Scale effects on core design, fuel costs, and spent fuel volume of pressurized water reactors
The desire to improve the economic competitiveness and deployment pace of nuclear energy through modularization, manufacturing, and series production had led to the development of smaller size reactors. As the standard 17x17 fuel technology is mainly maintained in the pressurized water reactors (PWRs) category, this translates into a lower number of fuel assemblies in the core and sometimes a reduced fuel height. To assess the impact of such scale change in core design on fuel cycle cost and spent fuel volume, a scoping analysis tool is developed based on infinite lattice calculations, leakage, fuel management reduced models, and levelized unit cost of electricity (LCOE) estimate. As such, cost dynamics driven by fuel specific power, burnup, core leakage, feed, cycle length, fuel assembly height as well as uranium market data are captured with consistent set of assumptions and analysis methods. A selection of 5 reactor designs representative of leading PWR developers is assessed and compared. Pursuing higher specific powers and optimal burnups are highlighted as the main fuel cost reduction drivers, nevertheless, practical limitations and opportunities must be evaluated to establish the feasibility of such enhanced fuel operation. In consequence, a detailed core design is performed using SIMULATE3 code for 5 PWR variations including natural and forced coolant circulation modes, two reactor scales, power densities of 73, 112, and 123 kW/l and higher discharge burnups. Design and optimization are performed at the lattice level, for the reflector, and at the core loading level. Satisfactory steady-state operation including power distribution, coolant operating limits, and reactivity requirements are analyzed and reported in this paper. The fuel economics of the detailed core designs confirm the scoping analysis findings. Despite the unlocked power uprates in small PWRs, the achievable burnup for a given fuel specific power requires more enrichment and shorter fuel height results in higher fabrication costs per mass of fuel, which makes scaling down core size a more expensive endeavor on the fuel cycle front. Spent fuel volumes are reported for the PWRs designed in this paper. Furthermore, these volumes are driven by the core average discharge burnup regardless of the scale in consideration. Additional cost and core performance aspects related to heavy reflector gains, fuel-reflector substitution, and disposal cost policy in the U.S. are examined.