ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

More documents

Recommendations

Info

c-2 In all cases the reactors operating on plutonium or on highly enriched uranium were assumed to be restricted to secure energy centers, while those operating on low-enriched, slightly enriched, natural, or denatured uranium were permitted to operate outside the centers. The specific reactors used for each case, and their locations, are given in Table 6.1-5 of Chapter 6. All cases were run assuming 350 GWe of installed nuclear capacity in the year 2000 and a net increase in installed capacity of 15 GWe per year thereafter. Each new plant was assumed to have a 30-yr lifetime. For Option 1, some additional cases were run for a lower energy demand -- 200 GWe in the year 2000 and a net increase of 10 GWe per year thereafter. These latter,cases are-identified with a C following the case number (i.e., cases lLEC, lLC, etc.). In the results presented here, particular emphasis is given to uranium utilization, separative work utilization, and energy-support ratios. Two important criteria are to be considered when analyzing uranium utilization of reactor systems. of the system to meet the specified nuclear energy demand with the available U308 supply. For these calculations two different supplies were assumed: $160/1 b U308, corresponding to a high-cost and an intermediate-cost supply, respectively. (As shown in Appendix D, nuclear power plants do not compete well at higher U308 costs.) The second criterion is the capability of the uranium industry to discover, mine and mill the ore at a rate adequate to satisfy the demand for uranium. maximum production rate is difficult to postulate because of the possibility of importing U3Oi and because of the difficulties that might be encountered in developing uncertain resources. As pointed out in Section 7.4.4 of Chapter 7, the DOE Uranium and Enrichment Division has estimated that by developing known and potential reserves domestic mining and milling could sustain 60,000 ST of U30s per year. The first is the ability 3 million and 6 million ST below The specification of the overall When analyzing enrichment utilization, the same two criteria - total amount and enrichment capacity - were also used, the more meaningful being the capacity since enrichment is not a limited natural resource like uranium. For the cases in which 3 million ST of uranium below $160/lb U308 was assumed, the lack of low-cost U308 dominates the plant selection because the amount of ore available is inadequate for meeting the projected nuclear energy demand. As a result, resource-efficient reactors are constructed regardless of their cost. With a U308 supply below $160/lb as large as 6 million ST, however, most systems are no longer dominated by the lack of U308, and the relative total power costs of the individual reactors play a more important role. In fact, if the system is not limited in any way by the supply of U308, then the solution is determined solely by economics. The results in this case become more tenuous because of the uncertainty in capital costs, fabrication costs, reprocessing costs, etc. The cumulative nuclear capacities that could be constructed through the year 2050 for the various cases are shown in Table C-2. Only those cases totaling 1959 GWe will have c I] c L L c 1: c c L . d LJ L
1 i; Li b L lkd t L L I hd I ' L; i Table C-2. Cumulative Nuclear Capacity Built Through Year 2050 with Various Nuclear Policy Options c-3 (Adequate Capacity = 1959 GWe) Advanced Option Capacity (GWe) Converter option 1E* 1 2 3 4 5u 5T 6 7 8 572 594 607 667 603 1135 1193 1271 1497 1320 *System with standard LWR only. 953 1043 987 1417 1783 1937 1921 1959 High-Cost U30R Supply 1959 945 120s 1027 1959 1071 1423 1275 1959 1334 1747 1505 1959 855 1064 1004 Intermediate-Cost U308 Supply 1959 1852 1921 1864 1959 1943 1959 1959 1959 1943 1959 1959 1959 1794 1924 1844 1959 1959 1959 1950 1959 1959 1959 1959 1959 1547 1959 1943 1959 1959 1959 1591 1959 1956 1959 1959 1959 105; 1959 1559 met the projected nuclear demand under the criteria of an installed capacity of 350 GWe in year 2000 and an increase of 15 GWe per year thereafter.* With the high-cost U308 supply some of the systems fall far short of satisfying the demand; in fact, the only nuclear systems that fully meet the demand are those including FBRs (Options 3, 6, 7, and 8). The throwaway option, in particular, builds less than a third of the desired nuclear plants. Of the cases that do not include FBRs, those employing HWRs come closest to meeting the demand. One HTGR case (26) is also clearly superior to most of the other cases. This is to be expected since Case 26 includes traditional HTGRs that are fueled with highly enriched 235U and also with 3U/Th. A doubling of the economic U308 supply to 6 million tons allows many more nuclear system options to meet the projected nuclear energy demand. optSon has cases that don't even come close to satisfying the demand. In fact, only the throwaway None of the Option 4 cases meet the demand either; however, Cases 4s and 4H are within 16 GWe of the demand. All other systems have at least one advanced converter option that builds the desired 1959 GWe of energy. It should be emphasized that for the systems where the demand was met with the high-cost U308 (i.e.,'the systems with FBRs), a doubling of the ore supply means that the ore supply is no longer the sole constraint and plant selection is based on economics. *NOTE: Since this is a 50-year span, some of the reactors built in the first few years will have been decommissioned after having operated 30 years.
Page 1 and 2:
Interim Assessment of the Denatured
Page 3:
i L i b I, i L L bi L L Contract No
Page 7 and 8:
1, L L t i Ltr 1 L L V PREFACE AND
Page 9 and 10:
L i Li 1, I b k b id ii t L id b i
Page 11 and 12:
I L bi i; L 7.3.1. Possible Procedu
Page 13 and 14:
i xi I b L ABSTRACT A fuel cycle th
Page 15 and 16:
I b .- i, hd t t CHAPTER 1 INTRODUC
Page 17 and 18:
- - I 4d _- t .- ! Lili L Ld id .-
Page 19 and 20:
L .- k id .- I L: _ - I iclr .- i b
Page 21 and 22:
I, G - -- I id ..- ! I _. I: L _.-
Page 23 and 24:
huJ -- AI I ' b --- I bl --- t L L
Page 25 and 26:
-- t Li - I' b -. c (u I i ai L i i
Page 27 and 28:
L - i' u i Lt L r- L t- b L 2-7 den
Page 29 and 30:
2-9 1. Nuclear power is limited to
Page 31:
e Isr i L i- b t CHAPTER 3 ISOTOPIC
Page 34 and 35:
232" Fig. 3.0-1. Decay of 232U. ORN
Page 36 and 37:
3-6 3.1. ESTIMATED U CONCENTRATIONS
Page 38 and 39:
3-8 The values in Table 3.1-2 are a
Page 40 and 41:
3-1 0 3.2. RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS OF
Page 42 and 43:
3-1 2 232u IN RECYCLED HTGR FUEL (p
Page 44 and 45:
3-14 3.2.2 Toxicity of 232Th Given
Page 46 and 47:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.
Page 48 and 49:
3.18 There are three approaches whi
Page 50 and 51:
1 i i 3-20 3.3.2. Fabrication and H
Page 52 and 53:
The 3-22 3.3.3 Detection and Assay
Page 54 and 55:
3-24 3.3.4. Potential Circumvention
Page 56 and 57:
3-26 - either large centrifuge pilo
Page 58 and 59:
! 3-28 Table 3.3-3. Enriched Proauc
Page 60 and 61:
3-30 The high alpha activity of ura
Page 62 and 63:
3- 32 Table 3.3-7. Sumry of Results
Page 64 and 65:
3-34 statistical redundancy through
Page 66 and 67:
introduce time, cost and visibility
Page 68 and 69:
3-38 An additional factor relative
Page 71 and 72:
I b t I t L 1; L t ki 4.0. 4.1. CHA
Page 73 and 74:
L L _ _ { i J _- \ I b B u il c _.
Page 75 and 76:
Y m I I I . aro ID0 10.00 4-5 ORNL-
Page 77 and 78:
t .. -. F 4d -- I ' L 0- 122, L _-
Page 79 and 80:
L L; L t -I I ' b L -- t i b -- I;
Page 81 and 82:
_- I -- L i d .-- L 4-1 1 Reference
Page 83 and 84:
_- id L t I , 4d i, L id L 5 bi t h
Page 85 and 86:
-- - . & I I ' h I ' Y 61 L -- I( L
Page 87 and 88:
u -- x i I*i 1- bi 4-1 7 The use of
Page 89 and 90:
la - i , I br -_ t c c L e L 4-1 9
Page 91 and 92:
4-21 Case B" is a modification of C
Page 93 and 94:
c 4-23 L i a L L 4.2. SPECTRAL-SHIF
Page 95 and 96:
4-25 Initial analyses of spectral-s
Page 97 and 98:
h 1' b t c i--; & I- & 1: i f 4-27
Page 99 and 100:
c- i L L e I b 4-29 . safeguards fo
Page 101 and 102:
L t i- bi L L t i 4-31 a significan
Page 103 and 104:
~ kc'l c" -1 r-"! r! r-'i c Table 4
Page 105 and 106:
F-- I iJ L ii - L c c 4-35 Referenc
Page 107 and 108:
c r- L i] L h L __ f; t 4-37 trons
Page 109 and 110:
Table 4.4-1. Fuel Utilization Chara
Page 111 and 112:
L I 1 I Ld I ie i-- 1 t' 4-41 4.4.2
Page 113 and 114:
4-43 Table 4.4-4. PBR Coated Partic
Page 115 and 116:
HEU/Th 0.59 Seed i3 Breed 0.58 HEU/
Page 117 and 118:
L i; 1 I i; i 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Page 119 and 120:
4-49 Table 4.5-1. Fuel Utilization
Page 121 and 122:
ments. 4-51 The calculations for LM
Page 123 and 124:
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 4-53 0 77-1
Page 125 and 126:
Table 4.6-1. Comparison of Fuel Uti
Page 127 and 128:
4-57 _I 10 10' 2 2' CASE NUMBER -.
Page 129 and 130:
4-59 Most of the information availa
Page 131 and 132:
- i b k L L -- I , b -- I .- I Li L
Page 133:
4-63 on only the preliminary data p
Page 136 and 137:
c e E c
Page 138 and 139:
! 5-4 5.1. REACTOR RESEARCH AND DEV
Page 140 and 141:
5-6 As has been pointed out above,
Page 142 and 143:
5-8 the LMFBR on its reference cycl
Page 144 and 145:
5-10 The fuel performance program u
Page 146 and 147:
. 5.1.2. Government Research and De
Page 148 and 149:
5-1 4 The first aspect of large pla
Page 150 and 151:
5-1 6 and should also address metho
Page 152 and 153:
I DATA BASE DEMu)pMENT DEMO DESIGN
Page 154 and 155:
j ~ 5-20 The R,D&D costs are highes
Page 156 and 157:
5-22 In the case of metal-clad oxid
Page 158 and 159:
5-24 5.2.2. Research, Development,
Page 160 and 161:
5-26 program, including hot testing
Page 162 and 163:
c c
Page 164 and 165:
6-4 persed areas ensured - a fact w
Page 166 and 167:
6-6 6.1.2. Reactor Options The reac
Page 168 and 169:
Reactor/Cycl ea LWR-U5(LE)/U-S LUR-
Page 170 and 171:
6-10 6.1.3. Nuclear Policy Options,
Page 172 and 173:
Table 6.1-4. Nuclear Policy Options
Page 174 and 175:
SWU SWU 6-14 UZJS USILEINS WYI U5IL
Page 176 and 177:
6-16 n nM MEDL nows.1 Option 4: In
Page 178 and 179:
6-18 HM HEDL7OOl.70.3 Option 6: In
Page 180 and 181:
SRCIFIED CONSTRUCTION LlMllLD INTRO
Page 182 and 183:
50- 40 6-22 c Y \ VL - :-: F 30- -
Page 184 and 185:
6-24 The potential nuclear contribu
Page 186 and 187:
%- f $400 J 2 s 2, 1 THE LWR FOLLOW
Page 188 and 189:
141.6 ST - U308 4 7.2 lo3 swu ENRIC
Page 190 and 191:
6-30 reactor. Since this increase i
Page 192 and 193:
‘9. ,1 ST ‘3O8 6-32 12 Kg HM I
Page 194 and 195:
6-34 1HE LWR WITH FISSILE UUNIUM PC
Page 196 and 197:
THE LWR WITH PURONIUM MlNUllUTlON A
Page 198 and 199:
6-38 be located in energy centers a
Page 200 and 201:
6-40 installed capacity must be han
Page 202 and 203:
lm, 1 I I I I mf RR WITH UGHT rwrmi
Page 204 and 205:
6-44 6.2.7. Converter-Breeder Syste
Page 206 and 207:
25.2 ST swu 6-46 19 Kg fir Pu 13 Kg
Page 208 and 209:
6-48 Table 6.3-2. Summary of Result
Page 210 and 211:
6-50 (4) If all plutonium produced
Page 213 and 214:
I d r-- 1 > w I r- k z r L id r- .
Page 215 and 216:
L 1 L u without benefit of U.S. exp
Page 217 and 218:
L a, - L i -- k; L t IJ L 7-7 While
Page 219 and 220:
7-9 Viewed solely from the plutoniu
Page 221 and 222:
L L i; i; 7-1 1 routinely in LWRs a
Page 223 and 224:
'I 7-1 3 t I: k: The isotopic compo
Page 225 and 226:
U L L L L ld 1 i" * required 233U m
Page 227 and 228:
I I, i 7-1 7 ii I 1 I L L k L i Thr
Page 229 and 230:
li i i L Li L & I ' i kr ii L i h i
Page 231 and 232:
7-21 7.3. PROSPECTS FOR IMPLEMENTAT
Page 233 and 234:
L I L t L i L i 1 L 7-23 7.3.1. Pos
Page 235 and 236:
7-25 7.3.2. Considerations in Comme
Page 237 and 238:
.. I b k; L; i b b 1J I L 7-27 cycl
Page 239 and 240: 7-29 7.4. ADEQUACY OF NUCLEAR POWER
Page 241 and 242: L i' hd .- - I ' i t L i' b i -' b
Page 243 and 244: x ibd 1 .. I i, L -- i t Table 7.4-
Page 245 and 246: 7-35 cycled in Pu/Th converters, th
Page 247 and 248: L 1' b I_- ,- i b -- I ' b L 7-37 T
Page 249 and 250: ..a 4 I- 1 ' u c1 Y u L 7-39 betwee
Page 251 and 252: L e, I I ' lb t 7-41 Systems that u
Page 253 and 254: e-. . ! hr L3 z i- b: i- b L c i li
Page 255 and 256: 7-45 j I Table 7.5-1. Integrated As
Page 257 and 258: - isi. c ‘Id i L c 7-47 Although
Page 259 and 260: e Other e e e On the e 7-49 technol
Page 261 and 262: t a APPENDICES
Page 263 and 264: A-3 Appendix A. ISOTOPE SEPARATION
Page 265 and 266: I] 1- $i ill 8 LI b' The Gas Centri
Page 267 and 268: id A- 7 The Component Preparation L
Page 269 and 270: i ?L 1- U t L fl bi L c u La -- ti
Page 271 and 272: p; ‘U i-- L ,c c Japan A-1 1 Tabl
Page 273 and 274: 13 A-13 L" efficient of the units d
Page 275 and 276: L L L t I h h u L; _- t f is throug
Page 277 and 278: u A-1 Aerodynamic Methods 7 Both th
Page 279 and 280: i i d .- I . ii hi L i: i t ' Li 1
Page 281 and 282: la t L I I, lj ir 1 Li c I L L' B-1
Page 283 and 284: i; 1 t u 1 1 B-3 Table 8.5. Reactor
Page 285 and 286: Table 6-7. Marginal Costs of U308 a
Page 287 and 288: LJ L L1 a .E 4' P Y W 5 18 2 16 : 0
Page 289: Appendix C. DETAILED RESULTS FROM E
Page 293 and 294: L c-5 The introduction of the class
Page 295 and 296: i ' ibd 1 b i L L i L I Li . . b b
Page 297 and 298: E , 1 ' b _. I ' L 1 b _- i G i' b
Page 299 and 300: -, ii I ; b i- ii L b 4 i L L i‘
Page 301 and 302: _- I ii I _ _ I L I td C i b L i, L
Page 303 and 304: Qulatiw klur W i t y hilt (*I thrmg
Page 305 and 306: L c c b - i ii L r D-1 Appendix D.
Page 307 and 308: L L L L [i i” Table D -2. Maximum
Page 309 and 310: Fig. D-2 (cont.) 25W I I I I I (I)
Page 311 and 312: [i energy center. It can be seen fr
Page 313 and 314: L L i il L t W 0-9 Table D-4. Summa
Page 315 and 316: -- Lid c i' .- .b) i Internal Distr
Page 317 and 318: It e L L L t u I' f ' ki Federal Ag
Page 319: u 1' 1" Outside Organizations (cont
show all

ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?