Journal of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology(JNFCWT) (방사성폐기물학회지)

Korean Radioactive Waste Society (한국방사성폐기물학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Application of Economic Risk Measures for a Comparative Evaluation of Less and More Mature Nuclear Reactor Technologies

  • Andrianov, A.A. (National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute)) ;
  • Andrianova, O.N. (Institute for Physics and Power Engineering named after A.I.Leypunsky) ;
  • Kuptsov, I.S. (National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute)) ;
  • Svetlichny, L.I. (National Research Nuclear University MEPhI (Moscow Engineering Physics Institute)) ;
  • Utianskaya, T.V. (JSC Engineering Center of Nuclear Containers)
  • Received : 2018.03.05
  • Accepted : 2018.10.02
  • Published : 2018.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Less mature nuclear reactor technologies are characterized by a greater uncertainty due to insufficient detailed design information, operational data, cost information, etc., but the expected performance characteristics of less mature options are usually more attractive in comparison with more mature ones. The greater uncertainty is, the higher economic risks associated with the project realization will be. Within a comparative evaluation of less and more mature nuclear reactor technologies, it is necessary to apply economic risk measures to balance judgments regarding the economic performance of less and more mature options. Assessments of any risk metrics involve calculating different characteristics of probability distributions of associated economic performance indicators and applying the Monte-Carlo method. This paper considers the applicability of statistical risk measures for different economic performance indicators within a trial case study on a comparative evaluation of less and more mature unspecified LWRs. The presented case study demonstrates the main trends associated with the incorporation of economic risk metrics into a comparative evaluation of less and more mature nuclear reactor technologies.

Keywords

References

  1. International Atomic Energy Agency, Economic Evaluation of Bids for Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA Technical Reports Series No. 396 (2000).
  2. Generation IV International Forum, Cost estimating guidelines for GENERATION IV nuclear energy systems, Revision 4.2 (2007).
  3. International Atomic Energy Agency, Financing of New Nuclear Power Plants, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series No. NG-T-4.2 (2008).
  4. OECD/NEA, The Financing of Nuclear Power Plant, NEA No. 6360 (2009).
  5. International Atomic Energy Agency, INPRO Methodology for Sustainability Assessment of Nuclear Energy-Systems: Economics, IAEA Nuclear Energy Series No. NG-T-4.4 (2014).
  6. OECD/NEA, Current Status, Technical Feasibility and Economics of Small Nuclear Reactors (2011). (2011).
  7. A.A. Andrianov, I.S. Kuptsov, and V.M. Murogov, "Towards sustainable nuclear power development", ATW: International journal for nuclear power, 59(5), 287-293 (2014).
  8. A.A. Andrianov, V.A. Kanke, I.S. Kuptsov, and V.M. Murogov, "Reexamining the Ethics of Nuclear Technology", Science and Engineering Ethics, 21(4), 999-1018 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-014-9578-0
  9. A. Andrianov, V. Kuznetsov, I. Kuptsov, and G. Fesenko, "INPRO activities on development of advanced tools to support judgement aggregation for comparative evaluation of nuclear energy systems", Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations, Article ID 910162, 15 (2014).
  10. A. Andrianov, V. Kuznetsov, I. Kuptsov, A. Schwenk- Ferrero, and G. Fesenko, "Innovative Nuclear Energy Systems: State-of-the Art Survey on Evaluation and Aggregation Judgment Measures Applied to Performance Comparison", Energies, 8(5), 3679-3719 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3390/en8053679
  11. International Atomic Energy Agency, Expansion Planning for Electrical Generating Systems: A Guidebook, IAEA Technical Reports Series No. 241 (1984).
  12. P. Silvennoinen, Nuclear Fuel Cycle Optimization: Methods and Modelling Techniques, 126, Pergamon Press, New York (1982).
  13. P. Belli, J. Anderson, H. Barnum, J. Dixon, and J-P. Tan, Handbook on Economic Analysis of Investment Operations, 110-124, Operational Core Services Network Learning and Leadership Center, World Bank (1998).
  14. K. Daniel, "Net Present Value (NPV) Definition", Investopedia, Accessed Feb. 24 2018. Available at: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/npv.asp.
  15. G.A. Holton, Value at Risk: Theory and Practice, 1st ed., 56-205, Academic Press, San Diego (2003).
  16. P. Artzner, F. Delbaen, J. M. Eber, and D. Heath, "Coherent Measures of Risk", Mathematical Finance, 9(3), 203-208 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9965.00068
  17. D. Vose, Risk Analysis, A Quantitative Guide, 3rd ed., 752, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester (2008).
  18. D.-W. Kim, "A Research on the Economic Feasibility of Korean Nuclear Power under the Condition of Social Acceptance after Fukushima Accident", J. Nucl. Fuel Cycle Waste Technol., 11(3), 207-212, (2013). https://doi.org/10.7733/jnfcwt-k.2013.11.3.207
  19. B.H. Park and W.I. Ko, "External Cost Assessment for Nuclear Fuel Cycle", J. Nucl. Fuel Cycle Waste Technol., 13(4), 243-251 (2015). https://doi.org/10.7733/jnfcwt.2015.13.4.243
  20. B.H. Park and W.I. Ko, "Review on Studies for External Cost of Nuclear Power Generation", J. Nucl. Fuel Cycle Waste Technol., 13(4), 271-282 (2015). https://doi.org/10.7733/jnfcwt.2015.13.4.271