Izvestiya vuzov. Yadernaya Energetika

The peer-reviewed scientific and technology journal. ISSN: 0204-3327

System Levelized Fuel Cost of Electricity Generation in a Two-Component NES with a Closed Uranium-Plutonium NFC

9/23/2021 2021 - #03 Nuclear power plants

Zrodnikov A.V. Dekusar V.M. Gurskaya O.S.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26583/npe.2021.2.01

UDC: 621.039.51

An approach has been proposed to determine computationally the levelized unit fuel cost (LUFC) of electricity generation for a fast reactor of a two-component nuclear energy system (NES) with regard for plutonium production. The approach is based on taking into account the additional economic effect, which can be achieved through the sale at the market price of the natural uranium from the substitution of thermal reactors by fast reactors with MOX fuel based on the plutonium bred in a fast reactor. This requires considering simultaneously the reactor parts of the fuel cycle for fast and thermal reactors. Relationships have been obtained which connect the key neutronic and fuel characteristics with the NPP economic performance and fuel cycle. The described methodology was used for the computational study of the LUFC for a fast sodium-cooled reactor. Calculations have shown that, in the considered case, taking into account the plutonium production leads to the LUFC reduction by nearly half and, therefore, to a major decrease in the total unit cost of electricity generation (levelized cost of electricity or LCOE).

References

  1. Alekseev P.N., Blandinsky V.Yu., Balanin A.L., Grol’ A.V., Nevinica V.A., Teplov P.S., Fomichenko P.A., Gulevich A.V., Dekusar V.M., Egorov A.F., Korobejnikov V.V., Moseev A.L., Marova E.V., Maslov A.M., Farakshin M.R., Shepelev S.F., Shirokov A.V. Evaluation of the scenarios effectiveness of Russian nuclear power development using multi-criteria analysis. Atomnaya Energiya. 2020, v. 128 , iss. 1, pp. 3-6 (in Russian).
  2. Egorov A.F., Klinov D.A., Korobejnikov V.V., Moseev A.L., Marova E.V., Shepelev S.F. Results of multi-criteria analysis of nuclear energy development scenarios in Russia including total energy mix in the state. VANT. Ser. Yaderno4Reaktornye Konstanty. 2017, iss. 4, pp. 64-78 (in Russian).
  3. The Economics of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, OECD/NEA. Paris – 1994. Available at: https://www.oecd-nea.org/ndd/reports/efc/EFC-complete.pdf (accessed Jun. 13, 2021).
  4. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, INPRO Methodology for Sustainability Assessment of Nuclear Energy Systems: Economics, INPRO Manual, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series No. NG-T-4.4, IAEA, Vienna, 2014.
  5. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Guidance for the Application of an Assessment Methodology for Innovative Nuclear Energy Systems, INPRO Manual Economics, Volume 2 of the Final Report of Phase 1 of the International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO), IAEA-TECDOC-1575/Rev.1, IAEA, Vienna, 2008.
  6. Dekusar V.M., Kolesnikova M.S., Chizhikova Z.N. Methodology and Software for Calculation of the Fuel Component Cost of Electricity Production at Nuclear Power Plants with Thermal and Fast Reactors. Preprint FEI-3243. Obninsk. GNTs RE-FEI, 2014, 22 p. (in Russian).
  7. Chernyakhovskaya Yu.V. Evolution of Methodological Approaches to the Assessment of the Cost of Electricity. The Analysis of Foreign Experience. Vestnik IGEU. 2016, iss. 4, pp. 56-68 (in Russian).
  8. Dekusar V.M., Gurskaya O.S. On the issue of plutonium cost in a two-component nuclear power system. VANT. Ser. Yaderno4Reaktornye Konstanty. 2021, iss. 2, pp. 25-33 (in Russian).
  9. Walter A., Reynolds A. Fast Neutron Breeder Reactors. Moscow. Energoatomizdat Publ., 1986, 623 p. (in Russian).
  10. Alekseev P.N. et al. Two4Component Nuclear Power System with Thermal and Fast Reactors in the Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle. Moscow. Tekhnosfera Publ., 2016, 160 p. ISBN 978-5-94836-434-6 (in Russian).
  11. Matveev V.I., Khomyakov Yu.S. Technical Physic of Sodium Fast Reactors. Moscow. MEI Publ., 2012, 355 p. (in Russian).
  12. Poplavsky V.M., Tsibulya A.M., Khomyakov Yu.S., Matveev V.I., Eliseev V.A., Tsikunov A.G., Vasil’ev B.A., Belov S.B., Farakshin M.R. Core and Fuel Cycle for an Advanced Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor. Atomnaya Energiya. 2010, v. 108, iss. 4, pp. 206-211 (in Russian).
  13. Shropshire D.E., Williams K.A., Boore W.B. Smith J.D., Dixon B.W. Dunzik-Gougar M., Adams R.D., Gombert D., Schneider E. Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis, INL/EXT-07-12107 Rev.1 2008. Available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/71325086.pdf (accessed Jun. 13, 2021).
  14. Bunn M., Fetter S., Holdren J.Р., Zwaan B. The Economics of Reprocessing vs. Direct Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel. DE-FG26-99FT4028. Cambridge, Mass.: Project on Managing the Atom, Harvard University, 2003. Available at: https://www.belfercenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/files/repro-report.pdf (accessed Jun. 13, 2021).
  15. Deutch J. et al. The Future of Nuclear Power: An Interdisciplinary MIT Study. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Science, Technology and Public Policy Program. Available at: http://www.web.mit.edu/nuclearpower (accessed Jun. 13, 2021).
  16. The Full Costs of Electricity Provision. OECD 2018 NEA No. 7928.

nuclear fuel cycle closure technical and economic performance plutonium production levelized unit fuel cost additional income fast and thermal reactors