CHAPTER III.-NUCLEAR PLANT COST

Although many uncertainties must be resolved before nuclear prosion for civilian merchant ships will be economically feasible, some resentative cost numbers and other related factors have been set th for nuclear maritime plants on: (a) NS Savannah, (b) present WR maritime technology, and (c) future PWR maritime objeces. These can be reviewed in order to present the growth and blication potential of the nuclear plant.

NS "SAVANNAH"

The 1957 memorandum of understanding between the Chairman, omic Energy Commission, and the Secretary of Commerce agreed a cooperative program including certain cost-sharing principles ing the design, construction, and demonstration operation. As vided in this agreement, the "nuclear powerplant" was defined include the "reactor" and "propulsion plant." The "reactor" was ned to mean "a nuclear heat source including a complete core, ssure vessel, coolant loops, shielding, and instrumentation immediy associated therewith." This also included the containment, ndations, and ventilation systems. The "propulsion plant" was ned to mean "all ship propulsion equipment except the reactor." With the above clarification of terminology, the supplied reactor the NS Savannah (excluding irradiations programs and supportR. & D. efforts) resulted in the following initial expenses:

re I-$2.03X10.

A. FUEL COSTS

B. CAPITAL COSTS

he following costs are the approximate breakdown for reactor ication and installation as defined above yet including the initial allation tests at the shipyard. Core I is listed separately above not totaled in the following numbers:

peration costs of the NS Savannah during the first 3 years followdelivery included costs of crew training, plant design upgrading, ic visitation, and evaluation of port operating criteria. The ves

37

sel was delivered to a commercial shipping company on August 20, 1965, under a charter arrangement for service as a scheduled cargo carrier. Although the ship was not designed to be an efficient working cargo vessel, the costs associated with this recent phase of the Savan nah program represent the most definitive data available for a nuclear commercial vessel. (See ch. V.) (Costs to be obtained by MarAd from FAST, Inc.)

OTHER NUCLEAR PLANT COSTS

The cost numbers presented here are representative in view of the uncertainties earlier mentioned in this chapter and chapter IV and since a specific nuclear plant has not been identified for a specific ship system.

A. CAPITAL COSTS

As discussed earlier, the terminology "nuclear powerplant" encompasses the "reactor" and the "propulsion plant." As shown below the cost of the "reactor" with conventional type acceptance, containment and the "propulsion plant" are installed costs including system tests (nondevelopmental tests) after installation. First plant costs and plants following the first are indicated with the assumption that the following plants are the identical design, from the same manufacturer, and installed by the same shipyard.

1 Extrapolations in view of interest in larger sizes and does not include research and development costs or any requie. ments for test programs other than that normally provided by the industry or central station reactors.

2 Prices do not include cost of reactor core which is normally considered an operating cost.

$ 1st plant planned as land test facility as provided in nuclear program of ch. IV and appendix.

B. OPERATING COSTS

(1) Nuclear fuel cycle cost estimates.-There may be seven or eight variables and/or assumptions made in determining the fuel cycle cost estimates; that is, fabrication cost, uranium cost, investment charges, spent fuel recovery cost, credit for discharged uranium and plutonium. plant factors, etc. This will vary from first core loadings to subsequent core loadings as charges for material and interest rates changes and the reactor core physics become definitely known. The following table is estimated to apply for civilian maritime applications at the power levels shown. These estimates are for the first core loading but can be assumed as applicable to subsequent core loadings. Improved economies may be achieved as a result of research and development altered economic conditions.

Fuel costs do not include research and development costs, and are dependent upon the contractor that designs the core and provides the fuel, what other work is being conducted at the same contractor's plant, the interest rate, and those many considerations included in the design plant factor.

Design plant factor is defined as ratio of hours of annual plant availability resulting from refueling, maintenance, repair, etc. to hours per year, as if plant were not shipborne.

* Based upon demonstration in a test facility.

(2) Maintenance and repair.-Until the NS Savannah has been operating as a commercial cargo vessel for a longer time, it is not considered practicable to set forth a precise nuclear base of ship maintenance and repair costs. In addition, such operating and maintenance costs can be affected significantly by plant design, characteristics and concepts, extent of manufacturer's and shipbuilder's guarantees, and by the extent of spare parts included in basic plant estimates.

CHAPTER IV-NUCLEAR POWERPLANTS FOR

MERCHANT SHIPS

INTRODUCTION

The use of pressurized water reactor plants is well established. The basic technology, including engineering and fabrication of current systems, is well known: water chemistry, fuel and cladding, heat flux and performance criteria, safety, control and instrumentation, reliability of components, maintenance problems, etc. Improvements in size and weight are desirable, although incentives from these improvements must be measured in terms of reduced costs.

Therefore, the main questions to be resolved relate to whether improved designs of PWR's specifically for the maritime application could indeed be achieved within the required performance, cost, reliability, and safety envelopes; and whether, if attained, these characteristics, plus potential improvements would be sufficient to assure reasonable economics for widespread merchant marine application. Many manufacturers have expressed interest in developing and producing reactor plants for civilian maritime application. Recently, sev eral manufacturers-Babcock & Wilcox, Combustion Engineering, Westinghouse, and United Nuclear-have forwarded unsolicited proposals for compact or integral pressurized water designs for maritime application. All have concluded that a compact plant type approach is required if the improved size and cost criteria are to be met. Although meaningful evaluations and comparisons of such unsolicited proposals are difficult, the technological differences among the pressurized water plant designs do not appear to be significant although the engineering designs may differ. These designs, considered as conceptual, were not in response to any government specific ship or reactor plant criteria and specifications, and there are probably many significant differences in the assumptions other than those which are readily identifiable in comparative tabulations. Furthermore, the companies consider that the details of these proposals are proprietary. The depth of detail made available in support of the proposals varied significantly.

A typical compact integral pressurized water reactor encloses the primary loop within the reactor pressure vessel-core and control rods, heat exchanger, and pumps-to provide the minimum volume to contain and shield. In general, core designs are typical of pressurized water reactors using slightly enriched oxide fuel clad with stainless steel or zirconium and utilizing burnable poisons distributed within the core. Water treatment is conventional. A number of the designs proposed once-through steam generators which are a departure from conventional pressurized water reactor steam generators Containment is close to the reactor and is partially filled with water which provides both shielding and vapor suppression.

Although most of the technology exists to design integral pressurized water reactors, there are many of the major features which require development, experimental and engineering verification, including those features related to proof of fabrication, reliability, and maintainability of such an advanced plant. For example, in the integral plant design, the proximity of the various components near the reactor core will require extensive analysis and tests to insure proper component and shield location, adequate protection from radiation effects, and ability to maintain components and instrumentation. In addition, the potential advantages of the integral plant design may decrease as the rating of the reactor plant increases.

Continued reliability of the proposed reactor propulsion plant at full power operation will require demonstration, and a number of the performance characteristics coupled into economic incentives are considered to be more stringent than those which have been demanded from proven pressurized water reactor plant designs. Plant automation would be an important objective for achieving more economic nuclear ship operation. It must be anticipated that a number of technical areas related to automation, safety and licensing will require development efforts as widespread applications are considered.

The following projections represent a 5-year program to conduct research and development and to construct a test facility, that can be started in any subsequent fiscal year if a determination is made that such a program is justifiable. The total cost of the 5-year program would be approximately $75 million which includes $35 million for the land-based test facility.

1 The unknown nature of a cooperative program makes any estimate of funding uncertain at this time. It is expected that funds required by the AEC for reactor plants for the shipbuilding program will be included in the authorization and appropriations sponsored by the Department of Commerce.

SUMMARY

Current pressurized water plant technology can support a construction program. The economic satisfaction, however, of the long-term costs will require development and demonstration of advanced nuclear systems to answer many current unresolved issues affecting a satisfactory shipping system. These unresolved issues encompass cost senitivities to manning, maintenance, operating aspects, installation, weight and space, and safety. Some of the factors which could affect these issues are plant layout, safeguards, reliability, core life, maintainability, quality assurance, specifications, plant automation, port criteria, public relations, and union attitude. The current AEC civilian maritime nuclear propulsion program (see app. I) is cognizant of these issues and has been discussed with the Bureau of the Budget and the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy.