Projected Costs of Generating Electricity - OECD Nuclear Energy ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Light water reactors require enriched uranium fuel (containing more 235 U, the fissile isotope, than natural uranium) in order to maintain a chain reaction in spite of the absorption of neutrons by the moderator. Fuels used in light water reactors of current generation use uranium enriched at some 3 to 5% in 235 U while natural uranium contains 0.71% of 235 U. Light water reactors also can use fuel containing recycled materials, plutonium and uranium, recovered through reprocessing of spent fuel. Pressurised heavy water reactors use heavy water (deuterium oxide) as coolant and moderator. This choice makes it possible to utilise natural uranium as fuel. The use of pressure tubes rather than a single large pressure vessel around the core facilitates refuelling while the reactor is in operation. For light water reactors the main front-end (before fuel loading in the reactor) fuel cycle steps are: uranium mining and milling; conversion; enrichment; and fuel fabrication. For PHWRs the enrichment step is not necessary. As enrichment accounts for some 30% of total fuel cycle cost (NEA, 2002), fuel cycle costs are lower for PHWRs than for light water reactors. At the back-end of the fuel cycle, after unloading of spent fuel from the reactor, two options are available: direct disposal of spent fuel (oncethrough cycle); and reprocessing (closed cycle). In the first option, spent fuel is conditioned after a period of cooling into a form adequate for final disposal in a high-level radioactive waste repository. In the second option, spent fuel is separated into materials that can be used again in reactor fuel and waste material (fission products) which are conditioned, after interim storage for cooling, to be disposed of in a high-level waste repository. There appears to be little difference in overall cost between the once-through and recycling options (NEA, 1994). For all reactor types and fuel cycle options, radioactive waste arising at each step of the fuel cycle are sorted and conditioned for disposal according to their level of radioactivity. Most countries provided nuclear fuel cost estimates for reactors operating on once-through fuel cycles, i.e. with direct disposal of spent fuel. Three countries provided cost estimates for closed cycle, i.e. with reprocessing of spent fuel and recycling of fissile materials. Advanced reactor designs New generations of nuclear power plants are being developed building upon the experience acquired through the commissioning and operation of existing units. Advanced nuclear power plant designs share common goals: improved economic competitiveness; enhanced safety; better use of natural resources; and strengthened security and proliferation resistance. Advanced designs pertain to two main categories: evolutionary and innovative (IAEA, 2004). Evolutionary designs, such as the Korean standard nuclear power plant (KSNP) and European pressurised water reactor (EPR), achieve improvements through relatively modest modifications, maintaining strong reliance on a proven design to minimise technological risks. Innovative designs, on the other hand, incorporate radical conceptual changes requiring extensive R&D programmes, including in most cases the construction and operation of a prototype or demonstration plant to demonstrate industrial feasibility. Several nuclear power plants already commissioned, under construction, ordered or planned pertain to the evolutionary advanced design category. Examples are the Kashiwasaki Kariwa units 6 and 7 ABWR in operation in Japan, the Olkiluoto-3 EPR under construction in Finland, the Sin-Kori units 1 and 2 (KSNP) being implemented in the Republic of Korea and the EPR project in France. Most of the units for which cost estimates were provided for the present study fall within the category of evolutionary advanced reactors. Advanced light water reactors under development cover a large range of capacity from less than 100 MWe to more than 1 500 MWe. Some examples of large size advanced LWR designs, beyond those already in operation or under construction mentioned above, include the ABWR, the BWR 90+, the simplified BWR (ESBWR), the AP-1000 and the VVER-1000/V-392. Small- and medium-size advanced LWR under development include AP-600, VVER-640/V-407, IRIS and SMART (IAEA, 2004). Advanced heavy water reactors are developed mainly in Canada, building upon the experience acquired through the operation of existing CANDU reactors. 162
The development of advanced reactors is not limited to water reactors. Gas-cooled reactors are attracting increasing interest, in particular in the context of hydrogen economy, in the light of their capabilities to deliver very high temperature heat. A significant effort is devoted to the small-size, modular pebble bed reactor PBMR and, for the longer term, the Generation IV International Forum (GIF, 2002) has selected two high temperature concepts – the gas fast reactor and the very high-temperature reactor – for further R&D efforts in an international context. Liquid metal-cooled fast reactors have been under development for many years in several countries and continue to be the focus of some efforts in particular in Japan and in the context of GIF. Other innovative designs under investigation at present include the supercritical water reactor, the molten salt reactor and a number of accelerator-driven systems aiming at enhance management of actinides. All advanced reactors under development are aiming at enhancing the competitiveness of nuclear power as compared to fossil-fuelled power plants, especially gas fired plants, while maintaining high safety standards. Owing to the cost structure of nuclear generated electricity, designers have focused their efforts on reducing capital costs. Significant capital cost reduction can be obtained by improved construction methods, reduced construction time, design improvement, standardisation, placing series orders, building multiple units on the same site and improving project management (NEA, 2000). Standardisation and series orders also have induced economic benefits through, for example, reducing expenses for staff training and spare part stocking. Shortening construction times reduces interest during construction which is a significant component of nuclear investment costs. Progress has been made already in this regard; for example nuclear units commissioned recently in Japan and Korea were built in 4 to 5 years. At the same time, advanced reactors are designed to last longer – 50 to 60 years. Extending operating lifetime decreases levelised electricity generation costs. Simplification is a key goal in the design of advanced reactors as reducing the complexity of nuclear steam supply system components both reduces costs, makes operation and maintenance easier, and improves safety. Advanced reactor designs aim at more compact, simplified plant layout, smaller buildings and structures, fewer safety related valves, pumps and piping, and simplified steam turbines. Another area of cost reduction is in fuel utilisation. Advanced reactor designs aim to improve fuel energy utilisation (“fuel burn-up”) and lower the total cost of fuel fabrication and other cost components related to the mass of fuel handled. Internal-combustion engines Internal-combustion engines are used extensively in electricity generation in sizes ranging from a few kilowatts to over 60 MW. Because they have pistons that employ a back-and-forth motion, they are also classified as reciprocating engines. Reciprocating engine technology has improved dramatically over the past three decades, driven by economic and environmental pressures for power density improvements (more output per unit of engine displacement), increased fuel efficiency and reduced emissions. There are two basic types of reciprocating engines – spark ignition (SI) and compression ignition (CI). Spark ignition engines for power generation use natural gas as the preferred fuel, although they can be set up to run on propane, gasoline, or landfill gas. Compression ignition engines (often called diesel engines) operate on diesel fuel or heavy oil, or they can be set up to run in a dual-fuel configuration that burns primarily natural gas with a small amount of diesel pilot fuel. Diesel engines have historically been the most popular type of reciprocating engine for both small and large power generation applications. However, in most industrialised nations, diesel engines are increasingly restricted to emergency standby or limited duty-cycle service because of air emission 163
Page 1:
NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY INTERNATIONAL
Page 4:
ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERAT
Page 9 and 10:
Table of Contents Table of Contents
Page 11:
Figures Figure 3.1 Specific overnig
Page 14 and 15:
The introduction of liberalisation
Page 16 and 17:
150 USD/MWh at a 5% discount rate a
Page 18 and 19:
The technologies and plant types co
Page 20 and 21:
locations and/or very favourable co
Page 22 and 23:
conclusions of the study were used
Page 25 and 26:
Chapter 2 Input Data and Cost Calcu
Page 27 and 28:
equipped with emission control devi
Page 29 and 30:
Table 2.2 - Exchange rates (as of 1
Page 31 and 32:
Table 2.4 - Coal plant specificatio
Page 33 and 34:
Table 2.7 - Wind and solar power pl
Page 35:
Table 2.10 - Other plant specificat
Page 38 and 39:
Figure 3.1 - Specific overnight con
Page 40 and 41:
exchange rates, the coal prices var
Page 42 and 43:
Construction time Gas-fired power p
Page 44 and 45:
USD/MWh 70 60 Figure 3.5 - Levelise
Page 46 and 47:
O&M costs The specific annual O&M c
Page 48 and 49:
Cost ranges for coal, gas and nucle
Page 50 and 51:
Ratio 1.9 Figure 3.12 - Cost ratios
Page 52 and 53:
Table 3.11 - Overnight construction
Page 54 and 55:
Table 3.14 - Projected generation c
Page 56 and 57:
Except for the offshore plant in th
Page 58 and 59:
At 10% discount rate, the levelised
Page 60 and 61:
At 5% discount rate, hydroelectrici
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Table 4.6 - Projected generation co
Page 66 and 67:
A CHP plant typically supplies heat
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Figure 5.2 - Levelised costs of ele
Page 72 and 73:
lower unit capital and operating co
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
cost calculation for some 130 power
Page 78 and 79:
It should be stressed that the plan
Page 80 and 81:
Concluding remarks The lowest level
Page 82 and 83:
Portugal Mr. António B. Gomes EDP
Page 84 and 85:
Table A2.1 - Nuclear plant investme
Page 86 and 87:
Overnight Capital Costs: Constructi
Page 88 and 89:
Table A2.7 - Gas-fired (including C
Page 90 and 91:
Table A2.10 - Wind plant investment
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Cost structure of supported green e
Page 98 and 99:
The highest investment cost arises
Page 100 and 101:
The expected development of the per
Page 102 and 103:
● ● Autoproducers. These firms
Page 104 and 105:
Canada The electricity market situa
Page 106 and 107:
Natural gas - combined cycle gas tu
Page 108 and 109:
Denmark Basic data Denmark has abou
Page 110 and 111:
In the future, both an increase in
Page 112 and 113:
nuclear operator Teollisuuden Voima
Page 114 and 115: these power generation methods. Two
Page 116 and 117: Figure 5 - Competitiveness of vario
Page 118 and 119: 2004. It envisages the gradual incr
Page 120 and 121: Table 4 - Gross electricity supply
Page 122 and 123: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Page 124 and 125: Electricity generation costs The to
Page 126 and 127: photovoltaic device. Finally the su
Page 128 and 129: Table 1 - Installed electric power
Page 130 and 131: Japan Consumers in Japan are suppli
Page 132 and 133: BPE will be established not as a bi
Page 134 and 135: Coal Coal fired power plants have b
Page 136 and 137: A new sewage treatment plant with a
Page 138 and 139: The interconnections between Portug
Page 140 and 141: In order to respond to these basic
Page 142 and 143: efficient energies and is reducing
Page 144 and 145: Liberalisation Basic restructuring
Page 146 and 147: External costs for electricity prod
Page 148 and 149: At the beginning of plant operation
Page 150 and 151: and high ash, moisture and sulphur
Page 152 and 153: The White Paper did not contain pro
Page 154 and 155: Table 7 shows the projected load fa
Page 156 and 157: other investment options available
Page 158 and 159: The impurities contained in coal ar
Page 160 and 161: “ultra-supercritical” condition
Page 162 and 163: unmineable coal seams. All three pr
Page 166 and 167: concerns. Consequently, the natural
Page 168 and 169: generators and power electronics el
Page 170 and 171: conventional fossil-fired plants. B
Page 172 and 173: ● ● very effective and is used
Page 175 and 176: Appendix 5 Cost Estimation Methodol
Page 177: into account in the real price of g
Page 180 and 181: ● ● ● ● Factors under the c
Page 182 and 183: and small power plants. Although th
Page 184 and 185: The general approach remains useful
Page 186 and 187: Two US economic analyses of nuclear
Page 188 and 189: assume future prices follow a rando
Page 190 and 191: The effects of price risk on techno
Page 192 and 193: The option to delay is embedded in
Page 195 and 196: Appendix 7 Allocating the Costs and
Page 197 and 198: Further Fourier’s law for heat tr
Page 199 and 200: Figure A7.4 - The energy conversion
Page 201 and 202: This yields: β = 0.153 α. If α e
Page 203: It is emphasised that depending on
Page 206 and 207: 1 st oil shock 2 nd oil shock Saudi
Page 208 and 209: Table A8.2 - Expected lower and upp
Page 210 and 211: Reliability in electricity systems
Page 212 and 213: is also highly dependent on the typ
Page 214 and 215:
In the ILEX study 5 and in another
Page 216 and 217:
an increasing share of wind is the
Page 218 and 219:
able to work out the optimal operat
Page 221 and 222:
Appendix 10 Impact of Carbon Emissi
Page 223 and 224:
costs of generation. The introducti
Page 225 and 226:
price at 3.5 €/GJ are the next fa
Page 227 and 228:
Figure A10.5 - Steam coal price var
Page 229 and 230:
The longer term impact on investmen
Page 231 and 232:
Appendix 11 List of Main Abbreviati
Page 233:
OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2 rue André-Pas
show all

Projected Costs of Generating Electricity - OECD Nuclear Energy ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?