05.08.2013 Views

ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

6-30<br />

reactor. Since this increase is due simply to <strong>the</strong> construction of additional HWRs, <strong>the</strong><br />

fractional installed capacity of <strong>the</strong> HWR is increased comensurately.<br />

In summary, using <strong>the</strong> assumptions contained in this study, <strong>the</strong> following conclusions<br />

can be drawn about <strong>the</strong> behavior of a nuclear power system operating on <strong>the</strong> throwaway option:<br />

(1) The effect of deploying an advanced converter in 1995, under <strong>the</strong> assumption of<br />

350 GWe in <strong>the</strong> year 2000 and 15 GWe/yr <strong>the</strong>reafter with <strong>the</strong> high-cost U308 supply, would<br />

be small.<br />

(2) If <strong>the</strong> U308 supply available below $160/lb should be larger than 3 million ST,<br />

or if <strong>the</strong> nuclear growth should be smaller than assumed above, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> effect of deploying<br />

<strong>the</strong> advanced converter would be larger.<br />

(3) The effect of reducing <strong>the</strong> enrichment tails composition is somewhat larger than<br />

that of deploying an advanced converter under <strong>the</strong> assumed conditions.<br />

(4) The dominant variable for <strong>the</strong> nuclear power system on <strong>the</strong> throwaway cycle is <strong>the</strong> U308 supply; a U308 supply ei<strong>the</strong>r twice as large or twice as small is of greater<br />

consequence than any of <strong>the</strong> effects discussed above.<br />

6.2.2. Converter System with Plutonium Recycle<br />

In order to assess <strong>the</strong> option of plutonium recycle in converters i- was assumed -..at<br />

a reprocessing capability would be available in 1991. (This assumption does not argue that<br />

<strong>the</strong> 'reprocessing capacity would be economically attractive or diversion-resistant, but<br />

merely that it would be technologically feasible by this date.) In this option <strong>the</strong> classical<br />

plutonium recycle was modified somewhat by rejecting converters with self-generated<br />

recycle in favor of converters with complete plutonium loads. This has <strong>the</strong> advantage of<br />

reducing <strong>the</strong> number of reactors that must be placed in <strong>the</strong> energy centers and comnensurately<br />

increases <strong>the</strong> number of reactors that can be placed outside <strong>the</strong> centers. The individual<br />

reactor concepts and <strong>the</strong>ir locations are shown in Fig. 6.1-2 (Option 2).<br />

A comparison of <strong>the</strong> nuclear contribution of <strong>the</strong> LWR with plutonium recycle to that<br />

of <strong>the</strong> LWR on <strong>the</strong> throwaway cycle (Fig. 6.2-13) shows that with recycle <strong>the</strong> maximum installed<br />

nuclear capacity is increased from approximately 420 GWe to approximately 600 GWe<br />

and <strong>the</strong> time at which <strong>the</strong> maximum occurs is increased from about year 2010 to about year<br />

2020 (high-cost UJ08 supply). The maximum annual U308 requirement for this case is<br />

67,000 ST/yr and <strong>the</strong> maximum annual enrichment requirement is 46 million SWU/yr. These<br />

L<br />

h'<br />

L<br />

L<br />

L<br />

c<br />

G<br />

h'<br />

L

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!