Spent LWR fuel storage costs: reracking, AR basins, and AFR basins
Whenever possible, fuel storage requirements will be met by reracking existing reactor basins and/or transfer of fuel to available space in other reactor basins. These alternatives represent not only the lowest cost storage options but also the most timely. They are recognized to face environmental and regulatory obstacles. However, such obstacles should be less severe than those that would be encountered with AR or AFR basin storage. When storage requirements cannot be met by the first two options, the least costly alternative for most utilities will be use of a Federal AFR. Storage costs of $100,000 to $150,000 MTU at a AFR are less costly than charges of up to $320,000/MTU that could be incurred by the use of AR basins. AFR storage costs do not include transportation from the reactor to the AFR. This cost would be paid by the utility separately. Only when a utility requires annual storage capacity for 100 MTU of spent fuel can self-storage begin to compete with AFR costs. The large reactor complexes discharging these fuel quantities are not currently those that require relief from fuel storage problems.
- Research Organization:
- Department of Energy, Aiken, SC (USA). Savannah River Operations Office
- OSTI ID:
- 5517277
- Report Number(s):
- DOE/SR-SF-2002(Rev.1); TRN: 80-004933
- Country of Publication:
- United States
- Language:
- English
Similar Records
Economics of spent LWR fuel storage
Economics of at-reactor spent fuel storage alternatives