investigating the economic viability of small modular nuclear reactors ahmed abdulla, inês azevedo,...

Investigating the Economic Viabilityof Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

Ahmed Abdulla, Inês Azevedo, and M. Granger Morgan

May 2012

2

Large reactors are falling out of favor

Carnegie Mellon University

On cost:Building a large reactor is viewed as a

big, complicated, scary, long-term commitment

Average size of U.S. reactor = 1,000MWe (NRC 2011)

Move to large reactors driven by scale economies

Can we produce nuclear reactors like aircraft?

Safety of reactor operations

Spent fuel management

Diversion of fuel to nefarious ends

High capital cost

3

Small reactors produce less than 300MWe (IAEA)

Variety of sizes and technologies (light water and non-light water)

Interest in small modular reactors (SMRs)


Possible advantages:

Factory fabrication

Modular construction

Flexibility in siting and sizing

Shorter construction schedules

Lower capital outlay

Expanding the market:

Orgs that cannot afford large plants

Difficult geographies

Constrained grids

New approaches to safety

Alternative end-uses

Charleston Regional Business Journal (2012, April 11). NuScale, NuHub to partner on small modular reactors. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from http://www.charlestonbusiness.com/news/43456-nuscale-nuhub-to-partner-on-small-modular-reactors?rss=0

4

2011/12: DOE spent $110 million on SMR RD&D “The department is hoping for $500 million over the next five years”*

These adopt familiar PWR operational principles Most U.S. vendor designs (any many intl. ones) are of this variety

We focus on integral light water SMRs


* Wald, M.L. (2011, February 11). Administration to Push for Small ‘Modular’ Reactors. The New York Times. Retrieved September 30, 2011 from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/13/science/earth/13nuke.html?_r=2

** DOE. (2011, February 15). Small Modular Reactors. Retrieved July 21, 2011, from DOE - Office of Nuclear Energy: http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/factSheets/2012_SMR_Factsheet_final.pdf

***Dan Ingersoll, personal communication, September 27, 2011.

Funding reflects the DOE’s belief “that these SMRs can be commercially deployed within the next decade.”**

“the question mark to me…. is: where are they going to come out in dollars per kWe?”

“the best data available, which is [sic] largely conjecture, exists [sic] with vendors.”***

5

Building on techniques developed at CMU for focussed elicitation of expert opinion, we conduct technical interviews to arrive at

estimates of cost, working with experts in the nuclear industry.

Here we try to generate such estimates


Twelve nuclear experts agreed to participate in our elicitation:All actively working on SMR projects, or closely related to SMR vendors

Experts come from several departmentsTechnical services, project management, and supply chain development

6

We explore 3 nuclear reactor designs


Scenario 1:1,000MWe

‘conventional’ GenIII+ reactor

Scenario 2:45MWe

SMR Number 1

Scenario 5:225MWe

SMR Number 2

Left: Thompson, K. (2011, June 27). Concepts and Prototypes: Two Next-Gen Nukes. Popsci. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-06/next-gen-nuke-designs-promise-safe-efficient-emissions-free-energy

Center: Heft, G. (2011, April). Small Modular Reactors Make Headway in Many Countries. Black & Veatch Solutions Magazine. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from http://solutions.bv.com/small-modular-reactors-make-headway-in-many-countries/

Right: Westinghouse Nuclear (2011). Explore the SMR. Westinghouse SMR. Retrieved October 1, 2011 from http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/smr/smr.swf

60ft18m

89ft27m220ft

66m

7

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

1 unit GenIII+

1,000MWe

1 unit SMR No. 1

45MWe

5 unitsSMR No. 1

225MWe

1 unitSMR No. 2

225MWe

24 unitsSMR No. 1

1,080MWe

We explore 5 nuclear plant deployment scenarios


8

One-unit scenarios: overnight cost per kWe


1 unit GenIII+ 1,000MWe

1 unit SMR No. 145MWe


Scenar.

Expert * * *

* Incl. owner’s cost

9

How much would an SMR project cost?



5 units SMR No. 1225MWe

1 units SMR No. 2225MWe

Scenar.Expert * * *

* Incl. owner’s cost

10

It will take less time to construct SMR plants


There is consensus that a conventional, 1,000MWe nth-of-a-kind plant would take 5 years from first concrete to commissioning

The single-unit SMR nth-of-a-kind plants would take 3 years from first concrete to commissioning

0%

100%

% p

roje

ct

com

plet

ion

construction duration (years): 3 5

11

Assessing the economic attractiveness of SMRs


“Both academic studies and vendor materials tout the potential economic benefits of SMRs. After studying the literature, we have compiled a list of these benefits. Here, we would like your opinion on these benefits: how valuable do you consider each?”

12

Safety and security: challenges faced by SMRs


“Here, we would like your opinion on which safety concerns are alleviated by SMR deployment (compared to GenIII+) and which concerns are not.”

13

We have estimates of how much deployment scenarios would cost Factory fabrication, modular construction, and shorter constructions

schedules hold promise in “improving the chances” of iPWRs iPWRs do not constitute a paradigm shift when it comes to safety and

security

Technology will cater to a larger marketthan conventional nuclear

What would an SMR cost schedule look like? Where in the world would these be viable now? How do you move to a place where SMRs can be deployed in different

parts of the world? (Institutions + proliferation) How do the communities hosting these plants feel about them? (does

the public’s perception of SMRs differ from that of large reactors?)

Moving forward with data from elicitation


investigating the economic viability of small modular nuclear reactors ahmed abdulla, inês azevedo,...

Documents