The Advanced Test Reactor at Idaho National Laboratory.
A Nuclear Renaissance
April / May 2008
Volume 6 Number 2
Nuclear technology is evolving from the cold war to a new global warming war. Nuclear power research and development is now aiming to produce both a clean, reliable source of electricity and eventually hydrogen for future use in transportation. Nuclear is an abundant source of energy, but without emitting carbon, sulfur or other harmful greenhouse gases into the environment.
The U.S. is in the planning stage of a nuclear renaissance; utilities have applied for licenses from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for more than 10 new nuclear plants to be built about 10 years from now. A number of challenges still remain but these are being addressed with innovative solutions.
One challenge is the significant increase in construction costs in recent years, upping the cost to build any type of power plant. Plant and equipment costs have been escalating substantially over the past 10 years, rising 30 percent over this term. This cost escalation hits coal, wind and nuclear plants hard due to their higher capital cost. Conservative analysis by investment firms warn of nuclear total construction costs as high as $5 to $6 million per mega-watt electric (MWe). Current estimates from the Department of Energy Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI) puts the upper cost range for capital costs between $2.8—€“$4.3 million per MWe. The actual costs will be dependent upon the nuclear reactor designs, construction interest rates (which add 10 to 30 percent to the capital costs) and the financial conditions facing the utility.
The completion of a nuclear waste repository continues to elude the U.S. From an economic standpoint, the disposal cost is not a critical determinant for nuclear success; however, moving the used fuel out of reactor pool storage and relieving the utilities from fuel disposition is critical for the expansion of nuclear power. A used fuel recycling option under evaluation by the AFCI and the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, although not a replacement for the repository, could minimize the need for additional repositories resulting from the growth of nuclear power.
The U.S. nuclear supply infrastructure has declined since the peak construction period in the 1970s. Fewer vendors are qualified to produce nuclear-stamp reactor components (especially large pressure vessels) and supply skilled labor to design, construct and operate nuclear reactors. The first orders for overseas construction of U.S.-designed reactors are priming the pump for U.S. component vendors to ramp up capabilities.
Innovations will be required to support large-scale expansion of a nuclear infrastructure to sustain build-rates approaching 10 or more reactors per year.
The nuclear renaissance can be achieved through the building of standard designs of large capacity reactor units (up to 1500 MWe) and also smaller modular systems to capitalize on production expansion while lowering costs. This mix of reactors supports a range of applications, including high-demand markets and developing markets where small to medium-sized reactors best match the electrical distribution grids.
Utilities may have difficulty initially affording new nuclear units given the financial risks and their limited ability to underwrite the costs and liabilities. The initial units will require government support, as provided by the Energy Policy Act 2005, to demonstrate to the financial community that the reactors can be built on budget and schedule. Recent project performance on reactor restarts (for example, Browns Ferry Unit 1 in May 2007) has shown that project completions on schedule and on cost are possible. Continued experiences like these will lower the perceived financial risk and therefore the interest cost to the utilities. Risks can also be reduced by using the streamlined combined operating license process and standardized reactor designs.
The global expansion of nuclear energy renews concerns about nuclear proliferation. Any new technology that expands nuclear power generation must be economically feasible and sustainable to be adopted by industry. Innovations in the nuclear fuel cycle must be examined to assess the degree of proliferation risk reduction that they secure, and at what price. If prices are not economically sustainable, then the incentives needed to support viability must be defined.
The nuclear renaissance can be realized through smart energy portfolio management and focused R&D over the lifecycle of the reactor. The key is to manage each phase of the reactor operation scrupulously so that the designs can be continually improved and become increasingly economical over their lifetimes.
Soon to be built reactors can be deployed in regulated markets in conjunction with profitable Light-Water Reactors to balance the energy portfolio while allowing the utility to continue to operate at profitable levels. This concept is further illustrated in the figure, with five phases to consider.
Phase 1. Currently operating reactors are providing solid economic performance, as measured by their current profitability. The average cost of electricity from the current 104 U.S. nuclear power plants is estimated at less than $18 per megawatt-hour (MW-hr). Many of these reactors will be granted lifetime extensions of 20 years, to around 2035. This is an opportune time to invest in R&D to improve the efficiencies of the technology, further extend the facility lives and identify improvements for future reactors. The end-of-life costs are expected to increase somewhat as capacity factors decline and costs increase for refurbishments and upgrades. Although there is an upturn of the cost curves after 2020 due to increasing maintenance, these reactors are still expected to produce electricity at competitive prices.
Phase 2. Introduction of the next plants, in the 2015—€“2035 timeframe, will show an increase in electricity generation costs due to relatively high plant construction and associated financing costs. Projections for the average cost of electricity from new plants during their first decade of operation are in the range of $52 to $67 per MW-hr including capital recovery. At the end of the financial life of a power plant (after 20 years, when the capital costs are mostly paid down), the reactor continues to operate for another 20 years or more with low costs near levels in Phase 1. The high initial costs for the new reactors are balanced by older reactors in the utility's portfolio. This mix of reactors will allow nuclear power to remain competitive with other baseload sources of energy.
Phase 3. This phase, as a continuation of Phase 1, provides for the further life extension of the existing fleet beyond the current license renewals from 40 to 60 years. Achieving this additional 20 year extension will take a concerted effort from industry and government. Idaho National Laboratory has developed a strategic plan to address this research and development opportunity, and this advance would be important to maintaining plant economic performance over extended lifetimes. According to Ralph Bennett, the laboratory's director of international and regional partnerships, "This R&D, although not on the critical path for new reactor deployment, enables the long-term economic viability of current and future plants."
Phase 4. After the first wave of new reactors, further expansion would occur with the introduction of the next phase of nuclear reactors—€”the so-called fourth generation Since R&D efforts are still underway and the designs are not complete, the costs for these systems are largely unknown. However, preliminary studies by the Japanese on future fast reactors show promising signs of meeting the economic goal to have a life-cycle cost advantage over other energy sources.
The Generation IV International Forum, a group of 10 nations collaborating on Generation IV R&D, is investigating the costs of these future systems. The startup costs for the new reactors are conservatively forecast to be similar to those of Phase 2. These advanced systems would also reduce costs as the capital expenses are written-off and R&D focuses on further technology improvements.
Phase 5. The electricity generation competitive cost range shaded in the center of the chart represents the likely competitive baseload energy cost from coal, natural gas and the averaged nuclear cost. The competitive cost ranges for baseload power may expand over time as premiums are placed on carbon emissions, fossil fuel supplies are diminished and renewable energy becomes mainstream. New reactor cost premiums may eventually be erased by these changes to the energy market and continued innovations in the technologies.
The momentum for a nuclear renaissance is growing. History cannot be reversed to undo the problems of the past, but the problems of the past do not have to be repeated. The nuclear industry has many years of safe and successful operation, and a record of economic stability. Nuclear technology has shifted over the decades from the creation of powerful tools for national security to tools that enable energy security and defend against global warming. The future offers new technical challenges and a competitive environment where nuclear could greatly expand in the 21st century.
David Shropshire, is an engineer at INL and deputy director of the Big Sky partnership, one of seven regional coalitions of government, research and industry members across the country.
Copyright © 2012 | Innovation America