ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

5-1 9
The most rapid deployment schedule considered to be feasible was one in which time
was allowed to resolve technical problems but one that was largely unimpeded by comercializa-
tion considerations. The R,D&D schedules that have been presented in this section are
consistent with this approach. However, it is recognized that the high-risk factors and
potentially unfavorable near-term economics of such a schedule would make it unattractive
to the private sector, especially for those systems requiring large-plant demonstration.
Demonstration program costs are viewed as highly uncertain and dependent upon the specific
economic incentives for each reactor/cycle concept and on such factors as the licensing
climate and general health of the industry prevailing at the time of deployment. Thus the
costs associated with the R,D&D schedules are assumed to be largely government financed.
A comparison of the total estimated costs to the government for the various reactor
systems discussed above is presented in Table 5.1-3. As noted, the R,D&D costs are lowest
Table 5.1-3. Estimated Total Government Support Required for Demonstration of
LWRs on DUTH Fuels and Advanced Converters on Various Fuels
Total Costs
Sys tern ($MI Comments
LblR; DUTH Fuels
Advanced Converters;
Reference Fuels
HTGR; HEU/Th Fuel
HWR; SEU Fuel 610 - 77ObSc
SSCR; LEU Fuel
85 - 215a In current-generation LWR; no demon-
stration plant required.
560 - 750b If DUTH fuel selected as reference
fuel, additional incremental cost
probably less than cost of convert-
ing LWRs to DUTH fuels.
190 - 25ObSc
Additional incremental cost to con-
vert to DUTH fuels approximately
equal to that for LWR conversion.
Could be converted to DUTH fuel for
SlOM - $60M if LWRs already con-
verted.
QIncludes 25% subsidy for demonstration of LWR on DUTH fuel; excludes fuel
performance program (see Table 5.1-2).
bCovers first demonstration unit only; 25% subsidy of four additional units
anticipated (see Table 5.1-2).
C
Excludes costs of heavy-water plant facilities.
for the LWR on denatured fuel because of the already widespread deployment of this reactor
concept. It is assumed that all basic R&D required for commercialization of LWRs operat-
ing on their reference fuel cycle (LEU) has been completed, and that the use of denatured
fuel can be demonstrated in current-generation LWRs. Thus, an LWR demonstration plant,
as such, will not be required. The commitment of an LWR to DUTH fuels will entail some
risks, however, and a 25% government subsidy is assumed to be necessary for a three-year
demonstration program.