![]() ![]() Locatelli and Mancini (2011b) discuss the effects of ‘non-financial parameters’, such as electric grid vulnerability, public acceptance, risk associated with the project and others, on the evaluation of the best reactor size for an investment in the nuclear sector. Once these factors are considered, the capital cost is comparable between the two technologies ( Boarin et al., 2012 Carelli et al., 2008). (2007, 2010) analyse specific factors, such as grid characteristics, construction time, financial exposition, modularisation and learning, which distinguish SMRs from LRs in the evaluation of capital cost. Several papers have discussed the competiveness of SMRs against large reactors (LRs) and how SMRs might balance the ‘diseconomy of scale’ with the ‘economy of multiples’ ( Boarin et al., 2012, 2015 Carelli et al., 2008 Locatelli and Mancini, 2012a Locatelli et al., 2014). designs that do not scale to large sizes but rather capitalize on their smallness to achieve specific performance characteristics’. 589) provides a good summary of the innovative feature of SMRs: ‘reactor designs that are deliberately small, i.e. (2013), are currently at different stages of development. Several SMR designs, detailed by IAEA (2014, 2016) and Locatelli et al. 1) defines small modular reactors (SMRs) as ‘newer generation reactors designed to generate electric power up to 300 MW, whose components and systems can be shop fabricated and then transported as modules to the sites for installation as demand arises’. The International Atomic Energy Agency ( IAEA, 2016: p. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |