ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

6-50
(4) If all plutonium produced were transmuted to 233U but no attempt was made to
minimize the amount of plutonium produced, the maximum installed nuclear capacity could be
as large as 640 GWe with the high-cost U30a supply. As much as 21% o f the installed
nuclear capacity would have to be located in secure energy centers, however, and it would
require that 34% o f the reprocessing capacity be devoted to fuel containing thorium and 20%
of the refabrication capacity be devoted to fuel containing 233U.
(5) If a nuclear system utilizing an FBR with a Pu-U core and a thorium blanket were
developed, the system could maintain a net addition rate of 15 GWe/yr indefinitely. The
installed nuclear capacity, in this case, could be as high as 1100 GWe in year 2050; however,
56% o f this capacity would have to be located in secure energy centers. Also, approximately
38% o f the reprocessing capacity would have to be devoted to fuel containing thorium and 27%
of the refabrication capacity would have to be devoted to fuel containing 232U.
(6) If a nuclear system utilizing an FBR with a Pu-Th core and a thorium blanket were
developed, the maximum installed capacity would depend upon the performance characteristics
of the denatured design receiving fuel from the FBR.
the nuclear system would be capable of adding 15 GWe/yr indefinitely.
design were a denatured LWR, then the installed nuclear capacity would increase to approxi-
mately 850 GWe in about year 2035 and decrease thereafter.
If this design were a denatured breeder,
If, however, the
In addition to the results and conclusions presented in this chapter, detailed results
for all the nuclear policy options calculated are tabulated in Appendix C.
Also, as men-
tioned earlier, a separate analysis performed under the assumption of an unlimited U308
supply but with the nuclear power systems in competition with coal-fired plants is described
in
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Appendix D.
Chapter 6 References
R. D. Nininger, "Remarks on Uranium Resources and Supply," Fuel Cycle 78, Atomic
Industrial Forum, New York, March 7, 1978.
John Klemenic, Director, Supply Analysis Division, Grand Junction Office, DOE Uranium
and Enrichment Division, "Production Capabi 1 i ty , 'I October 1978,
John Klemenic and David Blanchfield, Mineral Economist, Grand Junction Office, "Produc-
tion Capability and Supply," paper presented at Uranium Industry Seminar, October 26-27,
1977, Grand Junction, Colorado; proceedings pub1 ished as GJO-108( 77).
"Uranium Enrichment Services Activity Financial Statements for Period Ending September
30, 1977," p. 13, Schedule C, 0R0-759.
"AEC Gaseous Diffusion Plant Operations," 0R0-684, USAEC (January 1972).
"Data on New Gaseous Diffusion Plants," 0R0-685, USAEC (April 1972).
See also, T. M. Helm, M. R. Shay, R. W. Hardie, and R. P. Omberg, "Reactor Design
Characteristics and Fuel Inventory Data," TC-971 , Hanford Engineering Development
Laboratory (September 1977).
L
L
L
L
L
L
G
1;:
L
L
I: