Abstract

An economic analysis has been performed to compare four nuclear fuel cycle options: a once-through cycle (OT), DUPIC recycling, thermal recycling using MOX fuel in a pressurized water reactor (PWR-MOX), and sodium fast reactor recycling employing pyroprocessing (Pyro-SFR). This comparison was made to suggest an economic competitive fuel cycle for the Republic of Korea. The fuel cycle cost (FCC) has been calculated based on the equilibrium material flows integrated with the unit cost of the fuel cycle components. The levelized fuel cycle costs (LFCC) have been derived in terms of mills/kWh for a fair comparison among the FCCs, and the results are as follows: OT 7.35 mills/kWh, DUPIC 9.06 mills/kWh, PUREX-MOX 8.94 mills/kWh, and Pyro-SFR 7.70 mills/kWh. Due to unavoidable uncertainties, a cost range has been applied to each unit cost, and an uncertainty study has been performed accordingly. A sensitivity analysis has also been carried out to obtain the break-even uranium price (215$/kgU) for the Pyro-SFR against the OT, which demonstrates that the deployment of the Pyro-SFR may be economical in the foreseeable future. The influence of pyrotechniques on the LFCC has also been studied to determine at which level the potential advantages of Pyro-SFR can be realized.

Highlights

  • Economics is an essential criterion to be considered in the future deployment of nuclear power

  • The calculation results of the levelized fuel cycle costs (LFCC) concerning these four fuel cycle scenarios show the following: once-through cycle (OT) 7.35 mills/kWh, DUPIC 9.06 mills/kWh, PUREX-mixed oxide (MOX) 8.94 mills/kWh, and Pyro-sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) 7.70 mills/ kWh

  • LFCCs were obtained for a fair comparison: OT 7.35 mills/kWh, DUPIC 9.06 mills/kWh, PUREX-MOX 8.94 mills/kWh, and PyroSFR 7.70 mills/kWh

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Economics is an essential criterion to be considered in the future deployment of nuclear power. A closer look at nuclear power production brings an insight that the cost varies within a wide range, depending on the nuclear fuel cycle option. With the current trend toward competition in the power market, the option of nuclear fuel cycle is an important determinant in terms of economics. Four nuclear fuel cycle options can be considered in the foreseeable future under the nuclear power situation in the Republic of Korea: a once-through cycle (OT), DUPIC recycling (DUPIC), thermal recycling using MOX fuel in a PWR (PWR-MOX), and SFR recycling employing pyroprocessing (Pyro-SFR). The objective of this work is to provide a systematic cost comparison among these nuclear fuel cycles

Objectives
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call