DOCSLIB.ORG

Cost Estimating Guidelines for Generation Iv Nuclear Energy Systems

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cost Estimating Guidelines for Generation Iv Nuclear Energy Systems GIF/EMWG/2007/004 COST ESTIMATING GUIDELINES FOR GENERATION IV NUCLEAR ENERGY SYSTEMS Revision 4.2 September 26, 2007 Prepared by The Economic Modeling Working Group Of the Generation IV International Forum Printed by the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency for the Generation IV International Forum EMWG GUIDELINES 1 DISCLAMER This report was prepared by the Economic Modeling Working Group of the Generation IV International Forum (GIF). Neither GIF nor any of its members, nor any GIF member‟s national government agency or employee thereof, 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. References 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 GIF or its members, or any agency of a GIF member‟s national government. The views and opinions of the authors expressed therein do not necessarily state or reflect those of GIF or its members, or any agency of a GIF member‟s national government. EMWG GUIDELINES 2 ECONOMIC MODELING WORKING GROUP (EMWG) MEMBERS William Rasin, Chairman, Consultant, United States Kiyoshi Ono, co-Chairman, Japanese Atomic Energy Authority, Japan Evelyne Bertel, Technical Secretariat, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Nuclear Energy Agency Pierre Berbey, Electricite de France Romney Duffey, Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd. Hussein Khalil, Argonne National Laboratory, United States Izumi Kinoshita, Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, Japan Sermet Kuran, Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd. ManKi Lee, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, Republic of Korea Eugene Onopko, Consultant, United States Geoffrey Rothwell, Stanford University, United States Kent Williams, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, United States FORMER MEMBERS Kazunori Hirao, co-Chairman, Japanese Atomic Energy Authority, Japan François-Luc Linet, Commissariat à l‟Energie Atomique, France Keith Miller, British Nuclear Fuels, Ltd., United Kingdom Jean-Loup Rouyer, Electricite de France Risto Tarjanne, Lapeenranta University of Technology, Euratom EMWG GUIDELINES 3 EMWG GUIDELINES 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ................................................................................................................................................... 9 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................. 11 References ............................................................................................................................................. 14 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 15 1.1 Purpose of Cost Estimating Guidelines ...................................................................................... 15 1.2 Differences from Previous Guidelines ......................................................................................... 17 1.3 Relationship between the Present Guidelines and the Overall EMWG Modeling Effort ........... 19 1.4 Definition of Cost Estimating Terms .......................................................................................... 19 1.5 The GIF Code Of Account (COA) ............................................................................................. 29 References ............................................................................................................................................. 34 2. Structure of an Integrated Nuclear Energy Economic Model ..................................................... 35 2.1 Flow Diagram for an Integrated Nuclear Energy Economic Model ........................................... 35 2.2 Top-down Versus Bottom-up Cost Estimating ........................................................................... 37 2.3 Integration of Cost Estimating into the Design Process ............................................................. 38 2.4 Figures of Merit of Interest in these Guidelines ......................................................................... 38 References ............................................................................................................................................. 40 3. Estimating Categories for RD&D Costs ..................................................................................... 41 3.1 Rationale for Selection of Categories for Estimation ................................................................. 41 3.2 Comprehensive COA for RD&D Activities ............................................................................... 41 4. General Ground Rules and Assumptions .................................................................................... 45 4.1 Project Execution ........................................................................................................................ 45 4.2 Commercialization Plan .............................................................................................................. 46 4.3 Estimate Components ................................................................................................................. 46 4.4 Project Code of Accounts (COA) ............................................................................................... 47 4.5 Project Scope Definition ............................................................................................................. 47 4.6 Inclusions/Exclusions/Qualifications.......................................................................................... 48 4.7 Project Estimate .......................................................................................................................... 48 4.8 Project Schedule ......................................................................................................................... 51 4.9 Region and Site Definition ......................................................................................................... 54 4.10 FOAK Plant ................................................................................................................................ 54 4.11 NOAK Plant ............................................................................................................................... 55 4.12 Estimate Reporting Format ......................................................................................................... 55 References ............................................................................................................................................. 56 5. Guidance for Cost Estimates Prepared by the Top-down Approach… .. ……………………… 57 5.1 Cost Modeling Needs for Innovative System Designers ............................................................ 57 5.2 Top-down Modeling Principles .................................................................................................. 57 5.3 Use of Top-down Modeling for Generation IV Systems ............................................................ 61 5.4 Top-down Approach for Indirect Capital and Non-Capital Life Cycle Costs. ........................... 63 5.5 Other life cycle cost elements. .................................................................................................... 64 References ............................................................................................................................................. 65 EMWG GUIDELINES 5 6. Guidance for Cost Estimates Prepared By the Bottom-up Approach… ... …………………….. 67 6.1 Cost Categories ........................................................................................................................... 67 6.2 Specific Cost-Estimating Assumptions ...................................................................................... 68 6.3 Construction Costs ...................................................................................................................... 69 6.4 Other Project Costs ..................................................................................................................... 71 6.5 Power Plant Detailed Bottom-up Estimating .............................................................................. 71 6.6 Discipline Notes for Scope/Quantity Development .................................................................... 72 6.7 Other Plants ................................................................................................................................ 74 References ............................................................................................................................................. 75 7. Total Capital at Risk .. …………………………………………………………………………. 77 7.1 Cash Flow ................................................................................................................................... 77 7.2 Interest During Construction (IDC) ............................................................................................ 77 7.3 Contingency ................................................................................................................................ 77 7.4 Total Capital Investment Cost ...................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • WHAT WILL ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS COST? a Standardized Cost Analysis of Advanced Nuclear Technologies in Commercial Development
    WHAT WILL ADVANCED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS COST? A Standardized Cost Analysis of Advanced Nuclear Technologies in Commercial Development AN ENERGY INNOVATION REFORM PROJECT REPORT PREPARED BY THE ENERGY OPTIONS NETWORK TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 1 1. Study Motivation and Objectives 6 Why Care about Advanced Nuclear Costs? 7 Origins of This Study 8 A Standardized Framework for Cost Analysis 8 2. Results 9 3. Study Methodology 14 EON Model 15 Company Preparedness and Strategies 19 Limits of This Analysis 20 Certainty Levels for Advanced Nuclear Cost Estimates 20 Realistic Considerations That May Influence Cost 21 4. Advanced Nuclear’s Design and Delivery Innovations 22 Context: The Cost of Conventional Nuclear 23 Design Considerations for Conventional Nuclear Reactors 24 Safety Enhancements of Advanced Nuclear 24 Overview of Reactor Designs 25 Delivery Issues with Conventional Nuclear Power 27 Innovations in the Delivery of Advanced Nuclear Technologies 28 Design Factors That Could Increase Advanced Nuclear Costs 30 5. Conclusions 31 6. References 32 Appendix A: Nuclear Plant Cost Categories 34 Appendix B: Operating Costs for a Nuclear Plant 35 Appendix C: Cost Category Details and Modeling Methodology 36 Appendix D: External Expert Review of Draft Report 43 THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY: A STANDARDIZED COST ANALYSIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Advanced nuclear technologies are controversial. Many people believe they could be a panacea for the world’s energy problems, while others claim that they are still decades away from reality and much more complicated and costly than conventional nuclear technologies. Resolving this debate requires an accurate and current understanding of the increasing movement of technology development out of national nuclear laboratories and into private industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress in Nuclear Energy 105 (2018) 83–98
    Progress in Nuclear Energy 105 (2018) 83–98 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Progress in Nuclear Energy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/pnucene Technology perspectives from 1950 to 2100 and policy implications for the T global nuclear power industry Victor Nian Energy Studies Institute, National University of Singapore, Singapore ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: There have been two completed phases of developments in nuclear reactor technologies. The first phase is the Nuclear industry trends demonstration of exploratory Generation I reactors. The second phase is the rapid scale-up of Generation II Nuclear energy policy reactors in North America and Western Europe followed by East Asia. We are in the third phase, which is the ff Technology di usion construction of evolutionary Generation III/III+ reactors. Driven by the need for safer and more affordable New user state nuclear reactors post-Fukushima, the nuclear industry has, in parallel, entered the fourth phase, which is the International cooperation development of innovative Generation IV reactors. Through a comprehensive review of the historical reactor Advanced reactor development technology developments in major nuclear states, namely, USA, Russia, France, Japan, South Korea, and China, this study presents a projection on the future potentials of advanced reactor technologies, with particular focus on pressurized water reactors, high temperature reactors, and fast reactors, by 2100. The projected potentials provide alternative scenarios to develop insights that complement the established technology roadmaps. Findings suggest that there is no clear winner among these technologies, but fast reactors could demonstrate a new and important decision factor for emerging markets. Findings also suggest small modular reactors, espe- cially those belonging to Generation IV, as a transitional technology for developing domestic market and in- digenous technology competence for emerging nuclear states.
    [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]
  • Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems: Ten-Year Program Plan
    GENERATION IV NUCLEAR ENERGY SYSTEMS TEN-YEAR PROGRAM PLAN Fiscal Year 2005 Volume I Released March 2005 Office of Advanced Nuclear Research DOE Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology DISCLAIMER The Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems Ten-Year Program Plan describes the updated system and crosscutting program plans that were in force at the start of calendar year 2005. However, the Generation IV research & development (R&D) plans continue to evolve, and this document will be updated annually or as needed. Even as this Program Plan is being released, several system R&D plans are still under development, most in collaboration with international, university, and industry partners. Consequently, the Program Plan should be viewed as a work in progress. For current information regarding this document or the plans described herein, please contact: David W. Ostby, Technical Integrator Generation IV program Idaho National Laboratory P.O. Box 1625 2525 N. Fremont Idaho Falls, ID 83415-3865 USA Tel: (208) 526-1288 FAX: (208) 526-2930 Email: [email protected] GENERATION IV NUCLEAR ENERGY SYSTEMS TEN-YEAR PROGRAM PLAN Fiscal Year 2005 Volume I March 2005 Idaho National Laboratory Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Under DOE Idaho Operations Office Contract DE-AC07-05ID14517 i This page intentionally left blank. ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY As reflected in the U.S. National Energy Policy [1], nuclear energy has a strong role to play in satisfying our nation's future energy security and environmental quality needs. The desirable environmental, economic, and sustainability attributes of nuclear energy give it a cornerstone position, not only in the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Generation IV Reactor Systems and Fuel Cycles (Horizon 2030): Technological Breakthroughs in Nuclear Fission (Int'l RD&DD)
    EUROPEAN COMMISSION RESEARCH DIRECTORATE-GENERAL Directorate J : ENERGY - EURATOM Unit 2 : Fission Generation IV reactor systems and fuel cycles (horizon 2030): technological breakthroughs in nuclear fission (int'l RD&DD) Georges VAN GOETHEM Innovation in Nuclear Fission, and Education & Training [email protected] EC DG RTD J2, Brussels, May 2008 Generation IV International Forum (GIF, 2001) VHTR SFR GFR SCWR LFR MSR 1 ABSTRACT Euratom signed in 2006 the Framework Agreement of the Generation IV International Forum (GIF). As a consequence, all Euratom actions in the area of innovative reactor systems are based on the four "Technology Goals for industry and society" set by the GIF: • sustainability: e.g. enhanced fuel utilisation and optimal waste management • economics: e.g. minimisation of costs of MWe installed and MWth generated • safety and reliability : e.g. robust safety architecture, enhanced EUR requirements • proliferation resistance and physical protection: e.g. impractical separation of Pu. To set the scene of Generation IV, the history of nuclear fission power is recalled with some discussion about the benefits and drawbacks of each previous Generation: • Generation I (1950 – 1970): Atoms-for-Peace era plants (4 countries concerned) • Generation II (1970 - 2000): safety and reliability (30 countries concerned) • Generation III (2000 - 2030): "evolutionary" steps to further improve safety (EUR) • Generation IV (horizon after 2030): "visionary" innovation regarding sustainability. Résumé Euratom a signé en 2006 l’Accord Cadre du GIF (« Generation IV International Forum »). Par conséquent, toutes les actions Euratom dans le domaine des systèmes réacteurs innovants sont basées sur les quatre «Objectifs technologiques pour l’industrie et la société»: • durabilité : par ex.
    [Show full text]
  • New Reactor Concepts for New Generation of Nuclear Power Plants in the Usa: an Overview
    Fifth Yugoslav Nuclear Society Conference YUNSC - 2004 ████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████ NEW REACTOR CONCEPTS FOR NEW GENERATION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN THE USA: AN OVERVIEW JASMINA VUJIĆ, EHUD GREENSPAN and MIODRAG MILOŠEVIĆ* Department of Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA [email protected], [email protected] *VINCA Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade, Serbian and Montenegro [email protected] ABSTRACT With the growing demands for more reliable energy sources, there is an international interest in the development of new nuclear energy systems to be deployed between 2010 and 2030, that will improve safety and reliability, decrease proliferation risks, improve radioactive waste management and lower cost of nuclear energy production. Six nuclear energy systems were selected as candidates for this Generation IV initiative. In this paper we will explore each of these concepts, as well as several of more advanced concepts. Key words: Generation IV, nuclear energy systems, non-proliferation 1. INTRODUCTION Just a few years ago, many analysts were projecting the decline of nuclear power. Reality has proven these projections to be wrong. The reasons for revival of nuclear energy are very clear: • nuclear plants have performed exceedingly well. As a group, U.S. nuclear utilities have improved the availability of their
    [Show full text]
  • Nordic Forum for Generation IV Reactors, Status and Activities in 2012
    NKS-270 ISBN 978-87-7893-343-0 Nordic Forum for Generation IV Reactors, Status and activities in 2012 Rudi Van Nieuwenhove1, Bent Lauritzen2, Erik Nonbøl2 1Institutt for Energiteknikk, OECD Halden Reactor Project, Norway 2Technical University of Denmark, DTU Nutech, Denmark December 2012 Abstract The Nordic-Gen4 (continuation from NOMAGE4) seminar was this year hosted by DTU Nutech at Risø, Denmark. The seminar was well attended (49 participants from 12 countries). The presentations covered many as- pects in Gen-IV reactor research and gave a good overview of the activi- ties within this field at the various institutes and universities. Participants had the possibility to visit the Danish Decommissioning site. Key words Nordic-Gen4, seminar, Risø NKS-270 ISBN 978-87-7893-343-0 Electronic report, December 2012 NKS Secretariat P.O. Box 49 DK - 4000 Roskilde, Denmark Phone +45 4677 4041 www.nks.org e-mail [email protected] Nordic-Gen4 activities 2012 Nordic Forum for Generation IV Reactors Status and activities in 2012 Rudi Van Nieuwenhove1, Bent Lauritzen2, Erik Nonbøl2 1Institutt for Energiteknikk OECD Halden Reactor Project Norway 2 Technical University of Denmark, DTU Nutech, Denmark TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................................... 1 2. OBJECTIVES OF THE WORK ................................................................................................ 4 3. DELIVERABLES FOR 2012....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NKS-216, Nordic Nuclear Materials Forum for Generation IV Reactors
    Nordisk kernesikkerhedsforskning Norrænar kjarnöryggisrannsóknir Pohjoismainen ydinturvallisuustutkimus Nordisk kjernesikkerhetsforskning Nordisk kärnsäkerhetsforskning Nordic nuclear safety research NKS-216 ISBN 978-87-7893-286-0 Nordic Nuclear Materials Forum for Generation IV Reactors Clara Anghel (1) Sami Penttilä (2) (1) Studsvik Nuclear AB, Sweden (2) VTT, Finland March 2010 Abstract A network for material issues for Generation IV nuclear power has been initiated within the Nordic countries. The objectives of the Generation IV Nordic Nuclear Materials Forum (NOMAGE4) are to put the basis of a sustainable forum for Gen IV issues, especially focussing on fuels, cladding, structural materials and coolant interaction. Other issues include reactor physics, dynamics and diagnostics, core and fuel design. The present report summarizes the work performed during the year 2009. The efforts made include identification of organisations involved in Gen IV issues in the Nordic countries, update of the forum website, http://www.studsvik.se/GenerationIV, and investigation of capabilities for research within the area of Gen IV. Within the NOMAGE4 project a seminar on Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems has been organized during 15-16th of October 2009. The aim of the seminar was to provide a forum for exchange of information, discussion on future research needs and networking of experts on Generation IV reactor concepts. As an outcome of the NOMAGE4, a few collaboration project proposals have been prepared/planned in 2009. The network was welcomed by the European Commission and was mentioned as an exemplary network with representatives from industries, universities, power companies and research institutes. NOMAGE4 has been invited to participate to the "European Energy Research Alliance, EERA, workshop for nuclear structural materials" http://www.eera- set.eu/index.php?index=41 as external observers.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Data Needs for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems
    FRENCH ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISION (CEA) - NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISION NuclearNuclear DataData NeedsNeeds forfor GenerationGeneration IVIV NuclearNuclear EnergyEnergy SystemsSystems G. Rimpault Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique (CEA) Cadarache Center 13108 Saint-Paul-lez-Durance Cedex, France [email protected] CEA/DER Cadarache Centre Gérald Rimpault Hotel Mascotte, 27 May 2004 • Aix en Provence, France 1 FRENCH ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISION (CEA) - NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISION Generation IV Reactor Cores Six Reactor Concepts have been selected by the Generation IV International Forum (GIF) countries to meet challenging technology goals in four areas: Sustainability Economics Safety and reliability Proliferation resistance and physical protection. Among the six selected systems, 5 (SFR, GFR, LFR, SCWR, MSR) are fast systems while 3 (SCWR, MSR, VHTR) are thermal ones This implies some consequences on nuclear data needs CEA/DER Cadarache Centre Gérald Rimpault Hotel Mascotte, 27 May 2004 • Aix en Provence, France 2 FRENCH ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISION (CEA) - NUCLEAR ENERGY DIVISION Generic Nuclear Data Needs for Generation IV Reactor Cores Nuclear Data Needs for the six selected Generation IV systems should undergo a sensitivity analysis for selecting those data which are important But it must recognized straight from the beginning that evaluated nuclear data cannot as such meet the requirements especially for the fast systems Past experience should therefore be used. This will be done using experience •on SFR for the 5 (SFR, GFR, LFR, SCWR, MSR) and •on PWR for
    [Show full text]
  • Generation IV Reactor Systems and Renewable Energy
    Generation IV reactor systems and Renewable Energy Hideki Kamide Chair-Elect, Policy Group The Generation IV International Forum (GIF) NICE Future Webinar, December 2018 Contents I. The Generation IV International Forum II. Relation between Nuclear and Renewable III. What can be done by Gen-IV Reactor Systems? IV. Challenges for the industrial deployment of GEN-IV reactors NICE Future Webinar, December 2018 2 I. The Generation IV International Forum 3 Generation of Nuclear Energy Systems Current nuclear plants in operation are mainly Gen-II and Gen-III reactors. Evolutionary LWR, Small modular reactors, and Gen-IV reactors are expected as next generation nuclear power plants. Gen-IV reactors are expected to enter commercial phase after 2030 NICE Future Webinar, December 2018 4 History of Generation IV International Forum (GIF) USA proposed a bold initiative in 2000 The vision was to leapfrog LWR technology and collaborate with international partners to share R&D on advanced nuclear systems. GIF Charter was signed in Jul. 2001, and extended in 2011. Gen IV concept defined via technology goals and legal framework Technology Roadmap released in 2002, and updated in Jan. 2014. 2 year study with more than100 experts worldwide Nearly 100 reactor designs evaluated and down selected to 6 most promising concepts: SFR, VHTR, LFR, SCWR, GFR and MSR. Framework Agreement (FA) was signed in Feb. 2005, and extended in 2015 for another 10 years. France, Japan, Korea, USA are signed in Feb. 2015 and Russia, Switzerland, and South Africa signed in after Feb. in 2015 respectively, Canada and EU signed in 2016. Australia joined in 2017 and UK deposited its instrument of accession in 2018 as new member countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Euratom Contribution to the Generation IV International Forum Systems in the Period 2005-2014 and Future Outlook
    Euratom Contribution to the Generation IV International Forum Systems in the period 2005-2014 and future outlook Joint Research Centre 2017 This publication is a Technical report by the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s science and knowledge service. It aims to provide evidence-based scientific support to the European policy-making process. The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication. Contact information Name: Andrea Bucalossi Address: Rue Champ de Mars 21 E-mail: [email protected] Tel.: 0032 29 88309 JRC Science Hub https://ec.europa.eu/jrc JRC104056 EUR 28391 EN PDF ISBN 978-92-79-64938-7 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2760/256957 Print ISBN 978-92-79-64937-0 ISSN 1018-5593 doi:10.2760/875528 Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017 © European Union, 2017 The reuse policy of the European Commission is implemented by Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011 on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Reuse is authorised, provided the source of the document is acknowledged and its original meaning or message is not distorted. The European Commission shall not be liable for any consequence stemming from the reuse. For any use or reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the EU, permission must be sought directly from the copyright holders.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Nuclear Reactors: Technology Overview and Current Issues
    Advanced Nuclear Reactors: Technology Overview and Current Issues April 18, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45706 SUMMARY R45706 Advanced Nuclear Reactors: Technology April 18, 2019 Overview and Current Issues Danielle A. Arostegui All nuclear power in the United States is generated by light water reactors (LWRs), which were Research Assistant commercialized in the 1950s and early 1960s and are now used throughout most of the world. LWRs are cooled by ordinary (“light”) water, which also slows (“moderates”) the neutrons that Mark Holt maintain the nuclear fission chain reaction. High construction costs of large conventional LWRs, Specialist in Energy Policy concerns about safety raised by the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan, and other issues have led to increased interest in unconventional, or “advanced,” nuclear technologies that could be less expensive and safer than existing LWRs. An “advanced nuclear reactor” is defined in legislation enacted in 2018 as “a nuclear fission reactor with significant improvements over the most recent generation of nuclear fission reactors” or a reactor using nuclear fusion (P.L. 115-248). Such reactors include LWR designs that are far smaller than existing reactors, as well as concepts that would use different moderators, coolants, and types of fuel. Many of these advanced designs are considered to be small modular reactors (SMRs), which the Department of Energy (DOE) defines as reactors with electric generating capacity of 300 megawatts and below, in contrast
    [Show full text]