4 ms·
Doesn't really matter. Child comment mentions $1.5B in heavy water costs. That's $1.1B USD. Assuming an old, 600MWe nameplate capacity and the planned 30 year s
by arcticbull 4y ago
Doesn't really matter. Child comment mentions $1.5B in heavy water costs. That's $1.1B USD. Assuming an old, 600MWe nameplate capacity and the planned 30 year service life at 80% capacity (although they last far longer) we're talking total generated 130TWh.
That means heavy water contributes a total of 0.8c/kWh.
The cost of raw Uranium is between $0.0015/kWh and $0.000015/kWh. [1]
Disposal is like $500/kg, and 1kg gets you 315000kWh (0.16c/kWh).
Once the very expensive reactor is up and running the costs are very, very low.
[edit] Study pins it at 20% of the plant up-front cost.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_nuclear_power_plants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economics_of_nuclear_power_pla...
[2] https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/34/087/34087588.pdf https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/...
- amluto 4y ago> That means heavy water contributes a total of 0.8c/kWh. Which exceeds the LCoE of a brand new solar plant.