Economic Analysis of Several Nuclear Fuel Cycles

Economics is one of the essential criteria to be considered for the future deployment of the nuclear power. With regard to the competitive power market, the cost of electricity from nuclear power plants is somewhat highly competitive with those from the other electricity generations, averaging lower in cost than fossil fuels, wind, or solar. However, a closer look at the nuclear power production brings an insight that the cost varies within a wide range, highly depending on a nuclear fuel cycle option. The option of nuclear fuel cycle is a key determinant in the economics, and therefrom, a comprehensive comparison among the proposed fuel cycle options necessitates an economic analysis for thirteen promising options based on the material flow analysis obtained by an equilibrium model as specified in the first article (Modeling and System Analysis of Different Fuel Cycle Options for Nuclear Power Sustainability (I): Uranium Consumption and Waste Generation). The objective of the article is to provide a systematic cost comparison among these nuclear fuel cycles. The generation cost (GC) generally consists of a capital cost, an operation and maintenance cost (O and M cost), a fuel cycle cost (FCC), and a decontaminating and decommissioning (D and D) cost. FCC includes a frontend cost and a back-end cost, as well as costs associated with fuel recycling in the cases of semi-closed and closed cycle options. As a part of GC, the economic analysis on FCC mainly focuses on the cost differences among fuel cycle options considered and therefore efficiently avoids the large uncertainties of the Generation-IV reactor capital costs and the advanced reprocessing costs. However, the GC provides a more comprehensive result covering all the associated costs, and therefrom, both GC and FCC have been analyzed, respectively. As a widely applied tool, the levelized cost (mills/KWh) proves to be a fundamental calculation principle in the energy and power industry, which is particularly appropriate for an estimate on the costs of energy given the various technologies. Levelized fuel cycle cost (LFCC) and levelized generation cost (LGC) have offered effective indicators for economic comparison among nuclear fuel cycles and were adopted to compare the fuel cycle options considered in this study. The unpredictable change of the unit costs of several key components due to the uncertainties can lead to considerable differences in levelized costs among the fuel cycle alternatives. To take these unavoidable uncertainties into account, a wide scale was applied to each unit cost and a distribution of levelized cost was also obtained