Sources of Cost Overrun in Nuclear Power Plant Construction Call for a New Approach to Engineering Design

Eash-Gates, Philip; Klemun, Magdalena; Kavlak, Goksin; McNerney, James; Buongiorno, Jacopo; Trancik, Jessika E.

doi:10.1016/j.joule.2020.10.001

Cited by 51 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 55 publications

(97 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Note that these cost components can comprise both physical ''hardware'' costs, such as materials, and also non-hardware ''soft'' costs, such as labor, engineering design, and administration. 48,62 As such, these components can reflect changes in cell materials and designs as well as manufacturing processes, equipment, and overhead. Also note that in this analysis ''input prices'' refer to the prices a technology manufacturer pays to purchase materials that they use in their manufacturing process.…”

Section: Cost Decomposition Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…44 Recently, a new conceptual framework and dynamic, detailed quantitative models have been applied to study the cost changes observed for notable energy technologies. 35,48 These models start from a cost equation that computes a technology's overall cost scaled by its service (e.g. typically USD W À1 for power generating technologies, USD W À1 h À1 for energy storage technologies, etc.)…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Determinants of lithium-ion battery technology cost decline

Ziegler

Song

Trancik

2021

Energy Environ. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Cost Decomposition Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determinants of lithium-ion battery technology cost decline

Ziegler

Song

Trancik

2021

Energy Environ. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When we look at the historical record, the evidence suggests that at the fleet level nuclear power could even have what has been termed a negative rate of learning. In the United States and France, the two countries with the largest nuclear reactor fleets, reactors that were constructed later actually cost more than those constructed earlier [65]- [71]. If this pattern holds for SMRs, it would mean that a small reactor will never catch up on cost with a large reactor of similar design.…”

Section: Can Learning Compensate?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Small Modular and Advanced Nuclear Reactors: A Reality Check

Ramana

2021

IEEE Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nuclear power has been declining in importance over the last quarter century, with its share of global electrical energy generation decreasing from 17.5 percent in 1996 to around 10 percent in 2019. Small modular and advanced nuclear reactors have been proposed as potential ways of dealing with the problemsspecifically economic competitiveness, risk of accidents, link to proliferation and production of wasteconfronting nuclear power technology. This perspective article examines whether these new designs can indeed solve these problems, with a particular focus on the economic challenges. It briefly discusses the technical challenges confronting advanced reactor designs and the many decades it might take for these to be commercialized, if ever. The article explains why the higher construction and operational costs per unit of electricity generation capacity will make electricity from small modular reactors more expensive than electricity from large nuclear power plants, which are themselves not competitive in today's electricity markets. Next, it examines the potential savings from learning and modular construction, and explains why the historical record suggests that these savings will be inadequate to compensate for the economic challenges resulting from the lower generation capacity. It then critically examines arguments offered by advocates of these technologies about job creation and other potential uses of energy generated from these plants to justify subsidizing and constructing these kinds of nuclear plants. It concludes with an assessment of the markets for these technologies, suggesting that these are inadequate to justify constructing the necessary manufacturing facilities.

show abstract

“…The capital cost of nuclear power plants in western countries has significantly increased for multiple reasons. 5,6 One cause is that nuclear plant requirements have evolved over the last 50 years. The original nuclear plant designs followed those of coal plants, i.e., tight integration of the heat source with the turbine generators.…”

Section: High Capital Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Separating Nuclear Reactors from the Power Block with Heat Storage to Improve Economics with Dispatchable Heat and Electricity

Forsberg

2021

Nuclear Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Markets are changing as the result of (1) the addition of variable wind and solar that causes highly volatile electricity prices and (2) the goal of a low-carbon economy. These changes require economic low-carbon dispatchable electricity, which is now provided by natural gas turbines, and dispatchable heat for industry and commerce. Moreover, nuclear plant requirements have changed in the last 50 years with high capital costs in western countries. An alternative plant design is described with the nuclear island separated from a nonnuclear power block by large-scale heat storage. All heat from the reactor is sent to heat storage. The nuclear reactor operates at base load and is sized to meet average energy demand over a period of days. Heat storage provides variable heat to industry and/or the power block. The nonnuclear power block is sized to provide peak electricity capacity (kilowatts) several times the nuclear reactor base-load power output to maximize revenue by sale of electricity at times of high prices. The power block capital cost (heat exchanger, turbine, and generator) per unit of generating capacity (kilowatt) is less than a conventional gas turbine that includes heat generation (compressor and burner) and the power block (turbine and generator). Nuclear reactor capital cost is reduced by fewer requirements on the nuclear system (not connected to the grid) and nuclear-quality construction for only the reactor. Operating costs (security, maintenance, etc.) are minimized by separation of the nuclear reactor plant from balance of plant. Low-cost heat storage provides a competitive economic advantage to heat-generating technologies (nuclear, concentrated solar power) over electricity-generating technologies (wind, solar, photovoltaic) with more-expensive battery or other electricity storage systems in providing dispatchable electricity to the grid.

show abstract

Sources of Cost Overrun in Nuclear Power Plant Construction Call for a New Approach to Engineering Design

Cited by 51 publications

References 55 publications

Determinants of lithium-ion battery technology cost decline

Determinants of lithium-ion battery technology cost decline

Small Modular and Advanced Nuclear Reactors: A Reality Check

Separating Nuclear Reactors from the Power Block with Heat Storage to Improve Economics with Dispatchable Heat and Electricity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About