Economics
Today’s new nuclear plants cost billions of dollars to license, build and operate. The overall cost profile for new and existing light water reactors is capital intensive with low operating and nuclear fuel costs. The proposed nuclear system would be the opposite. The capital costs for the proposed system are estimated to be a fraction of the cost of new light water reactors and, as a result, the fuel and operating costs make up a higher proportion of the overall costs, similar to natural gas plants.
Thermoelectrics
Thermoelectrics (TEs) in the proposed system are estimated to convert about ten percent of the thermal heat into electricity compared to 33 percent for today's operating nuclear plants. The lower conversion efficiency, however, is not necessarily a negative cost and performance factor for TEs. With a TE system, many expensive components in today's nuclear plants are not needed such as steam generators, turbines, reactor coolant pumps, cooling towers, and pressurized systems. Further, little-to-no maintenance is required for the life of TEs.
With a TE system, many expensive components in today's nuclear plants are not needed such as steam generators, turbines, reactor coolant pumps, cooling towers, and pressurized systems.
The simpleness of TEs provides a large cost savings for the microreactor, enables the microreactor to be cost-competitive, and helps the microreactor overcome its low thermal conversion factor compared to other technologies.
Levelized Costs
Because the nuclear system is much smaller and simpler, it is easier to analyze and provide reliable cost estimates. The capital, fuel and operating costs of the system over a 20-year lifetime (levelized costs) is estimated to range from 3.0 cents/kWh to 5.0 cents/kWh. This is the range of levelized costs for new natural gas combined cycle plants, wind turbines and solar panels, which are the primary generating technologies currently being built in the U.S. It is also the price range in competitive deregulated wholesale markets.
Deregulated markets do not favor capital intensive technologies like today’s operating nuclear plants because variable costs (mostly fuel) are the primary costs that determine the spot price of electricity. As a result, capital intensive technologies like nuclear have a hard time competing in deregulated markets because capital costs are not always recovered. Further, in regulated markets, capital expenses can be recovered, but that's only if a nuclear plant is chosen as the lowest cost option for new electric capacity.
A new natural gas combined cycle plant has been the lowest cost option for several decades and is the main technology that drives the electricity prices in deregulated and regulated markets. This makes it the electric generating technology to beat. The cost profile for the proposed nuclear system is much more similar to the cost profile of natural gas plants that have low capital costs. As a result, the nuclear system will be able to better compete with gas plants in both regulated and deregulated markets because it’ll be able to recover more of its capital costs.
Further, the cost of nuclear fuel is lower and much more stable than the cost of natural gas. Nuclear fuel costs over the last ten years at existing plants have averaged 0.7 cents/kWh compared to 3-5 cents/kWh for natural gas.
Low capital costs coupled with low and stable nuclear fuel costs are precisely what can compete with fossil fuels. At these costs, not only could nuclear energy become the primary source of energy, it could also provide lower prices of electricity for consumers.