Motivating a Fusion Power Plant Conceptual Cost Study
ScottVitterTechnology-to-MarketSummerScholar
[email protected] |[email protected]
1
What– acoststudyforapowerplantbuiltaroundfourreactorconceptsintheALPHAprogram
What, why, and how?
2
Why– estimatecapitalcosts,assesssensitivities,influencefollow-onactivities
3
What, why, and how?
How– workwithapowerplantengineeringanddesignfirm,augmentedbyconsultantswithfusionexpertise
4
What, why, and how?
What do we mean when I say cost study?
LevelizedCostofElectricity
5
Whatwearedoing
• DirectCapitalCosts- FusionPowerCores- BalanceofPlant- TritiumExtractionPlant
What do we mean when I say cost study?
Whatwearedoing
6
• Non-CapitalCosts(limited)- Operationsandmaintenance- Tritiumhandlingandrecycling- Wastedisposal- Decommissioning
What do we mean when I say cost study?
Whatwearedoing
7
• Excluding- Costofcapital/financingcosts- Costofstart-uptritiuminventory- Thermal-to-electricefficiency- Regulatorycosts- Researchanddevelopmentcosts
What do we mean when I say cost study?
Whatwearedoing
8
Across various fusion power plant designs studies, capital cost is the largest contributor to total net present value
9
FuelO&MIncremental capitalConstruction
Itemto
tal,as%oftotalprojectNPV
1– Woodruff,S.,Miller,R.“CostSensitivityAnalysisfora100MWe modularpowerplantandfusionneutronsource.”FusionDesignandEngineering(2015).2– Miller,R.“ARIES-STdesignpointselection.”FusionDesignandEngineering(2015).3– Meier,W.,Moir,R.“AnalysesinSupportofZ-PinchIFEandActinideTransmutation- LLNLProgressReportforFY-06.”LANL(2006).
[1] [2] [3]
10
FuelO&MIncrementalConstruction
Itemto
tal,as%oftotalprojectNPV
FuelO&MIncremental capitalConstruction
[1] [2] [3] [4] [4] [4]
1– Woodruff,S.,Miller,R.“CostSensitivityAnalysisfora100MWe modularpowerplantandfusionneutronsource.”FusionDesignandEngineering(2015).2– Miller,R.“ARIES-STdesignpointselection.”FusionDesignandEngineering(2015).3– Meier,W.,Moir,R.“AnalysesinSupportofZ-PinchIFEandActinideTransmutation- LLNLProgressReportforFY-06.”LANL(2006).4– Deutch,J.,etal.“UpdateontheMIT2003FutureofNuclearPower.”MassachusettsInstituteofTechnology(2009).
Across various fusion power plant designs studies, capital cost is the largest contributor to total net present value
Calculating LCOE can be useful but is sensitive to parameters that are unknown for fusion power plants
LCOEprojectionsforPPCS-Adesign(Maisonnier,2005)usingcostinginformationfromHan,2013.LCOEmodeladaptedfromMITspreadsheetmodel(2009).Capacity =1.55GW,SpecificCapital=$3,940$/kW,FixedO&M1 =$65.8/kW/year,Var O&M2 =7.78mills/kWh1- (includesDDcosts);2- (includeswastedisposal)
Delaysleadtocostincreases(evenifdirectcapitalremainsflat)
HighOperationalAvailabilityLowmarginalcost
11
Low-riskregime
Makethemlastatleast30years
Driving for a common methodology, approach, and balance of plant to have roughly comparable results
Source:www.nerdtrek.com
4xfusionreactors
Heatexchange
Acommonbalanceofplant
12
AcommontritiumplantTritiumextractionandrecycling
Driving for a common methodology, approach, and balance of plant to have roughly comparable results
Source:www.nerdtrek.com
4xfusionreactors
Heatexchange
Acommonbalanceofplant
13
AcommontritiumplantTritiumextractionandrecycling
Howtofindacommonsetofinputs,boundaryconditions,andconstraints?
What does a control volume look like for a generic fusion reactor?
Avg.ThermalOutput(𝑃"#$)
FuelInput(D-T)
Exhaust- FusionProducts- UnburnedFuel- Waste
ThermalFluxNeutronFlux
FusionReactions
OtherMass- Driver- Target
AveragePowerIn (𝑃"&')- DriverEfficiency(η))- Energyin(𝐸&')- AveragePulseFrequency(𝑓)̅
𝑃"&' = 𝐸&' ∗ 𝑓̅η)
What are the parameters and metrics that can link four distinct fusion power cores to a common balance of plant?
Avg.ThermalOutput(𝑃"#$)
FuelInput(D-T)
KeyParametersTemperature(T)IonDensity(ni)ConfinementTime(τ)TritiumFraction(TF)BurnupFraction(BF)MassFuel(mf)
Exhaust- FusionProducts- UnburnedFuel- Waste
ThermalFluxNeutronFlux
Pfus**
OtherMass- Driver- Target
AveragePowerIn (𝑃"&')- DriverEfficiency(η))- Energyin(𝐸&')- AveragePulseFrequency(𝑓)̅
𝑃"&' = 𝐸&' ∗ 𝑓̅η)
**Note:𝑃"012 doesnotequal𝑃"#$becauseofexothermicreactionsthatmayoccurintheblanket
KeyMetricsThermalOutputRecirculatingPower
What are the dependent variables, boundary conditions, and constraints at play?
Avg.ThermalOutput(𝑃"#$)
FuelInput(D-T)
Dependant VariableCapitalCost
BoundaryConditionsPth =500MW
Exhaust- FusionProducts- UnburnedFuel- Waste
ThermalFluxNeutronFlux
Pfus**
OtherMass- Driver- Target
AveragePowerIn (𝑃"&')- DriverEfficiency(η))- Energyin(𝐸&')- AveragePulseFrequency(𝑓)̅
𝑃"&' = 𝐸&' ∗ 𝑓̅η)
ConstraintsRecirculatingpowerThermalfirstwallloadingNeutronloadingExhausthandling
- Compatibleacrossconceptsforfusionpowercore- Smallersizehasfavorablecharacteristics
- Lower-riskprofileforinvestors- Relevantandattractivetoutilities- Manufacturing/repetitionrate
17
Why Pth = 500 MW?
- Limitparasiticloads,achievesufficientnetelectricalcapacitywithlimitedfootprint
𝑃"&'
FusionReactor PowerPlant𝑃"#$ 𝑃"3,5
𝑃"'5#,5
Thermal output vs. recirculating power?
- Challenge:Reactorshouldnotexceedthermalloadingenvisionedfirstwallmaterialanddesign
- ITER– EnhancedHeatFluxPanelsdesignedfor4.7MW/m2 [1]- Armor– Beryllium- HeatSink– CuCrZr- Structure– AusteniticSteel
- ITER– DiverterSurfacedesignedfortime-averaged10MW/m2,shortdurationsupto20MW/m2[2]
- Armor- Tungsten
18
Constraint: First Wall Thermal Loading
D=2mPfus =500MWFWLoading=39.8MW/m2
D=6m Pfus =500MWFWLoading=4.4MW/m2
FortheCostStudy:
- Geometry/sizeofreactorvesselshouldreflectwallloadingconstraints.
- Dependencybetweenmaterial– thermalconstraint–geometry– cost
- Liquidfirstwallscanrelaxthermalloadingconstraint
[1]– Mazul et.al,“RussiandevelopmentofenhancedheatfluxtechnologiesforITERfirstwall.”FusionEngineeringandDesign (2012).[2]– Merola et.al,“EngineeringchallengesanddevelopmentoftheITERBlanketSystemand Divertor.”FusionEngineeringandDesign (2015).
19
Constraint: Neutronics / Neutron Shielding
- Duelobjectives:- Moderatefast(14.1MeV)neutronstothermalneutrons- Protectstructure,magnets,andpulsedpowersystemsfromneutron
damage
- Challenge:The“rightway”toscatterandmoderate14.1MeVneutronsisn’tclear.
- Challenge:Neutrondamagewillrequirereplacementofcomponents,magnets,and/orpulsedpowersystem
ITERShieldBlock[1]FortheCostStudy:
- Recognizeandquantifytheimpactthatuncertainneutronicbehaviormighthaveoncost
- Dependencybetweenshieldingtechnology– cost– neutrondamage– componentreplacementcosts
- Quantifyingtheuncertaintyintroducedbymultipleshieldingtechnologiesandunknownperformancecouldbeapositiveoutcomeofthecoststudy
Fuel cycle: there is not enough tritium (T) supply to burn without breeding + recycling
CANDUT-Stockpile~20kg
T-Stockpiledecay~1.1kg/yr
CANDUT-Production3.27kg/yr [1]
1– Nietal.,“TritiumsupplyassessmentforITERandDEMOnstration powerplant.”FusionEngineeringandDesign,88(2013)2– Sawan,M.andAbdou,M.,“Physicsandtechnologyconditionsforattainingtritiumself-sufficiencyfortheDTfuelcycle.”FusionEngineeringandDesign, 81(2006)
TConsumptionfor1GWfusion55.6kg/yr [2]
20
As currently conceived, Tritium Extraction Plants are large chemical processes
Source:Konishi etal.(2002)
21
1.HTOincoolingwater
2.Tinexhaustgases
3.Tinliquidlithiumorothermedium
Source:M.Gugla etal.
Howwilltechnologyevolve?CommoditypartofBOP,oraslarge,one-off,expensivesubsystems?ALPHAprojectteamswillbenefitfrommainlineR&D.
ScottVitter
GraduateResearchAssistantTheUniversityofTexasasAustinscott.vitter@utexas.edu
Thank you
22
What does the domestic generating fleet look like, and what might Fusion displace / replace?
Gas– 473GWCoal– 271GWWater– 107GWNuclear– 101GWWind– 76GW
Oil– 37GWSolar– 16GWBiomass– 14GWOther<8GW
2.1GW
How much of the fleet currently operating as baseload year-round (CF > 70%) ?
Total– 195GWNuclear– 101GWCoal– 50GWGas– 39GWOther<5GW
2.1GW
In 2015-2016, conversions and retirements of coal-fired power plants were driven by EPA Policy
Announcedasof2/2016(notprojections)
MATScompliancedeadlineby2016
A large Burn-up Fraction requires a smaller tritium inventory on hand
𝐵𝐹 = 𝑇91:'#
𝑇91:'# + 𝑇:5<=<>5
Larger Tritium Breeding Ratios will make-up for losses and produce excess fuel for ne reactors
Burn Rate (BR) and Tritium Breeding Ratio (TBR) are two important parameters for self-sufficiency
26
𝑇𝐵𝑅 = 𝑇9:5)𝑇91:'#
A large Burn-up Fraction requires a smaller tritium inventory on hand
𝐵𝐹 = 𝑇91:'#
𝑇91:'# + 𝑇:5<=<>5𝑇𝐵𝑅 =
𝑇9:5)𝑇91:'#
Larger Tritium Breeding Ratios will make-up for losses and produce excess fuel for ne reactors
Burn Rate (BR) and Tritium Breeding Ratio (TBR) are two important parameters for self-sufficiency
27
Fusion power core “performance” metric
Mostly agnostic to source of 14.1 MeV neutrons
Fusiondevelopmentgoal:Firstpre-commercialdemonstrationplant
CommercialPlantHandoff
PrimarilyGov’tFundedR&D
A:Now B:Endgame
When,how,andtowhom?
28
Why does it matter, who will care?
29
The Tritium Extraction Facility (TEF) needed for a fusion power plant is larger than has ever been built
- AnnualTritiumLoadatDarlingtonTritiumRemovalFacility(Canada)~3kg
>56kg - AnnualTritiumLoadatTritiumExtractionPlantfora1GWfus
InflowsofTritiumatanExtractionPlant:
1. CoolantLoopà DTRFcurrentlyextractstritiumfromheavywater
2. Tritiumbreedingmaterialà SavannahRiverSite($500M)extractstritiumfromspentfuelrods.Limitedexperienceextractingfromliquidlithium.
3. Exhaustgasà Experienceattokamakexperiments(JETinUK,TFTRatPrinceton)
Howwilltechnologyevolve?Istherightanalogyairseparationunitsatthermalpowerplants?Oraslarge,one-off,expensivesubsystems?
- Constraint:exhaustand/orwastematerialcannotinterferewithhigh-frequencypulses
- Whatisthemagnitudeofexhaustand/orwastematerialenvisioned?
- Whatlevelofvacuumisneeded(rough,middle,orhighvacuum)?
30
Constraint: Mass flow rate / exhaust flow rate
FortheCostStudy:
- Dependencybetweenmasstransport– geometry– cost
31