The LFTR, How much will it cost?
It does not appear that LFTR development will be anywhere as costly as LMFBR debelopment has been. The technical challenges are far less daunting, and the consequences of an improbable LFTR accident would be far less serious. Political interest have not yet gathered to push LFTR development in ways that controdict good technological judgement. A good guess would be that LFTR development would cost between $5 and $10 billion 2009 dollars., or less than A-380 development costs. If this is the case, then the LFTR would be quite a bargan.
No would the LFTR be hat expensive to produce. I have attempted updating old ORNL cost estimates for various LFTR designs. This would lead to an estimate that a MW of LFTR generating capacity would cost about half of what the equivalent LWR generating capacity would cost. Given numerous and significant portential savimgs that I have pointed out in Nucear Green, LFTR costs might be lowered to as little as 25% of the capital costs for LWRs. Thus levelized LFTR costs might run as low as 25. No doubt far more work is needed before such a figure could be considered definitive.
Other Posts by Charles Barton
Which is better for nuclear- Uranium or Thorium? - April 30, 2012
More on the Denatured Molten Salt Reactor from David LeBlanc - April 15, 2012
Can Anthropogenic Global Warming Be Non-Catastrophic? - November 9, 2011
Global Warming Skepticism Crumbling - October 29, 2011
Underground Reactor Advantages - October 10, 2011
» Already a member? Login now to comment!
» Not a member? Register to comment!
CharlesBarton said:
Friend2all, ORNL-3995 was a very early document, interms of MSBR conceptual development. Cost estimates in ORNL-3995 were based on largely untested cost estimates for light water reactors from the mid 1960's. Fifteen years later LWRs proved to be more expensive than had been estimated at the time of ORNL-3995. I would call your attention to my review of later ORNL cost estimates. http://nucleargreen.blogspot.com/2009/04/on-cost-of-lftrs-ornl-tm-7207-and-moir.htmlRobertSteinhaus said:
In 1966 Oak Ridge National Laboratory prepared and published a detailed design study for a commercial 1000 MW Molten Salt Reactor, This preliminary design study included detailed estimates of costs for the project in a summary document ORNL-3996
http://www.energyfromthorium.com/pdf/ORNL-3996.pdf
which was published in August of 1966. I have tried to update the ORNL-3995 construction cost estimate by multiplying the estimated 1966 project cost by a factor derived from the consumer price index history over the intervening years.
The report ORNL-3996 breaks the construction cost of a LFTR reactor into two pieces. The project covered in that report included a Reactor Power Plant and a separately estimated Supported Chemical Plant.
Reactor Power Plant - estimated total plant cost of $114.4 million private-financing in 1966 dollars
estimated total plant cost of $110.7 million for public financing in 1966 dollars
Supporting Chemical Plant - estimated total plant cost of $5.3 million in 1966 dollars
I used an inflation multiplication factor of 6.74 derived from a calculator provided on the Federal Reserve Minneapolis Website (http://www.minneapolisfed.org/index.cfm)
An "estimate" for the cost of replicating the ORNL 1000 MW Molten Salt Reactor today (2009) would be
Reactor Power Plant - estimated total plant cost of $771 million private-financing
estimated total plant cost of $746 million for public financing
Supporting Chemical Plant - estimated total plant cost of $35.7 million
The total direct construction costs in 2009 dollars for both the Reactor Power Plant and Supporting Chemical Plant would be 808.8 million 2009 dollars.
ORNL-3995 also breaks out indirect construction costs including cost of land, cost of engineering inspection, and cost of construction supervision. These indirect construction costs amounted to
These are still very low estimates and significantly below the estimates offered by the author Charles Barton for a 2009 commercial sized LFTR power plant.
ORNL-3996 suggests
"The relatively low capital cost estimate obtained is due to the small
physical size of the reactors and associated equipment, the high thermal
efficiency, and the simple control requirements."
The original ORNL estimate was for the direct and indirect construction costs associated with building a 1000 MW power generating molten salt reactor. The ORNL estimate included a contingency reserve to address unanticipated cost over-runs. The ORNL estimate did not include the costs of legal defense and delays resulting from harassing citizen environmental lawsuits and it could not include NRCregulatory costs associated with respect to certification of Liquid Molten Salt Reactor designs.
Nonetheless, I think it is still valuable to see an 2009 dollars inflation adjusted estimate for the capital construction costs for building a 1000 MW(e) commercial LFTR by one of America’s finest nuclear design teams.
I would like to know what is wrong with updating the ORNL-3995 estimate for the general rate of inflation and use that figure for a preliminary estimate of LFTR construction cost?
The author, Mr. Charles Barton, provides figures that are allot closer to current costs for building other styles of power generation plants including natural gas or coal fired power plants. Is it a case where it is often wiser to quote people a higher price and then bring in a project under budget. Is the author aware of cost elements not included in the ORNL estimate that justify the higher cost estimate?
Why is inflation adjusting the ORNL-3995 construction costs not “operative”? What elements in the MSBR ORNL-3996 design are known to have appreciated in cost at a rate that exceeds the general rate of inflation? Why is a 1000MW(e) LFTR for less than 1 billion dollars out of reach?
-
Baby You Can Drive My (Electric) Car
Posted May 11, 2012 by Scott Edward Anderson
-
Siemens develops ABS plastic alternative
Posted May 9, 2012 by Doris de Guzman
-
Reduce CO2 and Slow Global Warming?
Posted April 30, 2012 by Willem Post
-
Hidroenergia 2012
May 23, 2012, Wroclaw, Poland
-
WGC 2012 - 25th World Gas Conference
June 4, 2012, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
-
Ecwatech 2012
June 4, 2012, Moscow, Russia
Scott Edward Anderson is a consultant, blogger, and media commentator who blogs at The Green Skeptic. More »
Marc Gunther is a writer, speaker and consultant, who focuses on business and the environment. More »
Christine Hertzog is a consultant, author, and a professional explainer focused on Smart Grid. More »
Jesse Jenkins is the director of energy and climate policy at the Breakthrough Institute. More »
Robert Rapier works in the energy industry and writes and speaks about energy and the environment. More »
Geoffrey Styles is Managing Director of GSW Strategy Group, LLC and an award-winning blogger. More »
Dan Yurman is a nuclear energy blogger and writes regularly for Fuel Cycle Week. More »
The Energy Collective
- YOU
- Rod Adams
- Scott Edward Anderson
- Charles Barton
- Barry Brook
- Dick DeBlasio
- Simon Donner
- Big Gav
- Michael Giberson
- James Greenberger
- Lou Grinzo
- Marc Gunther
- Tyler Hamilton
- Christine Hertzog
- David Hone
- Jesse Jenkins
- Lynne Kiesling
- Sonita Lontoh
- Jesse Parent
- Vicky Portwain
- Tom Raftery
- Robert Rapier
- Joseph Romm
- Robert Stavins
- Robert Stowe
- Geoffrey Styles
- Alex Trembath
- Gernot Wagner
- John Whitehead
- Dan Yurman
Hidroenergia 2012
When: Wed, 2012-05-23 09:00
NERC CIP Compliance Training
When: Thu, 2012-05-24 08:00
Webinar on Transported Asset Protection Association’s (TAPA) Freight Security Requirements and Trucking Security Requirements
When: Thu, 2012-05-24 14:00
Global JOJOBAWORLD 2012
When: Fri, 2012-05-25 09:00
NESCO Town Hall: Security Risk Management Practices for Electric Utilities
When: Wed, 2012-05-30 13:00
Ecwatech 2012
When: Mon, 2012-06-04 09:00

About Social Media Today




