Spent Nuclear Fuel Management: Levelized Cost of Electricity Generation and Analysis of Various Production Scenarios

Rodríguez‐Penalonga, Laura; Soria, Beatriz Yolanda Moratilla; Ocaña-Pastor, Paula; Martín-Cañas, Paula; Belda-Sánchez, Borja; Cortes-Sanz, Natalia; Estadieu, Mathilde; Linares, José Ignacio; Vidal-Bernardez, José Manuel; Niño-Serrano, Marta

doi:10.3390/en9030178

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The cost of the twice-through cycle is usually higher than for the oncethrough cycle. However, the magnitude of the difference between these costs depends on the methodology and the adopted hypothesis and assumptions [20,27,28,[31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40]. Figure 1 shows the evolution of the nuclear fuel cycle strategies costs with time, in mill/kWh, for different international studies [27,28,[30][31][32][33]38,40], which have been updated to 2016.…”

Section: Advantages and Disadvantages Of The Current Nuclear Fuel Cycmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategies and the Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Technologies

Rodríguez‐Penalonga

Soria²

2017

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nuclear power has been questioned almost since its beginnings and one of the major issues concerning its social acceptability around the world is nuclear waste management. In recent years, these issues have led to a rise in public opposition in some countries and, thus, nuclear energy has been facing even more challenges. However, continuous efforts in R&D (research and development) are resulting in new spent nuclear fuel (SNF) management technologies that might be the pathway towards helping the environment and the sustainability of nuclear energy. Thus, reprocessing and recycling of SNF could be one of the key points to improve the social acceptability of nuclear energy. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to review the state of the nuclear waste management technologies, its evolution through time and the future advanced techniques that are currently under research, in order to obtain a global vision of the nuclear fuel cycle strategies available, their advantages and disadvantages, and their expected evolution in the future.

show abstract

Section: Advantages and Disadvantages Of The Current Nuclear Fuel Cycmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The cost of the twice-through cycle is usually higher than for the once-through cycle. However, the magnitude of the difference between these costs depends on the methodology and the adopted hypothesis and assumptions [20,27,28,[31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40].…”

Section: Advantages and Disadvantages Of The Current Nuclear Fuel Cycmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategies and the Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Technologies

Rodríguez‐Penalonga

Soria²

2017

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cost structure is typically as follows: capital costs, 91.8%; fixed operational costs, 7.22%; variable operational costs, 0.04%; costs of fuel, 0.60%; nuclear waste disposal, 0.24%; other costs, 0.10% [38] (see also other studies on economics of nuclear energy [40][41][42]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

To Whom Should We Grant a Power Plant? Economic Effects of Investment in Nuclear Energy in Poland

Zawalińska

Kinnunen²,

Gradziuk

et al. 2020

Energies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Poland is the most coal-dependent economy and one of the biggest polluters in the EU. In order to alleviate this problem, meet CO2 emission requirements set by EU, and improve the country’s energy security, Poland decided to introduce nuclear power to its energy mix. So far, several potential locations for nuclear power plants have been officially proposed, mainly based on technical parameters, but no comparisons of the economic impact of such locations have been considered. Consequently, the main goal of this paper is to compare the national and regional economic effects of investments in nuclear power plants—for both the construction and exploitation phases—in the four most probable locations, which are similarly beneficial from a technical point of view. In order to simulate these effects, the spatial recursive dynamic Computable General Equilibrium model was calibrated until 2050 including agglomeration effects and featuring the regional economies of all Polish regions. The results show that although the construction phase is beneficial for economic development in all four regions, the exploitation phase is good for only one. The economies of the other regions suffer, to a greater or lesser extent, from the Dutch disease. The paper argues that the regional economic effects of such an investment differ significantly, due to differences in the regions’ economic structures; hence, they should always be taken into account in the final decisions on the power plants’ locations.

show abstract

A multi-fuel management model for a community-level district heating system under multiple uncertainties

Zhuang

Shi

et al. 2017

Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spent Nuclear Fuel Management: Levelized Cost of Electricity Generation and Analysis of Various Production Scenarios

Cited by 5 publications

References 5 publications

A Review of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategies and the Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Technologies

A Review of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Strategies and the Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Technologies

To Whom Should We Grant a Power Plant? Economic Effects of Investment in Nuclear Energy in Poland

A multi-fuel management model for a community-level district heating system under multiple uncertainties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About