DOCSLIB.ORG

Prism: a Competitive Small Modular Sodium-Cooled Reactor

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Prism: a Competitive Small Modular Sodium-Cooled Reactor PRISM: A COMPETITIVE SMALL FISSION REACTORS MODULAR SODIUM-COOLED REACTOR KEYWORDS: spent/used nuclear fuel recycling, integral fast reac- BRIAN S. TRIPLETT,* ERIC P. LOEWEN, and BRETT J. DOOIES tor, pyroprocessing GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy, 3901 Castle Hayne Road, Wilmington, North Carolina 28401 Received May 7, 2010 Accepted for Publication July 12, 2010 The Power Reactor Innovative Small Module (PRISM) ulatory Commission stated that “On the basis of the re- designed by GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy is a small, mod- view performed, the staff, with the ACRS [Advisory ular, sodium-cooled fast reactor. The PRISM core is lo- Committee on Reactor Safeguards] in agreement, con- cated in a pool-type containment vessel and is fueled cludes that no obvious impediments to licensing the PRISM with metallic fuel. Each PRISM produces 311 MW of design have been identified.” PRISM is able to fission electricity. The PRISM is inherently safe due to its neg- electrometallurgically recycled used nuclear fuel (UNF) ative power reactivity feedback, large in-vessel coolant from light water reactors as well as weapons-grade ma- inventory, passive heat removal systems, below-grade sit- terials. PRISM, with the associated Nuclear Fuel Re- ing, and atmospheric reactor vessel operating pressure. cycling Center, represents a safe, diversion resistant, In NUREG-1368, “Preapplication Safety Evaluation Re- commercially viable technology for recycling UNF with port for the Power Reactor Innovative Small Module a small modular reactor. (PRISM) Liquid-Metal Reactor,” the U.S. Nuclear Reg- I. INTRODUCTION Department of Energy’s Global Nuclear Energy Partner- ship5 ~GNEP!. Under GNEP, GEH proposed the Ad- The concept of a liquid-metal–cooled reactor dates vanced Recycling Center ~ARC! as a commercial solution back to the genesis of nuclear energy. The first nuclear for nuclear fuel recycling. The ARC is composed of reactor to generate electricity was the liquid sodium- the Nuclear Fuel Recycling Center ~NFRC! and PRISM. potassium–cooled fast reactor Experimental Breeder Re- Together these two technologies are used to produce actor I ~EBR-I!~Ref. 1!. EBR-I’s successor, the sodium- electricity from recycled used nuclear fuel ~UNF!. The cooled fast reactor ~SFR! Experimental Breeder Reactor ARC consists of six PRISMs, each producing a net II ~EBR-II!, operated successfully for more than 30 311 MW of electricity. Two PRISMs are paired to- years, producing 20 MW of electricity via a sodium- gether in a power block to supply a 622-MW turbine- steam power cycle.2 Another SFR, S2G, supplied power generator. The total ARC electrical output is 1866 MW. to the United States’ second nuclear submarine, USS The fuel for the six PRISM reactors is supplied by a Seawolf ~SSN-575!, for two years of intensive Cold single NFRC, which is able to process light water reac- War operations. The S2G plant was designed and built tor ~LWR! UNF, PRISM UNF, and weapons-grade ma- by General Electric ~GE!. In the 1980s and 1990s, GE terial into PRISM fuel. led an industrial team that pursued commercial deploy- At end of life, LWR UNF is composed of ;95% ment of an SFR called Power Reactor Innovative Small uranium, 1% transuranics, and 4% fission products.6 Many Module ~PRISM! as part of the U.S. Advanced Liquid of these transuranic isotopes have long half-lives, which Metal Reactor ~ALMR! program administered by the can create long-term engineering challenges for geologic U.S. Department of Energy.3,4 disposal.7 The Integral Fast Reactor ~IFR! concept pro- In 2006, GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy ~GEH! revi- poses the recycling of the 96% of the fissionable material talized the PRISM engineering efforts as part of the ~uranium and transuranics! remaining in LWR UNF ~Ref. 8!. In this process, the uranium and transuranic *E-mail: [email protected] material is continually recycled via electrometallurgical 186 NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY VOL. 178 MAY 2012 Triplett et al. PRISM: A SMALL MODULAR Na-COOLED REACTOR processing ~pyroprocessing! in a metal-fueled, sodium- ucts. The fission product waste requires a few hundred cooled fast reactor. The ARC is the commercialization of years of repository management time as opposed to the this IFR concept. Through PRISM and the NFRC, the tens of thousands of years required for mixed-oxide re- ARC is designed to generate electricity by fully re- processed UNF and0or weapons-grade materials. The re- cycling the usable fissionable material in UNF and re- sulting metallic and ceramic waste forms from the ARC formed weapons-grade material.9 process are significantly more resistant to corrosion and are less susceptible to leeching into the environment than I.A. NFRC Overview untreated UNF ~Ref. 10!. The NFRC uses the century-old electrometallurgical I.B. PRISM Overview separations process employed by the aluminum industry for separating aluminum from alumina. This electromet- The PRISM is a pool-type, metal-fueled, small mod- allurgical process has been proved and deployed on a ular SFR. PRISM employs passive safety, digital instru- laboratory and engineering scale for nuclear materials by mentation and control, and modular fabrication techniques both Argonne National Laboratory ~ANL! and Idaho Na- to expedite plant construction.14–17 The PRISM has a tional Laboratory10 ~INL!. Separations are accomplished rated thermal power of 840 MW and an electrical output by dissolving UNF in a molten salt bath and applying an of 311 MW. Each PRISM has an intermediate sodium electrical potential across the solution. The uranium and loop that exchanges heat between the primary sodium transuranics plate out on an anode and are subsequently coolant from the core with water0steam in a sodium- removed from the solution. water steam generator. The steam from the sodium-water With the NFRC process, nonproliferation concerns steam generator feeds a conventional steam turbine. A are alleviated by the intrinsic diversion resistance of the diagram of the PRISM nuclear steam supply system electrometallurgical process.9,11 All transuranics ~Np, Pu, ~NSSS! is shown in Fig. 1. Am, Cm! are separated en masse in one step of the elec- Two PRISMs are paired to form one power block. A trometallurgical process. These transuranics are contin- PRISM power block is shown in Fig. 2. The power block ually recycled in the PRISM until they are fissioned supplies steam for one 622-MW turbine-generator. The completely.12,13 commercial PRISM plant achieves a high capacity factor The waste that results from the NFRC process is the by utilizing six reactor modules and their associated steam genuine waste from nuclear processes, the fission prod- generating systems arranged in three identical power Fig. 1. PRISM NSSS. NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY VOL. 178 MAY 2012 187 Triplett et al. PRISM: A SMALL MODULAR Na-COOLED REACTOR Fig. 2. PRISM power block. blocks. An unplanned outage in one PRISM module or TABLE I power block does not impact the plant electrical output as Nominal ARC Parameters dramatically as it does in a large single-unit site. Plant electrical output can be tailored to utility needs Overall plant by the modular addition of power blocks. This modular- Electrical output 1866 MW Thermal efficiency 37% ity allows expansion from one power block to as many as Number of power blocks 3 desired by the utility on one site. The nominal ARC with ~per plant! three power blocks has a total electrical output of Number of reactor modules 6 1866 MW. The nominal system parameters of the refer- ~per plant! ence ARC with three power blocks are summarized in Power block Table I. Number of reactor modules 2 The remainder of this paper focuses on the PRISM ~per block! Net electrical output 622 MW component of theARC. It presents a design overview and Number of steam generators 2 a summary of the commercialization plan for the ARC. Steam generator type Helical coil Information concerning the balance of plant interfaces is Steam cycle Superheated steam provided as necessary to provide clarity of the reactor Turbine type 3600 rpm, tandem compound, description. four flow Turbine throttle conditions 14.7 MPa ~2135 psia!0 4528C ~8468F! Main steam flow 2738 Mg0h ~6.024 ϫ 106 lb0h! II. DESCRIPTION OF PRISM Feedwater temperature 2168C ~4208F! Reactor module Thermal power 840 MW A PRISM module, pictured in Fig. 3, consists of the Primary sodium inlet0outlet 3608C ~6808F!04998C ~9308F! reactor vessel, reactor closure, containment vessel, inter- temperature nal structures, internal components, reactor module sup- Primary sodium flow rate 5.4 m30s ~86 000 gal0min! ports, and reactor core. The reactor vessel outer diameter Intermediate sodium inlet0 3268C ~6198F!04778C ~8908F! can be fabricated in sizes of 6.6 m ~Mod A! or 10 m outlet temperature Intermediate sodium flow rate 5.1 m30s ~80 180 gal0min! ~Mod B! depending on customer shipping constraints. The Mod A core has a smaller thermal output of 425 MW but is shippable by rail, whereas the Mod B has an 840-MW thermal output and is shippable by barge and overland transportation. The power levels of the associ- II.A. Containment Vessel and Reactor Internals ated cores are primarily limited by the shutdown heat removal capabilities of the passive safety systems. A de- The outermost structure of the reactor module is the tailed discussion of the cost-benefit of reactor vessel0 containment vessel. The containment vessel contains the thermal power sizing is presented in Ref.18. Mod B vessels reactor vessel and internals and is sealed with a reactor are considered as the nominal configuration for the pur- closure. The inside of the reactor vessel is filled with poses of this work. liquid sodium and a helium cover gas. The helium cover 188 NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY VOL. 178 MAY 2012 Triplett et al. PRISM: A SMALL MODULAR Na-COOLED REACTOR Fig.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category
    小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category Airborne contamination sensor Title Depth Evaluation of Entrained Products (DEEP) Proposed by Create Technologies Ltd & Costain Group PLC １．DEEP is a sensor analysis software for analysing contamination. DEEP can distinguish between surface contamination and internal / absorbed contamination. The software measures contamination depth by analysing distortions in the gamma spectrum. The method can be applied to data gathered using any spectrometer. Because DEEP provides a means of discriminating surface contamination from other radiation sources, DEEP can be used to provide an estimate of surface contamination without physical sampling. DEEP is a real-time method which enables the user to generate a large number of rapid contamination assessments- this data is complementary to physical samples, providing a sound basis for extrapolation from point samples. It also helps identify anomalies enabling targeted sampling startegies. DEEP is compatible with small airborne spectrometer/ processor combinations, such as that proposed by the ARM-U project – please refer to the ARM-U proposal for more details of the air vehicle. Figure 1: DEEP system core components are small, light, low power and can be integrated via USB, serial or Ethernet interfaces. 小型飛翔体／海外 Figure 2: DEEP prototype software ２．Past experience (plants in Japan, overseas plant, applications in other industries, etc) Create technologies is a specialist R&D firm with a focus on imaging and sensing in the nuclear industry. Createc has developed and delivered several novel nuclear technologies, including the N-Visage gamma camera system. Costainis a leading UK construction and civil engineering firm with almost 150 years of history.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Modular Reactors and the Future of Nuclear Power in the United States
    Energy Research & Social Science 3 (2014) 161–177 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Energy Research & Social Science jou rnal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/erss Review Small modular reactors and the future of nuclear power in the United States ∗ Mark Cooper Institute for Energy and the Environment, Vermont Law School, Yale University, United States a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Small modular reactors are the latest “new” technology that nuclear advocates tout as the game changer Received 30 May 2014 that will overcome previous economic failures of nuclear power. The debate over SMRs has been particu- Received in revised form 28 July 2014 larly intense because of the rapid failure of large “nuclear renaissance” reactors in market economies, the Accepted 31 July 2014 urgent need to address climate change, and the dramatic success of alternative, decentralized resources in lowering costs and increasing deployment. This paper assesses the prospects for SMR technology from Keywords: three perspectives: the implications of the history of cost escalation in nuclear reactor construction for SMR technology learning, economies of scale and other process that SMR advocates claim will lower cost; the challenges Nuclear cost escalation SMR technology faces in terms of high costs resulting from lost economies of scale, long lead time needed Decentralized resources to develop a new design, the size of the task to create assembly lines for modular reactors and intense concern about safety; and the cost and other characteristics – e.g. scalability, speed to market, flexibility, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Isn't Always Beautiful Safety, Security, and Cost Concerns About Small Modular Reactors
    Small Isn't Always Beautiful Safety, Security, and Cost Concerns about Small Modular Reactors Small Isn't Always Beautiful Safety, Security, and Cost Concerns about Small Modular Reactors Edwin Lyman September 2013 © 2013 Union of Concerned Scientists All rights reserved Edwin Lyman is a senior scientist in the Union of Concerned Scientists Global Security Program. The Union of Concerned Scientists puts rigorous, independent science to work to solve our planet’s most pressing problems. Joining with citizens across the country, we combine technical analysis and effective advocacy to create innovative, practical solutions for a healthy, safe, and sustainable future. More information is available about UCS at www.ucsusa.org. This report is available online (in PDF format) at www.ucsusa.org/SMR and may also be obtained from: UCS Publications 2 Brattle Square Cambridge, MA 02138-3780 Or, email [email protected] or call (617) 547-5552. Design: Catalano Design Front cover illustrations: © LLNL for the USDOE (background); reactors from top to bottom: © NuScale Power, LLC, © Holtec SMR, LLC, © 2012 Babcock & Wilcox Nuclear Energy, Inc., and © Westinghouse Electric Company. Back cover illustrations: © LLNL for the USDOE (background); © Westinghouse Electric Company (reactor). Acknowledgments This report was made possible by funding from Park Foundation, Inc., Wallace Research Foundation, an anonymous foundation, and UCS members. The author would like to thank Trudy E. Bell for outstanding editing, Rob Catalano for design and layout, Bryan Wadsworth for overseeing production, and Scott Kemp, Lisbeth Gronlund, and David Wright for useful discussions and comments on the report. The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the organizations that funded the work or the individuals who reviewed it.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Development, Applicability, and Design Considerations of Generation IV Small Modular Reactors
    Spring 2019 Honors Poster Presentation May 1, 2019 Department of Physics and Astronomy 1 2 1. Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University John Mobley IV , Gregory Maxwell 2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Iowa State University On the Development, Applicability, and Design Considerations of Generation IV Small Modular Reactors BACKGROUND RESULTS CONCLUSIONS Small modular reactors (SMRs) are a class of fission reactors with DEVELOPMENT DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS Incorporation of SMRs within existing power grids offers a scalable, power ratings between 10 to 300 MWe which can be utilized as Fission power systems from each reactor generation were isolated based upon A molten salt fast breeder small modular reactor (MSFBSMR) was devised on low initial investment energy solution to increase energy security and modules in the unit assembly of a nuclear steam supply system. The their significance and contributions to the development of current designs. the basis of long-term operation with high fuel utilization. independence. rapid development of SMRs has been spurred globally by two main features: proliferation resistance/physical protection and economic Figure I: Timeline of Nuclear Reactor Generations Table I: Critical System Reactor Materials and Specifications ■ Maturity of nuclear energy technologies have facilitated an appeal. On the topic of proliferation resistance/physical protection, Material Classification Key Property Color environment of revolutionary reactor designs. SMRs require much less nuclear material which can be of lower 6 FLiBe coolant COLEX processed; Pr = 13.525 enrichment, thus the potential for application in weapon systems is ■ Evaluation of reactor generations through a simplified SA reveals 15Cr-15Ni Ti cladding7 austenitic (Mo 1.2%) stymied by quantity and quality of the fissile material.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparison of Advanced Nuclear Technologies
    A COMPARISON OF ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES Andrew C. Kadak, Ph.D MARCH 2017 B | CHAPTER NAME ABOUT THE CENTER ON GLOBAL ENERGY POLICY The Center on Global Energy Policy provides independent, balanced, data-driven analysis to help policymakers navigate the complex world of energy. We approach energy as an economic, security, and environmental concern. And we draw on the resources of a world-class institution, faculty with real-world experience, and a location in the world’s finance and media capital. Visit us at energypolicy.columbia.edu facebook.com/ColumbiaUEnergy twitter.com/ColumbiaUEnergy ABOUT THE SCHOOL OF INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS SIPA’s mission is to empower people to serve the global public interest. Our goal is to foster economic growth, sustainable development, social progress, and democratic governance by educating public policy professionals, producing policy-related research, and conveying the results to the world. Based in New York City, with a student body that is 50 percent international and educational partners in cities around the world, SIPA is the most global of public policy schools. For more information, please visit www.sipa.columbia.edu A COMPARISON OF ADVANCED NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES Andrew C. Kadak, Ph.D* MARCH 2017 *Andrew C. Kadak is the former president of Yankee Atomic Electric Company and professor of the practice at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He continues to consult on nuclear operations, advanced nuclear power plants, and policy and regulatory matters in the United States. He also serves on senior nuclear safety oversight boards in China. He is a graduate of MIT from the Nuclear Science and Engineering Department.
    [Show full text]
  • An Advanced Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Core Concept Using Uranium-Free Metallic Fuels for Maximizing TRU Burning Rate
    sustainability Article An Advanced Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Core Concept Using Uranium-Free Metallic Fuels for Maximizing TRU Burning Rate Wuseong You and Ser Gi Hong * Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University, Deogyeong-daero, GiHeung-gu, Yongin, Gyeonggi-do 446-701, Korea; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-31-201-2782 Received: 24 October 2017; Accepted: 28 November 2017; Published: 1 December 2017 Abstract: In this paper, we designed and analyzed advanced sodium-cooled fast reactor cores using uranium-free metallic fuels for maximizing burning rate of transuranics (TRU) nuclides from PWR spent fuels. It is well known that the removal of fertile nuclides such as 238U from fuels in liquid metal cooled fast reactor leads to the degradation of important safety parameters such as the Doppler coefficient, coolant void worth, and delayed neutron fraction. To resolve the degradation of the Doppler coefficient, we considered adding resonant nuclides to the uranium-free metallic fuels. The analysis results showed that the cores using uranium-free fuels loaded with tungsten instead of uranium have a significantly lower burnup reactivity swing and more negative Doppler coefficients than the core using uranium-free fuels without resonant nuclides. In addition, we considered the use of axially central B4C absorber region and moderator rods to further improve safety parameters such as sodium void worth, burnup reactivity swing, and the Doppler coefficient. The results of the analysis showed that the final design core can consume ~353 kg per cycle and satisfies self-controllability under unprotected accidents. The fuel cycle analysis showed that the PWR–SFR coupling fuel cycle option drastically reduces the amount of waste going to repository and the SFR burner can consume the amount of TRUs discharged from 3.72 PWRs generating the same electricity.
    [Show full text]
  • Fast-Spectrum Reactors Technology Assessment
    Clean Power Quadrennial Technology Review 2015 Chapter 4: Advancing Clean Electric Power Technologies Technology Assessments Advanced Plant Technologies Biopower Clean Power Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Value- Added Options Carbon Dioxide Capture for Natural Gas and Industrial Applications Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies Carbon Dioxide Storage Technologies Crosscutting Technologies in Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Fast-spectrum Reactors Geothermal Power High Temperature Reactors Hybrid Nuclear-Renewable Energy Systems Hydropower Light Water Reactors Marine and Hydrokinetic Power Nuclear Fuel Cycles Solar Power Stationary Fuel Cells U.S. DEPARTMENT OF Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Brayton Cycle ENERGY Wind Power Clean Power Quadrennial Technology Review 2015 Fast-spectrum Reactors Chapter 4: Technology Assessments Background and Current Status From the initial conception of nuclear energy, it was recognized that full realization of the energy content of uranium would require the development of fast reactors with associated nuclear fuel cycles.1 Thus, fast reactor technology was a key focus in early nuclear programs in the United States and abroad, with the first usable nuclear electricity generated by a fast reactor—Experimental Breeder Reactor I (EBR-I)—in 1951. Test and/or demonstration reactors were built and operated in the United States, France, Japan, United Kingdom, Russia, India, Germany, and China—totaling about 20 reactors with 400 operating years to date. These previous reactors and current projects are summarized in Table 4.H.1.2 Currently operating test reactors include BOR-60 (Russia), Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR) (India), and China Experimental Fast Reactor (CEFR) (China). The Russian BN-600 demonstration reactor has been operating as a power reactor since 1980.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Nuclear Power and Fuel Cycle Technologies: Outlook and Policy Options
    Order Code RL34579 Advanced Nuclear Power and Fuel Cycle Technologies: Outlook and Policy Options July 11, 2008 Mark Holt Specialist in Energy Policy Resources, Science, and Industry Division Advanced Nuclear Power and Fuel Cycle Technologies: Outlook and Policy Options Summary Current U.S. nuclear energy policy focuses on the near-term construction of improved versions of existing nuclear power plants. All of today’s U.S. nuclear plants are light water reactors (LWRs), which are cooled by ordinary water. Under current policy, the highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel from LWRs is to be permanently disposed of in a deep underground repository. The Bush Administration is also promoting an aggressive U.S. effort to move beyond LWR technology into advanced reactors and fuel cycles. Specifically, the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), under the Department of Energy (DOE) is developing advanced reprocessing (or recycling) technologies to extract plutonium and uranium from spent nuclear fuel, as well as an advanced reactor that could fully destroy long-lived radioactive isotopes. DOE’s Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Initiative is developing other advanced reactor technologies that could be safer than LWRs and produce high-temperature heat to make hydrogen. DOE’s advanced nuclear technology programs date back to the early years of the Atomic Energy Commission in the 1940s and 1950s. In particular, it was widely believed that breeder reactors — designed to produce maximum amounts of plutonium from natural uranium — would be necessary for providing sufficient fuel for a large commercial nuclear power industry. Early research was also conducted on a wide variety of other power reactor concepts, some of which are still under active consideration.
    [Show full text]
  • Licensing Small Modular Reactors an Overview of Regulatory and Policy Issues
    Reinventing Nuclear Power Licensing Small Modular Reactors An Overview of Regulatory and Policy Issues William C. Ostendorff Amy E. Cubbage Hoover Institution Press Stanford University Stanford, California 2015 Ostendorff_LicensingSMRs_2Rs.indd i 6/10/15 11:15 AM The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace, founded at Stanford University in 1919 by Herbert Hoover, who went on to become the thirty-first president of the United States, is an interdisciplinary research center for advanced study on domestic and international affairs. The views expressed in its publications are entirely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the staff, officers, or Board of Overseers of the Hoover Institution. www.hoover.org Hoover Institution Press Publication Hoover Institution at Leland Stanford Junior University, Stanford, California 94305-6003. Copyright © 2015 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University The publisher has made this work available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs license 3.0. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0. Efforts have been made to locate the original sources, determine the current rights holders, and, if needed, obtain reproduction permissions. On verification of any such claims to rights in illustrations or other elements reproduced in this essay, any required corrections or clarifications will be made in subsequent printings/editions. Hoover Institution Press assumes no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Modular Nuclear Reactors: Parametric Modeling of Integrated Reactor Vessel Manufacturing Within a Factory Environment Volume 2, Detailed Analysis
    Small Modular Nuclear Reactors: Parametric Modeling of Integrated Reactor Vessel Manufacturing Within A Factory Environment Volume 2, Detailed Analysis Xuan Chen, Arnold Kotlyarevsky, Andrew Kumiega, Jeff Terry, and Benxin Wu Illinois Institute of Technology Stephen Goldberg and Edward A. Hoffman Argonne National Laboratory August 2013 This study continued the work, supported by the Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy, regarding the economic analysis of small modular reactors (SMRs). The study team analyzed, in detail, the costs for the production of factory-built components for an SMR economy for a pressurized-water reactor (PWR) design. The modeling focused on the components that are contained in the Integrated Reactor Vessel (IRV). Due to the maturity of the nuclear industry and significant transfer of knowledge from the gigawatt (GW)-scale reactor production to the small modular reactor economy, the first complete SMR facsimile design would have incorporated a significant amount of learning (averaging about 80% as compared with a prototype unit). In addition, the order book for the SMR factory and the lot size (i.e., the total number of orders divided by the number of complete production runs) remain a key aspect of judging the economic viability of SMRs. Assuming a minimum lot size of 5 or about 500 MWe, the average production cost of the first-of-the kind IRV units are projected to average about 60% of the a first prototype IRV unit (the Lead unit) that would not have incorporated any learning. This cost efficiency could be a key factor in the competitiveness of SMRs for both U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Modular Nuclear Reactors Can Represent an Innovative Solution for America’S Shifting Energy Sector DON SOIFER
    Small Modular Nuclear Reactors Can Represent an Innovative Solution for America’s Shifting Energy Sector August 2015 Don Soifer EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The United States is heavily reliant on nuclear power for its electricity. Last year, six states used nuclear power for more than 45 percent of electricity generation, with 19 percent of the nation’s electricity generated by nuclear reactors. As current U.S. nuclear energy production facilities increasingly approach the end of their planned operational lifespans, an innovative approach around Small Modular Reactors may represent the best and most practical solution available to energy decisionmakers. While solar, windpower and other renewable energy sources are becoming more prevalent, they are still decades away from becoming viable alternatives to nuclear for most Americans. Federal regulatory officials have made important progress modernizing their systems and requirements for approving advanced reactors, a process expected to continue at both federal and state levels, and one which will largely define the future cost- effectiveness of the Small Modular Reactor approach. In particular, plans and requirements for the safe disposition of spent nuclear fuel from new reactors will be crucial. Potential benefits of Small Modular Reactors include cost effectiveness, grid resilience, and improved safety and energy diversity. Details follow. Small Modular Nuclear Reactors Small Modular Nuclear Reactors Can Represent an Innovative Solution for America’s Shifting Energy Sector DON SOIFER INTRODUCTION Present and future changes in the United States’ energy sector are being shaped by a number of powerful factors: leadership from the Obama Administration and other federal and state policymakers for sharply reduced carbon emissions (particularly for power plants), aging energy infrastructure, the need for more robust power grid resilience, structural changes to electricity markets and the attractiveness of energy independence prominent among them.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Core Design Studies for the Advanced Burner Reactor Over a Wide Range of Conversion Ratios
    ANL-AFCI-177 Preliminary Core Design Studies for the Advanced Burner Reactor over a Wide Range of Conversion Ratios Nuclear Engineering Division About Argonne National Laboratory Argonne is a U.S. Department of Energy laboratory managed by UChicago Argonne, LLC under contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. The Laboratory’s main facility is outside Chicago, at 9700 South Cass Avenue, Argonne, Illinois 60439. For information about Argonne, see www.anl.gov. Availability of This Report This report is available, at no cost, at http://www.osti.gov/bridge. It is also available on paper to the U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, for a processing fee, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 phone (865) 576-8401 fax (865) 576-5728 [email protected] Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor UChicago Argonne, LLC, nor any of their employees or officers, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of document authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, Argonne National Laboratory, or UChicago Argonne, LLC.
    [Show full text]