• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.47 no.3
• /
• pp.306-314
• /
• 2015

This paper examines the difference in the value of the nuclear fuel cycle cost calculated by the deterministic and probabilistic methods on the basis of an equilibrium model. Calculating using the deterministic method, the direct disposal cost and Pyro-SFR (sodium-cooled fast reactor) nuclear fuel cycle cost, including the reactor cost, were found to be 66.41 mills/kWh and 77.82 mills/kWh, respectively (1 mill = one thousand of a dollar, i.e., $10^{-3}$ $). This is because the cost of SFR is considerably expensive. Calculating again using the probabilistic method, however, the direct disposal cost and Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle cost, excluding the reactor cost, were found be 7.47 mills/kWh and 6.40 mills/kWh, respectively, on the basis of the most likely value. This is because the nuclear fuel cycle cost is significantly affected by the standard deviation and the mean of the unit cost that includes uncertainty. Thus, it is judged that not only the deterministic method, but also the probabilistic method, would also be necessary to evaluate the nuclear fuel cycle cost. By analyzing the sensitivity of the unit cost in each phase of the nuclear fuel cycle, it was found that the uranium unit price is the most influential factor in determining nuclear fuel cycle costs.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.49 no.5
• /
• pp.1063-1070
• /
• 2017

This paper presents a method for forecasting future uranium prices that is used as input data to calculate the uranium cost, which is a rational key cost driver of the nuclear fuel cycle cost. In other words, the statistical autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) model and existing engineering cost estimation method, the so-called escalation rate model, were subjected to a comparative analysis. When the uranium price was forecasted in 2015, the margin of error of the ARIMA model forecasting was calculated and found to be 5.4%, whereas the escalation rate model was found to have a margin of error of 7.32%. Thus, it was verified that the ARIMA model is more suitable than the escalation rate model at decreasing uncertainty in nuclear fuel cycle cost calculation.

• Journal of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology(JNFCWT)
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.243-251
• /
• 2015

Nuclear power is currently the second largest power supply method in Korea and the number of nuclear power plants are planned to be increased as well. However, clear management policy for spent fuels generated from nuclear power plants has not yet been established. The back-end fuel cycle, associated with nuclear material flow after nuclear reactors is a collection of technologies designed for the spent fuel management and the spent fuel management policy is closely related with the selection of a nuclear fuel cycle. Cost is an important consideration in selection of a nuclear fuel cycle and should be determined by adding external cost to private cost. Unlike the private cost, which is a direct cost, studies on the external cost are focused on nuclear reactors and not at the nuclear fuel cycle. In this research, external cost indicators applicable to nuclear fuel cycle were derived and quantified. OT (once through), DUPIC (Direct Use of PWR SF in CANDU), PWR-MOX (PWR PUREX reprocessing), and Pyro-SFR (SFR recycling with pyroprocessing) were selected as nuclear fuel cycles which could be considered for estimating external cost in Korea. Energy supply security cost, accident risk cost, and acceptance cost were defined as external cost according to precedent and estimated after analyzing approaches which have been adopted for estimating external costs on nuclear power generation.

• Journal of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology(JNFCWT)
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.271-282
• /
• 2015

External cost is cost imposed on a third party when producing or consuming a good or service. Since the 1990s, the external costs of nuclear powered electricity production have been studied. Costs are a very important factor in policy decision and the external cost is considered for cost comparison on electricity production. As for nuclear fuel cycle, a chosen technology will determine the external cost. However, there has been little research on this issue. For this study, methods for external cost on nuclear power production have been surveyed and analyzed to develop an approach for evaluating external cost on nuclear fuel cycles. Before the Fukushima accident, external cost research had focused on damage costs during normal operation of a fuel cycle. However, accident cost becomes a major concern after the accident. Various considerations for external cost including accident cost have been used to different studies, and different methods have been applied corresponding to the considerations. In this study, the results of the evaluation were compared and analyzed to identify methodological applicability to the external cost estimation with nuclear fuel cycles.

• Journal of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology(JNFCWT)
• /
• v.4 no.4
• /
• pp.385-391
• /
• 2006

The estimated decommissioning cost of nuclear research reactor is calculated by applying a unit cost factor-based engineering cost calculation method on which classification of decommissioning works fitted with the features and specifications of decommissioning objects and establishment of composition factors are based. Decommissioning cost of nuclear research reactor is composed of labor cost, equipment and materials cost. Labor cost of decommissioning costs in decommissioning works are calculated on the basis of working time consumed in decommissioning objects. In this paper, the unit cost factors and work difficulty factors which are needed to calculate the labor cost in estimating decommissioning cost of nuclear research reactor are derived and figured out.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2017.10a
• /
• pp.133-137
• /
• 2017

Nuclear power plants in Korea are usually built based on a duplicated model; so the project cost data of the preceding unit can be used as reference when estimating the project cost for the succeeding unit. However, since the contracting method is oriented towards the price, empirical factors such as making top-down estimations using the reverse calculation method based on the completion cost of the preceding unit is dominant. In order to develop a project cost database to resolve such problems, the detailed cost boundary of the project cost data must be categorized by project and by system. This study proposes a method to connect the code of account with the base quantities and the IAEA account, and proposes a database structure for the development of a project cost estimation system. The estimation system developed in the future is expected to utilize the proposed project cost data structure.

• Korean Management Science Review
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.139-148
• /
• 2013

A nuclear energy has been one of the most important sources to securely supply electricity in South Korea. Its weight in the national electricity supply has kept increasing since the first nuclear reactor was built in 1978. The country relies on the nuclear approximately 31.4% in 2012 and it is expected to increase to 48.5% in 2024 based on the long-term electricity supply plan announced by the Korean government. However, Fukushima disaster due to 9.0 magnitude earthquake followed by the tsunami has raised deep concerns on the security of the nuclear power plants. The policy makers of the country are much interested in analyzing the cost structure of the power supply in the case that the nuclear is diminished from the current supply portion. This research uses a stochastic model that aims to evaluate the long-term power supply plan and provides an extensive cost analysis on the changes of the nuclear power supply. To evaluate a power supply plan, the research develops a few plausible energy mix scenarios by changing the installed capacities of energy sources from the long-term electricity supply plan. The analyses show that the nuclear is still the most attractive energy source since its fuel cost is very much stable compared to the other sources. Also the results demonstrate that a large amount of financial expenditure is additionally required every year if Koreans agree on the reduction of nuclear to increase national security against a nuclear disaster.

• Nuclear Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.47 no.7
• /
• pp.849-858
• /
• 2015

This study set the pyroprocess facility at an engineering scale as a cost object, and presented the cost consumed during the unit processes of the pyroprocess. For the cost calculation, the activity based costing (ABC) method was used instead of the engineering cost estimation method, which calculates the cost based on the conceptual design of the pyroprocess facility. The calculation results demonstrate that the pyroprocess facility's unit process cost is $194/kgHM for pretreatment, $298/kgHM for electrochemical reduction, $226/kgHM for electrorefining, and $299/kgHM for electrowinning. An analysis demonstrated that the share of each unit process cost among the total pyroprocess cost is as follows: 19% for pretreatment, 29% for electrochemical reduction, 22% for electrorefining, and 30% for electrowinning. The total unit cost of the pyroprocess was calculated at $1,017/kgHM. In the end, electrochemical reduction and the electrowinning process took up most of the cost, and the individual costs for these two processes was found to be similar. This is because significant raw material cost is required for the electrochemical reduction process, which uses platinum as an anode electrode. In addition, significant raw material costs are required, such as for $Li_3PO_4$, which is used a lot during the salt purification process.

• Environmental and Resource Economics Review
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.367-391
• /
• 2013

After the Fukushima nuclear accident, the external costs of generating electricity from nuclear power plants such as additional safety compliance costs and possible accident risk action costs have gained increasing attention from the public, policy-makers and politicians. Consequently, estimates of the external costs of nuclear power are very deliberate issue that is at the center of the controversy in Korea. In this paper, we try to calculate the external costs associated with the safety of the nuclear power plants, particularly focusing on additional safety compliance costs and possible accident risk action costs. To estimate the possible accident risk action costs, we adopt the damages expectation approach that is very similar way from the external cost calculation of Japanese government after the Fukushima accident. In addition, to estimate additional safety compliance costs, we apply the levelized cost of generation method. Furthermore, we perform the sensitivity analysis to examine how much these social costs increase the electricity price rate. Estimation results of the additional security measure cost is 0.53Won/kWh ~ 0.80Won/kWh depending on the capacity factor, giving little change on the nuclear power generation cost. The estimates of possible accident risk action costs could be in the wide range depending on the different damages of the nuclear power accident, probability of the severe nuclear power accident and the capacity factor. The preliminary results show that it is 0.0025Won/kWh ~ 26.4188Won/kWh. After including those two external costs on the generation cost of a nuclear power plant, increasing rate of electricity price is 0.001%~10.0563% under the capacity factor from 70% to 90%. This paper tries to examine the external costs of nuclear power plants, so as to include it into the generation cost and the electricity price. This paper suggests one of the methodologies that we might internalize the nuclear power generations' external cost, including it into the internal generation cost.

• Journal of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology(JNFCWT)
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.541-550
• /
• 2022

When decommissioning nuclear power plant (NPP), the first task performed is cost estimation. This is an important task in terms of securing adequate decommissioning funds and managing the schedule. Therefore, many countries and institutions are conducting continuous research and also developing and using many programs for cost estimation. However, the cost estimated for decommissioning an NPP typically differs from the actual cost incurred in its decommissioning. This is caused by insufficient experience in decommissioning NPPs or lack of decommissioning cost data. This uncertainty in cost estimation can be in general compensated for by applying a contingency. However, reflecting an appropriate standard for the contingency is also difficult. Therefore, in this study, data analysis was conducted based on the contingency guideline suggested by each institution and the actual cost of decommissioning the NPP. Subsequently, TLG Service, Inc.'s process, which recently suggested specific decommissioning costs, was matched with ISDC (International Structure for Decommissioning Costing)'s work breakdown structure (WBS). Based on the matching result, the guideline for applying the contingency for ISDC's WBS Level 1 were presented. This study will be helpful in cost estimation by applying appropriate contingency guidelines in countries or institutions that have no experience in decommissioning NPPs.