Designrequirements

Reference process model

Facility design

Anchor facility Other reference

Expertreview

Expertreview

Material laborcost

Cost evaluation

Final report

◼ Functional flowsheet◼Material balance◼ Process components◼ Facility configuration- Components arrangement- Hot cell layout- Building design- Auxiliary systems◼ Trade-off study

◼ Establish methodology◼ Capital costs◼ Operating costs◼ Unit cost- Life cycle model- Financial factors- Levelized costs◼ Sensitivity analysis

Figure 3 The calculation procedures of the manufacturing cost of SFR metallic nuclear fuel


NFBC

LiCl-KClwith UCl3

Anodesludge

Electrorefining Salt SaltElectrowinningTRUREU REsalt

RE

RemovalNa

Hull

U-dendrite

Cd

Cddistillation

Saltpurification Waste

U product UTRUREproduct

Salt

TRUUCd Salt(RETRU)

Cleaned salt

SFR spentoxide fuel

TRURE

Waste formfabrication

Disassemblingchopping

Residualactiniderecovery

Cathodeprocessor

Figure 4 The process flow diagram of pyroprocess

Fabrication of duct and handling socket

Manufacture of cladding tube

Fuel loading

Charging of sodium

Leaking test of He

Surface cleaningcontamination test

Wire rapping

Weld of fuel assembly

Inspection of fuelor fuel assembly

Fabrication of fuel rod and nose pieces

Weld of lower-end plug

Weld of upper-end plug

Figure 5 The manufacturing process of SFR nuclear fuel

of work as shown in Table 1 and manufactures SFR metallicnuclear fuel of 3862 tHM

Uranium and transuranium (TRU) produced through thepyroprocess is transferred to the nuclear fuel manufacturinghot cell to manufacture the metallic nuclear fuel and aftercarrying out the component adjustment (UTRUZr) of thenuclear fuel fuel slug is manufactured using an injection castmethod The completely manufactured fuel slug is chargedtogether with sodium to the fuel rod A flowchart of themanufacturing process of SFR metallic nuclear fuel is shownin Figure 5

The assumptions required for the pyroprocess of the SFRnuclear fuel manufacturing facility are shown in Table 3

The SFR spent fuel is received and in the SFR nuclearfuel manufacturing facility uranium ingot 211 tUyr and U-TRU-RE ingot 1175 tHMyr are produced In addition off-gas waste is generated from the high-temperature oxidationvolatilization process [8] This waste will be disposed of in adeep geological repository

4 Cost Estimation

41 Cost Structure

411 Investment Cost The cost of investment in facilities isdefined as the expense occurring from the time when the


Table 2 Characteristics of reference SFR spent fuel

New fuel

Nuclides Annual input (g)(600MW times 6)

Ratio ()

234U 419119864 minus 02 011235U 205119864 minus 02 005236U 153119864 minus 02 004238U 273119864 + 01 7035U 272119864 + 01 7055237Np 257119864 minus 01 067238Pu 320119864 minus 01 083239Pu 481119864 + 00 1246240Pu 346119864 + 00 897241Pu 747119864 minus 01 193242Pu 765119864 minus 01 198Pu 101119864 + 01 2617241Am 389119864 minus 01 101242Am 217119864 minus 02 006243Am 295119864 minus 01 076242Cm 377119864 minus 04 000243Cm 171119864 minus 03 000244Cm 200119864 minus 01 052245Cm 644119864 minus 02 017246Cm 369119864 minus 02 010MA 127119864 + 00 328TRU 114119864 + 01 2945Total (HM) 3862119864 + 01

Spent fuel

Nuclides Annual output (g)(600MW times 6)

Ratio ()

234U 372119864 minus 02 011235U 104119864 minus 02 004236U 168119864 minus 02 005237U 110119864 minus 04 000238U 237119864 + 01 7207239U 400119864 minus 05 000U 23809 723237Np 136119864 minus 01 041238Np 153119864 minus 04 000239Np 576119864 minus 03 002238Pu 309119864 minus 01 092239Pu 366119864 + 00 1110240Pu 300119864 + 00 909241Pu 505119864 minus 01 153242Pu 684119864 minus 01 208Pu 815119864 + 00 2472241Am 269119864 minus 01 082242MAm 325119864 minus 03 001242Am 106119864 minus 04 000

Table 2 Continued

Spent fuel

Nuclides Annual output (g)(600MW times 6) Ratio ()

243Am 237119864 minus 01 072244Am 543119864 minus 05 000242Cm 207119864 minus 02 006243Cm 190119864 minus 03 001244Cm 205119864 minus 01 062245Cm 629119864 minus 02 019246Cm 367119864 minus 02 011247Cm 218119864 minus 03 001248Cm 170119864 minus 04 000MA 981119864 minus 01 298TRU 913119864 + 00 2772Total (HM) 3294119864 + 01

Burnup 91429MWdtHM cooling 5 years calculation code Origen 21conversion ratio 060

Table 3 Main constraints of prime process

Category of process Assumption

Head-end cell

Annual assemblies treated in head-endcell 930Recovery factor of fuel 9999Removal rate for Na Cs Sr Ba I 99

Electrorefining

Annual throughput 3294 tHMThroughput per batch 4575 kgHMbatchVolume of molten salt 2900 kgLiCl-KClbatchmdash1unitInitial UCl3 concentration 9 wtRecovery factor of uranium inelectrorefining 9967

ElectrowinningComposition in molten salt PuU gt 3U coefficient UsaltUcd = 113Recovery factor of TRU in RAR (residualactinide recovery) 099

Salt waste treatmentAnnual solidification volume of nuclidesand concentrated salt 3895 kgAnnual solidification volume of RETRUoxide 870 kg

owner decides on the construction of the facilities to the timewhen the facilities are commercially operated which includesthe costs of obtaining the land the design the infrastructurethe construction the equipment and the interest accrualduring the construction period

To estimate the cost the conversion factor considering thecomplication size and degree of development of the tech-nology was reflected and the inflation rate was reflected toestimate the construction cost based on the end of 2009 Theexchange rate of won-dollar assumed is 1 USD = 1100 wonThe investment costs of the SFR nuclear fuel manufacturefacilities are estimated as shown in Table 4


Table 4 Investment costs of SFR fuel cycle facilities

Capital costEstimated

cost(kUSD)

Ratio()

Direct costSite preparation 9445Process systems 199194Main processing building 238668Site support facilities 15266Sub total 462573 50

Indirect costConceptualfinal design (14) 64760Licenses (7) 32380General and administrative costs (5) 23129Engineering and constructionmanagement (10) 46257

Startup and testing (20) 92515Initial training (3) 13877Subtotal 272918 30

Contingency (25) 183873 20Total 919364 100

412 Operation Cost The operation cost is defined as allnecessary annual expenses related to the use of the facilitiesand includes the labor cost maintenance cost and servicecosts (water electricity etc)

The estimated annual operation cost of the SFR nuclearfuel manufacturing facilities is shown in Table 5

413 Decommissioning Cost For the decommissioning costof the SFR nuclear fuel manufacture facilitiesit is assumedthat 1 of the direct investment cost is accumulated everyyear for a lifespan period of 60 years in consideration of thescale of the facilities based on expert judgment [9] Generallythe decommissioning cost of a nuclear facility is calculated tobe 10ndash20 of the direct investment cost This cost includesthe cost of the disposal of equipment The accumulatedannual decommissioning cost is 4626000USD and the totaldecommissioning cost is estimated to be 277544000USD

42 Cost Estimation Method The general cost estimationmethods are analogy cost estimation parametric cost estima-tion and engineering cost estimation

The analogous cost estimation method selects the similarcost object The parameter cost estimation method assumesthe total cost as a dependent variable and sets the charac-teristics (facility scale production quantity of nuclear fueletc) of the prime cost as an independent variable Thereforethe parameter estimation method can be expressed as aregression model

The engineering cost estimation method carries out adetailed estimation from the lowphase which is a componentof the prime cost object and accumulates up to the highest

Table 5 Annual operation costs of SFR fuel cycle facilities

Description Estimated cost(kUSD)

Ratio()

O ampM costStaff 18184 12Materials 92601 62Equipment replacement 28456 19Utilities 9530 7Total 148771 100

phase to calculate the total cost [10] Therefore we need tofirst conduct a conceptual design for the cost object

Other cost estimation methods include expert estima-tions and the earned value management system (EVMS)method In the expert estimation method a one-to-oneinterviewwith an expert is conducted ormultiple experts aregathered in one place to conduct a group decision making

The earned value management system (EVMS) methodintegrates the schedule and cost of the business Thereforethe EVMS can be classified into plan elements measure-ment elements and analysis elements The plan elementsare the work breakdown structure control account andperformance measurement baseline while the measurementelements are composed of the actual cost and earned valueThe earned value means the budgeted cost for work per-formed In addition the analysis elements are the scheduledvariance cost variance and schedule performance indexThepurpose of an EVMS is to accurately evaluate the quantitativeperformance and is a method that can be used tomeasure theefficiency of the investment cost

In addition the levelized unit cost which is used a lotin the engineering cost estimation method was used Thelevelized unit cost (LUC) can be expressed as in (1) using thecontinuous discount rate 119877 if it is assumed that the electricpower production is continued [11]

LUC = PVPBinttime exp (minus119877119905) 119862119894119889119905inttime exp (minus119877119905) 119876119894119889119905

(1)

Here LUC is levelized unit cost PV is present value PB ispresent benefits 119862

119894is costs for the year 119876

119894is benefits of

the year such as processing volume of uranium or electricitygeneration 119877 = ln(1 + 119903) and 119903 is discount rate

43 Cash Flow Figure 6 shows a graph expression of theannual cost trends as overnight costs of investment OampMand DampD using (1) based on the end of 2009 on theassumption that the time of initiating the operation of the SFRnuclear fuel manufacturing facilities is 2051 the constructionperiod is 7 years and the lifespan period is 60 years

The present cost at the end of the year 2009 needed forthe SFR nuclear fuel manufacture facilities was calculated tobe about 531779 k$ and the present treatment quantity isestimated to be about 965 tHM If the total cost needed forthe SFR nuclear fuel manufacturing facilities is subdivided


Cos

ts (k

$)Costs (k$)

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

02044 2054 2064 2074 2084 2094 2104

(Years)

Years

Investment

Investment

O and MD and D

O and M D and D204420452046204720482049205020512052int

2110Total

4596873549919361379051838732298411562920

int

0919364

148771

148771

int

8926282

4626

int

2775444626

998400998400 998400998400 998400998400

Figure 6 Cost trends of SFR facilities

it is composed of the investment cost of 138962 k$ (26)the operation and maintenance cost of 380971 k$ (72) andthe decontamination and decommissioning cost of 11845 k$(2) These three main costs (investment cost OampM costand DampD cost) were discounted by 5 using (2) with theannual cost from 2044 to 2110 as shown in Figure 6

NPV = sum119905

AC (119905)(1 + 119903)

119884119888minus119884119887

(2)

Here NPV is net present value AC is annual cost 119903 isdiscount rate 119884

119888is current year and 119884

119887is base year

As the result of dividing the total present value of theSFR nuclear fuel manufacturing facilities by the total presenttreatment quantity as a benefit the levelized unit cost (LUC)for SFR nuclear fuel manufacturing facilities was calculatedto be 5311 $kgHM

5 The Break-Even Point Analysis

Generally the break-even point is the point where total rev-enue equals total cost (ie the point of zero profit)Thereforein this paper only the SFR nuclear fuel manufacture cost ischanged and fixed values for all other costs were used todefine the SFR nuclear fuel manufacturing cost in which thedirect disposal is equal to the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle costas the break-even point as in (3) [12]

The direct disposal is considered applicable to verticaldisposal in 500m underground granitic rocks The objectsof disposal cost are limited to the deep geological repositorywith disposal capacity covering PWR spent fuel (20000 tons)on the assumption that the PWRrsquos initial enrichment is 45

and its burnup is 55GWDMtU In addition the cooling timeis assumed to last for 10 years [13]

BEPSFR Fuel Manufacturing

= TC119863minus (MC + CC + EC + ISC + RCPyro + DCPyro Waste)

= 0

(3)

Here BEPSFR FuelManufacturing is a breakeven point of the man-ufacturing cost of metallic SFR fuel for the direct disposaloption TC

119863is the total cost of direct disposal option MC

is the raw material cost CC is the conversion cost EC is theenrichment cost ISC is the interim storage cost RCPyro is thepyroprocess cost and DCPyroWaste is the disposal cost of thepyrowaste

Additionally if the break-even point is expressed in costaccounting it could be expressed as [14]

BEPAccounting =FC

UCM (4)

Here FC is the fixed cost and UCM is the unit contributionmargin

In (4) the fixed cost is the investment cost of the SFRnuclear fuel manufacturing facilities and the unit contribu-tion margin is the value calculated by dividing the value ofthe subtraction of the variable cost from the total revenue bythe output [14]

UCM = TR minus VCQ (5)

Here TR is the total revenue VC is the variable cost and119876 isthe output

In (5) the total revenue can be calculated as the fuelsales and the variable cost can use the operation cost change


Table 6 Input data for economic assessment of SFR fuel

Category Unit Reference Minimum MaximumUranium $kgU 150 53 318Conversionlowast $kgU 6 3 9Enrichmentlowast $SWU 165 84 210Reprocessing cost

UO2 pyroprocess (reductionrefining)$kgHM 781 373 1866

SFR metal fuel pyroprocess $kgHM 2000 1000 2500Fabrication cost

UO2 fuellowast $kgHM 256 206 307

SFR metal fuel $kgHM 3000 1000 4000Storage costlowast

UO2 SF dry storage $kgHM 180 78 392UO2 pyroprocess HLW dry storage $m3 120000 80000 200000SFR pyroprocess HLW dry storage $m3 120000 80000 200000

Disposal costLILW (long lived)lowast $m3 6000 4000 8000Packing (PWR SF)lowast $kgHM 350 250 500HLW (underground cost) $m3 1200 600 2000

lowastOECDNEA advanced nuclear fuel cycles and radioactive waste management 2006 [7]

75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Direct disposal cost

Pyroprocess and SFR metal fuel fabrication cost ($kgHM)

Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM

This cost was calculated based on the conceptualdesign of PWR repository [13]

Figure 7 The break-even point of the manufacturing cost of SFR metallic nuclear fuel

according to the output of the nuclear fuel of the SFR nuclearfuel manufacturing facilities The output can also use thequantity of manufacturing of SFR nuclear fuelTherefore thebreak-even point obtained with the method of accountingmeans the quantity of the manufacturing of the SFR nuclearfuel which makes the revenue equal to the cost Howeverin this paper through an analysis of the comparative costof the direct disposal and Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle as in(3) rather than using the method of cost accounting thebreak-even point of the SFR nuclear fuel manufacture costwas calculated This is because the method of calculating thebreak-even point in the accounting method should use thepast actual cost to make the reliability of the cost calculationresults Therefore calculating the break-even point using theengineering cost estimation method which uses the nuclearfuel cycle cost can be regarded as a valid method whoseaccuracy is somewhat higher [15]

51 Input Data The input data used to calculate the nuclearcycle cost can be largely divided into the economic data andtechnical data In particular the unit cost should be adjustedto the cost at which the inflation index is reflected in case aconstant price is not used Namely it is necessary to calculatethe cost fitting for a certain standard year The input data isshown in Table 6 In addition it is assumed that the cost ofconstruction of the SFR is about 20higher than that of light-water reactor [7]

52 The Break-Even Point Calculation Result As a resultof calculating the cost of the nuclear fuel cycle using thereference value in Table 6 the direct disposal cost wascalculated to be 671millskWh and the Pyro-SFR fuel cyclecost was calculated to be 660millskWh using (1)

In addition as a result of calculating the break-even pointof themanufacture cost of SFRmetallic nuclear fuel for direct


Table 7 Equations for the direct disposal cost

Recharge interval 119877119894=

119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC

Quantity of fabrication Qf(119905) =119862119904

119873119887

119905 = batch

Quantity of enrichment Qe (119905) = [119881 (EL) + (EL minus 119879

119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)

Quantity of conversion Qc (119905) =EL minus 119879

119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)

Quantity of uranium Qu (119905) = Qc (119905) (1 + LF)

Spent fuel generation Qsf (119905) =119875365119862

119891

120576BU

Cost of uranium Cu = sum119905

Qu(119905) sdot UCu sdot (1 + 119864U)119871(119905)minusLEDuminusYRc

(1 + 119863)119871(119905)minusLEDuminusYRp

Cost of conversion Cc = sum119905

Qc(119905) sdot UCc sdot (1 + 119864119888)119871(119905)minusLEDcminusYRc

(1 + 119863)119871(119905)minusLEDcminusYRp

Cost of enrichment Ce = sum119905

Qe(119905) sdot UCe sdot (1 + 119864119890)119871(119905) minus LEDe minus YRc

(1 + 119863)119871(119905)minusLEDeminusYRp

Cost of fabrication Cf = sum119905

Qf(119905) sdot UCf sdot (1 + 119864119891)119871(119905)minusLEDfminusYRc

(1 + 119863)119871(119905)minusLEDfminusYRp

Cost of transportationapplied LAG time

Ct = sum119905

Qsf(119905) sdot UCt sdot (1 + 119864119905)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRc

(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp

Cost of storage Cs = sum119905

Qsf(119905) sdot UCs sdot (1 + 119864119904)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRc

(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp

Cost of disposal Cd = sum119905

Qsf(119905) sdot UCd sdot (1 + 119864119889)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRc

(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp

Total cost of directdisposal option TC

119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)

119877119894 recharge interval 119862119904 core size 119873119887 total number of batches BU burn up MWt thermal power 119862119891 load (Capacity) factor 119871(t) loading time 119863(t)discharging time LED lead times LAG lag times 119865119888 fixed unit cost 119881119888 variable unit cost 119862uc construction unit cost ($kW) 119877 fixed charge rate 119879 8760(=365 days times 24 hours) 119868119888 consumption rate in power plant NFCC nuclear fuel cycle cost EL enrichment of equilibrium core NAT enrichment of naturaluranium119879119886 tail assay LF loss rate factor119881(119909) = (2119909minus1)ln(119909(1minus119909)) Cu cost of uraniumQu(t) quantity of uranium119875 capacity (MWe) 120576 thermodynamicefficiency (MWeMWt) UC unit cost UCu unit cost of uranium Eu escalation rate of uranium119863 discount rate YRt base year Qsf(t) quantity of spent fuelTC119863(t) total cost of direct disposal option Cu(t) uranium cost Cc(t) conversion cost Ce(t) enrichment cost Cf(t) fabrication cost Ct(t) transportationcost Cs(t) storage cost Cd(t) disposal cost t years

disposal using the equations in Table 7 the break-even pointwas calculated to be $5267kgHM as shown in Figure 7

Therefore the pyroprocess cost and the SFR metallicnuclear fuel manufacture cost $5272kgHM exceeds thebreak-even point of $5267kgHM slightly Here an inflationrate of 23 is applied because the inflation rate was specifiedas 23 in the Korea Radioactive Waste Management Law[16]

In addition the cost difference between the break-evenpoint and estimated cost of SFCF is within the relevantrange of the uncertainty level of Class 3 in accordance withthe general cost estimate classification matrix of AACE (theAssociation for the Advancement of Cost Engineering) It isexpected that the calculated break-even point will be used asa valuable clue for estimating the economic feasibility of theSFR metallic nuclear fuel in the future

6 Conclusions

The break-even point of the manufacturing cost of the SFRnuclear fuel using the nuclear fuel cycle cost was calculated tobe $5267kgHM Namely if the manufacturing cost of SFRmetallic nuclear fuel including the pyroprocess cost is lessthan $5267kgHM we can say that the economic feasibilityof the SFR metallic nuclear fuel in the Pyro-SFR nuclearcycle exists In other words if the SFCF cost excluding thepyroprocess cost of $2000kgHM announced in the reportof the OECDNEA in 2006 is less than $3267 it can bejudged that the economic feasibility of SFR metallic nuclearfuel exists

In this paper the investment cost of the manufacturingfacilities of SFR nuclear fuel was estimated to be about919MUSD the annual operation cost was about 149MUSD


and the decontamination and decommissioning cost wasabout 5MUSD based on the price at the end of 2009 Inaddition the levelized unit cost of the manufacturing ofSFR metallic nuclear fuel including the pyroprocess cost wascalculated to be 5311 $kgHM and it exceeded the break-evenpoint $5267kgHM Therefore based on the manufacturingcost of the metallic nuclear fuel the cost difference betweenthe break-even point and the estimated cost of SFCF isnot only small but also within the relevant range of theuncertainty level of Class 3 AACE estimate

Manufacturing facilities of SFR nuclear fuel are presentlyin the stage of research and development and no commercialscale processing equipment and facilities exist

To reduce this uncertainty therefore is difficult to judgethe economic feasibility However if the technology devel-opments of a mass production pyroprocess system and SFRmetallic nuclear fuel manufacturing facilities are enhancedthe economics of SFRmetallic nuclear fuel are expected to bebetter

Acknowledgment

This work was supported financially by the Ministry ofEducation Science and Technology under the Mid- andLong-Term Nuclear R amp D Project and the authors expresstheir sincere gratitude for supporting this important work

References

[1] D C Wade and R N Hill ldquoThe design rationale of the IFRrdquoProgress in Nuclear Energy vol 31 no 1-2 pp 13ndash42 1997

[2] H Ohmura K Mizuguchi S Kanamura et al ldquoDevelopmentof hybrid reprocessing technology based on solvent extractionand pyro-chemical electrolysisrdquo Progress in Nuclear Energy vol53 pp 940ndash943 2011

[3] K sungjinTheTheory of Cost Estimation Dunam Press SeoulRepublic of Korea 2010

[4] J J Laidler L Burris E D Collins et al ldquoChemical partitioningtechnologies for an ATW systemrdquo Progress in Nuclear Energyvol 38 no 1-2 pp 65ndash79 2001

[5] KAERI ldquoDevelopment of Head-end Pyrochemical ReductionProcess for Advanced Oxide Fuelsrdquo KAERIRR-2939 2007

[6] C E Boardman M Thompson C E Walter and C SEhrman ldquoThe separations technology and transmutation sys-tems (STATS) report -implications for nuclear power growthand energy sufficiencyrdquo Progress in Nuclear Energy vol 32 no3-4 pp 411ndash419 1998

[7] OECDNEA Advanced Nuclear Fuel Cycles and RadioactiveWaste Management OECD Publishing 2006 Appendix L

[8] C E Till Y I Chang and W H Hannum ldquoThe integral fastreactor-an overviewrdquo Progress in Nuclear Energy vol 31 no 1-2pp 3ndash11 1997

[9] KAERI ldquoPreliminary Conceptual Design and Cost Estimationfor SFR fuel cycle facilityrdquo KAERICM-1383 2010

[10] D E Shropshire K A Williams W B Boore et al AdvancedFuel Cycle Cost Basis Idaho National Laboratory Idaho FallsIdaho USA 2008

[11] OECDNEA ldquoThe Economics of the Nuclear Fuel Cyclerdquo TechRep NEAEFCDOC(93) 1993

[12] KAERI ldquoDevelopment of System Engineering Technology forNuclear Fuel Cyclerdquo KAERIRR-3426 2011

[13] KAERI ldquoKAERIrsquos spent fuel repository design evaluation andcost estimationrdquo RampD Report 2003-02 2003

[14] M Maryanne Mowen R don Hansen and L dan HeitgerManagerial Accounting South-Western Press 4th edition 2012

[15] S K Kim W I Ko H D Kim S T Revankar W Zhou and DJo ldquoCost-benefit analysis of BeO-UO

2nuclear fuelrdquo Progress in

Nuclear Energy vol 52 no 8 pp 813ndash821 2010[16] ldquoMinistry of Knowledge Economyrdquo RadioactiveWasteManage-

ment Law Article 15 Section 1 2009


to decrease the scale of a high-level waste repository therecycling of spent fuel is inevitable In addition to increasethe efficiency of uranium use the development of an SFR andSFR fuel cycle facilities (SFCF) is necessary

Pyroprocess which is a dry reprocessing method con-verts the spent fuel into metal in high-temperature moltensalt phase and decreases the volume of the spent fuel toincrease its economic feasibility of disposal innovatively [1]

Namely the technology of the Pyro-SFRnuclear fuel cycleis one of the alternatives that can fundamentally solve theproblem of spent fuel management and is known to be anadvanced technology with high proliferation resistance [2]

Some experts however still have doubt whether Pyro-SFR nuclear cycle technology is feasible in terms of tech-nology know-how and economics Therefore to introducefacilities related to the SFR nuclear cycle not only continuousresearch on the manufacture process of SFR metallic nuclearfuel but also the review of the economic feasibility of thepyroprocess for SFR spent fuel is required

This paper defines the design requirements of SFRnuclearfuel manufacturing facilities and calculates the manufactur-ing cost of SFR nuclear fuel using the engineering cost esti-mationmethod In addition by comparing the direct disposalcost with the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle cost the break-even point of the SFR metallic nuclear fuel manufacture costwas elicited This is because the manufacturing cost of SFRmetallic nuclear fuel is a major cost driver of the Pyro-SFRnuclear fuel cycle cost

2 Conceptual Design of SFR Facility

To calculate the break-even point of the manufacturing costof SFR metallic nuclear fuel we should first calculate thePyro-SFR nuclear cycle cost based on Figures 1 and 2 andto do this we should estimate the cost of the manufacturefacilities of the SFR nuclear fuel Therefore a conceptualdesign of SFR facilities as shown in Figure 1 is necessaryThe engineering cost estimation method using a conceptualdesign is for now a realistic method with high reliability [3]and can calculate the cost of SFR nuclear fuel in manufactur-ing facilities

We can calculate the cost of investment in the facilitiesused for SFR nuclear fuel manufacturing as well as the oper-ation and maintenance cost (OampM) and decontaminationand decommissioning (DampD) cost from the bottom up Thecost calculation of SFRmetallic nuclear fuel manufacturing isshown in Figure 3

21 Major Function of SFR Fuel Cycle Facility (SFCF) TheSFR fuel cycle facility (SFCF) recycles the spent fuel dis-charged from the SFR of 6 units of a 600MWe as shownFigure 2

In the main manufacture facility after going through thehead-end processes such as inspection dissolution cuttingand removing sodium of the spent fuel uranium is collectedthrough the electrorefining process [4] and by collecting theremaining uranium and TRU (transuranium) through theelectrowinning process [5]

Table 1 Design standard of SFR fuel cycle facilities

Capacity

Annual SFR SF3294 tHMyr (912 tTRUyr) SF of SFR 6unit (600MWe per unit)

Manufacturing ofSFR new fuel

HM 3862 tHMyr TRU 114 tTRUyrannual manufacturing of fuel rod327139yr annual fuel assemblies1207yr

Plant function Head-end process pyroprocessmanufacturing of SFR nuclear fuel

Annual load factor 55 200 dayyearDesign lifetime 60 yearInput material UTRURE metal ingot SFR spent fuel

Output material initial and make-up SFR new fuel waste(ceramic metal)

Fuel compositionFuel composition U-206 wt TRU-10wtMA composition lt5wtRE composition lt5wtInjection Sodium

The collected uranium and U-TRU ingot are recycled asSFR nuclear fuel after going through the metallic nuclear fuelmanufacture process [6]

In addition in KAPF (Korea Advanced PyroprocessFacility Plus) uranium metal (U metal UTRU metal)produced by treating light-water nuclear reactor (PWR) spentfuel in the pyroprocess is supplied to the SFR nuclear fuelmanufacturing facility and used for the initial core andsupplement

22 Design Requirement and Criteria Thedesign standard ofSFCF (SFR fuel cycle facility) is shown in Table 1

23 Reference Spent Fuel of SFR It is assumed that thereference SFR spent fuel is cooled in the storage tank for 5years or longer after being taken out from the SFR and theaverage burnup is 91429MWdtHMThe composition of themajor nuclear material before and after the burnup is shownin Table 2

3 Material Flow of SFR Nuclear Fuel

To calculate the cost of the Pyro-SFR nuclear cycle thenuclear material balance of each process was calculated Todo this if we look at the flow of the manufacturing processthe core process of the SFR nuclear fuel manufacture facilityis largely divided into the head-end process the pyroprocessand the SFR nuclear fuel manufacture process

The flow of pyroprocess is as shown in Figure 4 Thepyroprocess was done in an argon gas atmosphere with littleair (le50 ppm O

2)

The SFR nuclear fuel manufacturing facility receives theSFR spent fuel of 3294 tHM annually based on 200 days


Utilitiesbuilding

Gasstation



Wastestorage

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

Stagingstorage area


21 tUyr


Assemblyfabrication

Fuelfabrication



Salttreatment

recycle

Waste

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

281tHMyr(227 tRUyr)

054 tUyr

386 tHMyr(113TRUyr)

329tTRUyr(91tTRUyr)

SFR SF


Exteriorpyroprocess

facility


Designrequirements


Facility design


Expertreview

Expertreview

Material laborcost

Cost evaluation

Final report





NFBC

LiCl-KClwith UCl3

Anodesludge


RE

RemovalNa

Hull

U-dendrite

Cd

Cddistillation



Salt

TRUUCd Salt(RETRU)

Cleaned salt

SFR spentoxide fuel

TRURE




Cathodeprocessor




Fuel loading

Charging of sodium

Leaking test of He


Wire rapping











4 Cost Estimation

41 Cost Structure




New fuel


Ratio ()


Spent fuel


Ratio ()


Table 2 Continued

Spent fuel






Head-end cell


Electrorefining









cost(kUSD)

Ratio()













Ratio()







(1)








Cos

ts (k

$)Costs (k$)

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

02044 2054 2064 2074 2084 2094 2104

(Years)

Years

Investment

Investment

O and MD and D

O and M D and D204420452046204720482049205020512052int

2110Total

4596873549919361379051838732298411562920

int

0919364

148771

148771

int

8926282

4626

int

2775444626

998400998400 998400998400 998400998400



NPV = sum119905

AC (119905)(1 + 119903)

119884119888minus119884119887

(2)



119887is base year








= 0

(3)





BEPAccounting =FC

UCM (4)
















75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000



Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM










119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References




















Utilitiesbuilding

Gasstation



Wastestorage

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

Stagingstorage area


21 tUyr


Assemblyfabrication

Fuelfabrication



Salttreatment

recycle

Waste

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

SFR600

MWe

281tHMyr(227 tRUyr)

054 tUyr

386 tHMyr(113TRUyr)

329tTRUyr(91tTRUyr)

SFR SF


Exteriorpyroprocess

facility


Designrequirements


Facility design


Expertreview

Expertreview

Material laborcost

Cost evaluation

Final report





NFBC

LiCl-KClwith UCl3

Anodesludge


RE

RemovalNa

Hull

U-dendrite

Cd

Cddistillation



Salt

TRUUCd Salt(RETRU)

Cleaned salt

SFR spentoxide fuel

TRURE




Cathodeprocessor




Fuel loading

Charging of sodium

Leaking test of He


Wire rapping











4 Cost Estimation

41 Cost Structure




New fuel


Ratio ()


Spent fuel


Ratio ()


Table 2 Continued

Spent fuel






Head-end cell


Electrorefining









cost(kUSD)

Ratio()













Ratio()







(1)








Cos

ts (k

$)Costs (k$)

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

02044 2054 2064 2074 2084 2094 2104

(Years)

Years

Investment

Investment

O and MD and D

O and M D and D204420452046204720482049205020512052int

2110Total

4596873549919361379051838732298411562920

int

0919364

148771

148771

int

8926282

4626

int

2775444626

998400998400 998400998400 998400998400



NPV = sum119905

AC (119905)(1 + 119903)

119884119888minus119884119887

(2)



119887is base year








= 0

(3)





BEPAccounting =FC

UCM (4)
















75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000



Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM










119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References




















NFBC

LiCl-KClwith UCl3

Anodesludge


RE

RemovalNa

Hull

U-dendrite

Cd

Cddistillation



Salt

TRUUCd Salt(RETRU)

Cleaned salt

SFR spentoxide fuel

TRURE




Cathodeprocessor




Fuel loading

Charging of sodium

Leaking test of He


Wire rapping











4 Cost Estimation

41 Cost Structure




New fuel


Ratio ()


Spent fuel


Ratio ()


Table 2 Continued

Spent fuel






Head-end cell


Electrorefining









cost(kUSD)

Ratio()













Ratio()







(1)








Cos

ts (k

$)Costs (k$)

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

02044 2054 2064 2074 2084 2094 2104

(Years)

Years

Investment

Investment

O and MD and D

O and M D and D204420452046204720482049205020512052int

2110Total

4596873549919361379051838732298411562920

int

0919364

148771

148771

int

8926282

4626

int

2775444626

998400998400 998400998400 998400998400



NPV = sum119905

AC (119905)(1 + 119903)

119884119888minus119884119887

(2)



119887is base year








= 0

(3)





BEPAccounting =FC

UCM (4)
















75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000



Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM










119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References





















New fuel


Ratio ()


Spent fuel


Ratio ()


Table 2 Continued

Spent fuel






Head-end cell


Electrorefining









cost(kUSD)

Ratio()













Ratio()







(1)








Cos

ts (k

$)Costs (k$)

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

02044 2054 2064 2074 2084 2094 2104

(Years)

Years

Investment

Investment

O and MD and D

O and M D and D204420452046204720482049205020512052int

2110Total

4596873549919361379051838732298411562920

int

0919364

148771

148771

int

8926282

4626

int

2775444626

998400998400 998400998400 998400998400



NPV = sum119905

AC (119905)(1 + 119903)

119884119888minus119884119887

(2)



119887is base year








= 0

(3)





BEPAccounting =FC

UCM (4)
















75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000



Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM










119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References






















cost(kUSD)

Ratio()













Ratio()







(1)








Cos

ts (k

$)Costs (k$)

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

02044 2054 2064 2074 2084 2094 2104

(Years)

Years

Investment

Investment

O and MD and D

O and M D and D204420452046204720482049205020512052int

2110Total

4596873549919361379051838732298411562920

int

0919364

148771

148771

int

8926282

4626

int

2775444626

998400998400 998400998400 998400998400



NPV = sum119905

AC (119905)(1 + 119903)

119884119888minus119884119887

(2)



119887is base year








= 0

(3)





BEPAccounting =FC

UCM (4)
















75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000



Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM










119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References




















Cos

ts (k

$)Costs (k$)

250000

200000

150000

100000

50000

02044 2054 2064 2074 2084 2094 2104

(Years)

Years

Investment

Investment

O and MD and D

O and M D and D204420452046204720482049205020512052int

2110Total

4596873549919361379051838732298411562920

int

0919364

148771

148771

int

8926282

4626

int

2775444626

998400998400 998400998400 998400998400



NPV = sum119905

AC (119905)(1 + 119903)

119884119888minus119884119887

(2)



119887is base year








= 0

(3)





BEPAccounting =FC

UCM (4)
















75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000



Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM










119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References





























75

7

65

6

55

51000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000



Pyro

-SFR

NFC

C (m

ills

kWh)

5 267$kgHM










119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References






















119862119904

119873119887

times

BUMWt times 119862

119891times 365

(Unit year)

Generation cost 119862 = 119865119888+ 119881119888=

119862uc sdot 119877

119879 sdot 119880119903sdot (1 minus 119868

119888)

+ NFCC


119873119887

119905 = batch


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

minus 1) sdot 119881 (119879119886) minus

EL minus 119879119886

NAT minus 119879119886

119881 (NAT)]Qf (119905) (1 + LF)


119886

NAT minus 119879119886

Qf (119905) (1 + LF)



119891

120576BU














Ct = sum119905


(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGtminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGsminusYRp



(1 + 119863)119863(119905)+LAGdminusYRp


119863= Cu(119905) + Cc(119905) + Ce(119905) + Cf(119905) + Ct(119905) + Cs(119905) + Cd(119905)





6 Conclusions







Acknowledgment


References























Acknowledgment


References



















Documents

Economic Viability of Metallic Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor ......Electrorefining Annualthroughput:32.94tHM Throughputperbatch:45.75kgHM/batch Volumeofmoltensalt:2,900kg LiCl-KCl/batch—1unit