RE: NRC close to vote on new Westinghouse nuke reactor

[Bernard L Cohen <blc+@pitt.edu>]

	According to DOE/NE-0095 (Sept. 1988), the mills/KW-hr for capital
costs, Operation and maintenance, fuel, decommissioning, and total are the
following respectively (in 1987 dollars, for 1200 MWe):
PWR, median experience 56,13.0, 7.2, 0.5, 77
PWR. best experience   28, 9.1, 6.4, 0.5, 44
Two AP-600s            22,10.4, 6.4, 0.7, 40
Two coal fired         21, 5.9,21.0, 0.1, 48

Bernard L. Cohen
Physics Dept.
University of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
Tel: (412)624-9245
Fax: (412)624-9163
e-mail: blc+@pitt.edu


On Sat, 15 May 1999 Glen.Vickers@ucm.com wrote:

> The biggest question is whether the smaller reactor can pump out enough MWe
> ($) to pass a cost-benefit analysis.  Isn't this model only in the 600 MWe
> range?  I heard talk long ago that one of the reasons it could do with less
> emergency core cooling support was due to a lower power density in the core
> as compared to current PWRs.
>  
> Even though the plant may be able to be run with a few less people, pumps,
> and valves, there is still an enormous amount of overhead costs necessary to
> run a nuke plant.  For instance, your 1100+ MWe PWR probably has the same
> number of personnel and administrative costs as a smaller 800 MWe model.
> This is where having a larger plant with additional revenue generation
> capability helps offset the costs and results in lower generation costs.
> 
> The question is not whether or not nuclear power is good clean power, but
> whether or not it is a viable economic investment.  I really do hope it can
> generate enough money to offset the staggering costs of the power business.
> 
> Glen
> 
> glen.vickers@ucm.com <mailto:glen.vickers@ucm.com> 
> 
> 
> 
> 	-----Original Message-----
> 	From:	Magic2626@aol.com [SMTP:Magic2626@aol.com]
> 	Sent:	Saturday, May 15, 1999 3:09 PM
> 	To:	Multiple recipients of list
> 	Subject:	Re: NRC close to vote on new Westinghouse nuke
> reactor
> 
> 	This sure sounds like a much needed step in the right direction.
> 
> 	>>>The Westinghouse reactor's design relies on natural forces such
> as 
> 	convection and gravity flow of emergency cooling water. This 
> 	reduces reliance on pumps, valves and emergency generators that 
> 	ensure the safety of today's plants. Because of its simplicity, the 
> 	mid-size reactor could be built faster than existing plants, usually
> 
> 	within three to four years.  
> 
> 	The reactor would be smaller, cheaper and less complicated than 
> 	existing plants, according to the Nuclear Industry Institute, a
> trade 
> 	group.  <<<
> 	
> ************************************************************************
> 	The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and
> subscription
> 	information can be accessed at
> http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
> 

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html