Multi-Application Small Light Water Reactor Final Report

Technical Report · Mon Dec 01 00:00:00 EST 2003

DOI:https://doi.org/10.2172/839135· OSTI ID:839135

Modro, S M; Fisher, J E; Weaver, K D; Reyes, J N; Groome, J T; Babka, P; Carlson, T M

The Multi-Application Small Light Water Reactor (MASLWR) project was conducted under the auspices of the Nuclear Energy Research Initiative (NERI) of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). The primary project objectives were to develop the conceptual design for a safe and economic small, natural circulation light water reactor, to address the economic and safety attributes of the concept, and to demonstrate the technical feasibility by testing in an integral test facility. This report presents the results of the project. After an initial exploratory and evolutionary process, as documented in the October 2000 report, the project focused on developing a modular reactor design that consists of a self-contained assembly with a reactor vessel, steam generators, and containment. These modular units would be manufactured at a single centralized facility, transported by rail, road, and/or ship, and installed as a series of self-contained units. This approach also allows for staged construction of an NPP and ''pull and replace'' refueling and maintenance during each five-year refueling cycle. Development of the baseline design concept has been sufficiently completed to determine that it complies with the safety requirements and criteria, and satisfies the major goals already noted. The more significant features of the baseline single-unit design concept include: (1) Thermal Power--150 MWt; (2) Net Electrical Output--35 MWe; (3) Steam Generator Type--Vertical, helical tubes; (4) Fuel UO{sub 2}, 8% enriched; (5) Refueling Intervals--5 years; (6) Life-Cycle--60 years. The economic performance was assessed by designing a power plant with an electric generation capacity in the range of current and advanced evolutionary systems. This approach allows for direct comparison of economic performance and forms a basis for further evaluation, economic and technical, of the proposed design and for the design evolution towards a more cost competitive concept. Applications such as cogeneration, water desalination or district heating were not addressed directly in the economic analyses since these depend more on local conditions, demand and economy and can not be easily generalized. Current economic performance experience and available cost data were used. The preliminary cost estimate, based on a concept that could be deployed in less than a decade, is: (1) Net Electrical Output--1050 MWe; (2) Net Station Efficiency--23%; (3) Number of Power Units--30; (4) Nominal Plant Capacity Factor--95%; (5) Total capital cost--$1241/kWe; and (6) Total busbar cost--3.4 cents/kWh. The project includes a testing program that has been conducted at Oregon State University (OSU). The test facility is a 1/3-height and 1/254.7 volume scaled design that will operate at full system pressure and temperature, and will be capable of operation at 600 kW. The design and construction of the facility have been completed. Testing is scheduled to begin in October 2002. The MASLWR conceptual design is simple, safe, and economical. It operates at NSSS parameters much lower than for a typical PWR plant, and has a much simplified power generation system. The individual reactor modules can be operated as on/off units, thereby limiting operational transients to startup and shutdown. In addition, a plant can be built in increments that match demand increases. The ''pull and replace'' concept offers automation of refueling and maintenance activities. Performing refueling in a single location improves proliferation resistance and eliminates the threat of diversion. Design certification based on testing is simplified because of the relatively low cost of a full-scale prototype facility. The overall conclusion is that while the efficiency of the power generation unit is much lower (23% versus 30%), the reduction in capital cost due to simplification of design more than makes up for the increased cost of nuclear fuel. The design concept complies with the safety requirements and criteria. It also satisfies the goals for modularity, standard plant design, certification before construction, construction schedule, refueling schedule, operation and maintenance, long plant life-cycle, and economics.

• Research Organization: Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States); Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR; NEXANT, Inc., San Francisco, CA (US)
• Sponsoring Organization: USDOE Office of Nuclear Energy, Science and Technology (NE) (US)
• DOE Contract Number: AC07-99ID13727
• OSTI ID: 839135
• Report Number(s): INEEL/EXT-04-01626; TRN: US0501841
• Resource Relation: Other Information: PBD: 1 Dec 2003
• Country of Publication: United States
• Language: English

Related Subjects

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS
21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS
29 ENERGY PLANNING
POLICY AND ECONOMY
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION
CAPITALIZED COST
COGENERATION
CONTAINMENT
DESALINATION
DISTRICT HEATING
LIFE CYCLE
NATURAL CONVECTION
NUCLEAR ENERGY
NUCLEAR FUELS
POWER GENERATION
POWER PLANTS
REACTOR VESSELS
STEAM GENERATORS
WATER
MASLWR