Document MGd8VRVpXkdvDQg6g806VkVGj

Cnporehm end ugnrfnot*rf* Tja- loading ' hrifhe _ founOtffan ^ c6&-from\ . Irfediatet fuel 1 .-iCZDlL. ftorcff* jlll-rPower Cost, Sodium?Cooled Reactors itAt Dual-purpose 'eostor at turrenlly conceived for power ond plutonium Ouat.purpoie reactor as currently conceived for power only III Dual-purpose MQtlot o% currently conceived for power only oiler 5-yeor tnortiiallon llli future Improved reocto* built for powar only i Conventional iluon pow> plant liens A I II III (MilUoni of doilori) Silo and yerd investment loectpr.plpnl Investment Towor.ptoni Investment Total investment 1.1 39.1 ts.i 31.0 1.B 33.1 13.1 it-o 2.1 33.1 15.1 51.0 l.t 14.6 12.1 29.1 0.5 _ 13.5 14.0 Site ond yard flitd charges 0.34 eector-pteni fid cMorgot 4.30 Pover-plont flood charges 2.03 Total flood charges 4,41 (mills per twhr not output) 0.34 4J0 2.03 4.91 (4.0| _ _ -- 0.15 2.24 1.45 4.04 (34) 1.40 (2.4) odor onnuel operating cost 1.04 fower-ptont annuo) oper coil 0.44 Total onnwol operating coils 1.32 (mills per kwhr net output) Anneal luel, processing cost I0JS (mills pet kwhr nel output) Total onnool costs 11.81 074 0.4A 1.20 (Ml 4.40 (4J) 1271 074 0.44 UO (U) 2.50 (2.4) 370 0.37 0.35 072 (0.4) UO (U| 4.71 0.40 (0.4) 1.47 (7.5) 4.00 Net copoclty, mw 145.0 Net on. output, 1000 mwhr 1070 Average energy cost, nltti per kwhr 141.0 145.0 140.0 1020 1010 1120 (12.3) (3.6) (3-5) 100.0 447 (4.0| COMPACT SODIUM-COOUD filACTOfl moat bo tMoldod and or. ranged for removing product* and recharging Of Intervals device release! the plates to let them (oil into their sheaths. A storage area holds new (uel assemblies. A separate storage tank holds irradiated (uel assemblies (or the nee* essary time. The entire renctor charge must be replaced several times per year. Reactor*planr operation needs 103 men. and powcr.plant 14 men. a total o( 117, These do not include maintenance men. It was assumed that (uel*element fabrication and processing would be handled by central facilities. Uquld-Matol-Cooled Tost Reoctor. Table 1 gives details of the reactor, shown on page 100. A breeder blanket o( depleted or natural uranium surrounds the reoctor core of highly enriehed material. An assembly of o large num ber of stainless-steel fuel elements moke up the core- A reflector will probably envelop the core, decreasing the critical mass and limiting the heating outside the core. All these are In a cylindrical steel vessel. 8x6 ft. The vessel must be designed to circulate the liquid sodium, to refuel, and to accommodate control mechanisms. Two electromagnetic pumps circulate the primary cool ant to two Intermediate heat exchangers at 900 P. returning to the reactor at 600 P, p. 99. The intermediate coolant (so dium) heats the two steam generators. The intermediate heat exchanger can be a single-tube design since sodium leakage from intermediate to primary dreuitj will not affect reactor operation. Moving a reflector between core and blanket, or altering disposition of fertile and fissionable material can be used to control the reoctor. Either method can use control drums, p. 100. Another possibility is o movable reflector outside the core, which con be raised or lowered to change reac tivity. Need for on Inert atmosphere (helium), above the sodium at all times, complicates refueling. Complete refueling of the core end Inner portion of the breeder blanket will be needed once a year. If the reactor runs as a converter, the U235 remaining in the core must be decontaminated and reprocessed. If the reactor runt as o breeder, a portion of the separated and decontaminated plutonium must be re. processed to moke up a future core. The reactor is designed to run with on 80% annual capac ity factor. One month is provided for scheduled maintenance and refueling. The fast reactor connot be considered equal to the water-cooled reoctor on the basis of existing technology, time needed for design and construction, reliability of cost and performance estimates, or safeguards and degree of isolation now required. Two more years will be needed to complete a fast reaetor 100 IEPOIT ON ATOMIC ENIIOY powei THE STUDIES continued utullation, compared to a water-cooled thermal reactor. Thls.couM be reduced at the expense of additional and parallel development work. Test results to dote hove not shown any limitations on `"nature of liquid sodium. With further experience it may be possible to raise coolant temperatures t6*generate 1000-F steam for the turbine. Icenomic Studies. Table II gives the estimated invest ment costs f6r the two types of dual-purpose reactors. All eosts are based on June 1952 rotes end prices. They ore contractor s price, plus 10% for owner's overhead. ARC laboratory nuclear design and development entails consid erable cost that wos not included in these estimates, This wot not considered chargeobJc to a specific project. Table III shows the results of brief studies mode to mesture the economic feasibility of nuclear energy. These are based on 20-year amortixotion for power and fuel fab rication plants, private utility financing, 60% capacity loctor. Case I shows that on immediately feasible nuclear-power plant cannot compete with current steam-electric plants. The 3-6 mills per kwhr of Cose 21 assumes capital costs of the plant have been amortised, and shows the plant would have substontiol value as a power producer after retirement from plutonium production. Case 111 indicates that a future atomic plant might produce power on a competitive basis. This assumes reduced costs stemming from: improved technology, operating experience, construction of a large block of capacity (S00 mw) at one site. Certain improvements in thermal efficiency could be at tained by refinements of design in the turbine-generator plant, resulting in plutonium-cost reductions. This becomes Increasingly Important as the economic life of the project is extended. Uncertainties with the initial plant, however, and the desire to minimise investment make it preferable not to use such refinements now. When reoctor operating conditions hove been established In on actual design, detailed analysis should be made to evaluate cycle refinements. On a project (or power only these would be of greater Importance. Conclusions. 1. Dual-purpose reactors arc now techni cally feasible. 2. Construction and operating costa of the water-cooled thermal-type reaetor can be predicted with fair degree of accuracy. Detailed design of such a reaetor can be started promptly. Placing primary emphasis on plutonium pro duction, et earliest possible date for a definite production period, will moke this reoctor very attractive. 3. The liquid-metal-cooled fast reactor conserves uran ium and promises to be adaptable to high steam conditions. This makes it mare attractive for power. Design end construction ought to be undertaken even though certain development work will be needed during the design period. 4. Though the liquid-fuel fast reactor seems to hove greatest possibility of low-cost power production, the de velopment still needed prevents design and construction in the near future. 5. It seems power soles from a dusl-purpose reoctor will not reduce the cost of plutonium production by a substan tial amount. Under present plutonium demand and cost conditions, however, power sales more than justify the ad ditional equipment in dual-purpose plants. After plutonium demand 'ceases and investment is recovered, the reactors may be economically vaiuoble as power producers only. Commonwealth Edison - Public Service ThU group believes heavy-water-moderated and cooled reactor has best economic possibili ties. But they see the gas-cooled reactor as a substantial beginning in atomic power, one causing minimum Interference with production reactors now under construction or contemplated Two reactors were considered: (1) gas-cooled graphite moderated (2) heavy-woter-modernted and -cooled. The tss-eooled unit was chosen first, because more information wsi available on engineering, construction and operating experience. It seemed that less extrapolation of design data, less time and expense for research and development would be needed. The heavy.water reoctor was conceived essentially by the Artonne National Laboratory. The working group primarily helped in solving some of the electrical, mechanical and tnictural design problems, and prepared cost estimates. Oos-Cooled Roecfer. This 350-mw heat-output unit has MIIIUM-COOICD BIACTORt bailor* fn AO-tt-hlgh building feed 3SO-ptJg SlJ-f tfwn to M-mv MAIM on opon platform IT (433 RffOtT ON ATOMIC CNItOT 101