Break-Even Point Analysis of Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Capital Investment Cost Comparing the Direct Disposal Option and Pyro-Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Nuclear Fuel Cycle Option in Korea

Sungki Kim, Hong Jang, Ruxing Gao, Chulmin Kim, Yanghon Chung and Sungsig Bang
Additional contact information
Sungki Kim: Nuclear Fuel Cycle Analysis, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 1045 Daedeokdaero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, Korea
Hong Jang: Nuclear Fuel Cycle Analysis, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 1045 Daedeokdaero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, Korea
Ruxing Gao: Nuclear Fuel Cycle Analysis, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, 1045 Daedeokdaero, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-353, Korea
Chulmin Kim: Department of Nuclear and Quantum Engineering Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701, Korea
Yanghon Chung: Department of Business and Technology Management, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701, Korea
Sungsig Bang: Department of Business and Technology Management, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon 305-701, Korea

Sustainability, 2017, vol. 9, issue 9, 1-14

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to recommend a break-even point for the capital investment cost for a Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) when choosing between a Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle (recycling option via Pyro-processing) and a direct disposal option. This is because the selection of an alternative cannot be justified without a guarantee of economic feasibility. The calculation of a break-even point is necessary because SFR capital investment cost makes up the largest share of the cost for electricity generation. In other words, the cost of capital investment is an important cost driver, and the one that exerts the greatest effect on Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle economics. In the end, the break-even point of the SFR capital investment cost between the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle and the direct disposal was calculated to be 4284 US$/kWe. In other words, it is possible to claim that the potential for the economic viability of the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle is greater (compared to investing in direct disposal) when the SFR capital investment cost is 4284 US$/kWe or less. In addition, Pyro-SFR technology will enable sustainable nuclear power generation.

Keywords: break-even point; PWR; Pyro-SFR fuel cycle; direct disposal; sustainable nuclear power generation; capital investment cost; cost driver; economic (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/9/1518/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/9/1518/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:9:p:1518-:d:109871

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().