IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/energy/v281y2023ics0360544223015980.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Uncertainties in estimating production costs of future nuclear technologies: A model-based analysis of small modular reactors

Author

Listed:
  • Steigerwald, Björn
  • Weibezahn, Jens
  • Slowik, Martin
  • von Hirschhausen, Christian

Abstract

Predicting future costs of technologies not yet developed is a complex exercise that includes many uncertain parameters and functional forms. In that context, small modular reactor (SMR) concepts that are in a rather early development stage claim to have cost advantages through learning effects, standardized design, modularization, co-siting economies, and other factors, such as better time-to-market even though they exhibit negative economies of scale in their construction costs due to their lower power output compared to conventional nuclear reactors. In this paper, we compare two different approaches from production theory and show that they have a theoretically equal structure. In the second step, we apply these approaches to estimate a range of potential construction costs for 15 SMR projects for which sufficient data is available. These include water cooled, high temperature, and fast neutron spectrum reactors. We then apply the Monte Carlo method to benchmark the cost projections assumed by the manufacturers by varying the investment costs, the weighted average cost of capital, the capacity factor, and the wholesale electricity price in simulations of the net present value (NPV) and the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE). We also test whether the differences between the manufacturer estimates and ours differ between technology families of SMR concepts and apply a sensitivity analysis. Here we contribute to an intensifying debate in the literature on the economics and finance of SMR concepts. The Monte Carlo analysis suggests a broad range of NPVs and LCOEs: Surprisingly, the lowest LCOE is calculated for a helium-cooled high-temperature reactor, whereas all of the light water reactors feature higher LCOEs. None of the tested concepts is able to compete economically with existing renewable technologies, not even when taking their variability and necessary system integration costs into account. The numerical results also confirm the importance of the choice of production theory and parameters. We conclude that any technology foresight has to take as much of the case specifics into account, including technological and institutional specifics; this also holds for SMR concepts.

Suggested Citation

  • Steigerwald, Björn & Weibezahn, Jens & Slowik, Martin & von Hirschhausen, Christian, 2023. "Uncertainties in estimating production costs of future nuclear technologies: A model-based analysis of small modular reactors," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 281(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:281:y:2023:i:c:s0360544223015980
    DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2023.128204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544223015980
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.energy.2023.128204?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dmitrii Bogdanov & Javier Farfan & Kristina Sadovskaia & Arman Aghahosseini & Michael Child & Ashish Gulagi & Ayobami Solomon Oyewo & Larissa Souza Noel Simas Barbosa & Christian Breyer, 2019. "Radical transformation pathway towards sustainable electricity via evolutionary steps," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Rothwell, Geoffrey, 2022. "Projected electricity costs in international nuclear power markets," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    3. Declan Butler, 1997. "France says goodbye to the fast-breeder as Superphénix takes on new role," Nature, Nature, vol. 385(6612), pages 104-105, January.
    4. Neumann, Anne & Sorge, Lars & von Hirschhausen, Christian & Wealer, Ben, 2020. "Democratic quality and nuclear power: Reviewing the global determinants for the introduction of nuclear energy in 166 countries," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 63.
    5. Black, Geoffrey A. & Aydogan, Fatih & Koerner, Cassandra L., 2019. "Economic viability of light water small modular nuclear reactors: General methodology and vendor data," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 248-258.
    6. Ben Wealer & Christian von Hirschhausen, 2020. "Nuclear Power as a System Good: Organizational Models for Production along the Value-Added Chain," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1883, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    7. Wealer, B. & Bauer, S. & Hirschhausen, C.v. & Kemfert, C. & Göke, L., 2021. "Investing into third generation nuclear power plants - Review of recent trends and analysis of future investments using Monte Carlo Simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    8. Kavlak, Goksin & McNerney, James & Trancik, Jessika E., 2018. "Evaluating the causes of cost reduction in photovoltaic modules," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 700-710.
    9. Stephen Thomas & M. V. Ramana, 2022. "A hopeless pursuit? National efforts to promote small modular nuclear reactors and revive nuclear power," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), July.
    10. David, Paul A. & Rothwell, Geoffrey S., 1996. "Standardization, diversity and learning: Strategies for the coevolution of technology and industrial capacity," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 181-201.
    11. Grubler, Arnulf, 2010. "The costs of the French nuclear scale-up: A case of negative learning by doing," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(9), pages 5174-5188, September.
    12. Lucas W. Davis, 2012. "Prospects for Nuclear Power," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 26(1), pages 49-66, Winter.
    13. Lina Escobar Rangel and Francois Leveque, 2015. "Revisiting the Cost Escalation Curse of Nuclear Power: New Lessons from the French Experience," Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    14. Bernath, Christiane & Deac, Gerda & Sensfuß, Frank, 2021. "Impact of sector coupling on the market value of renewable energies – A model-based scenario analysis," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 281(C).
    15. Spinney, Peter J & Watkins, G Campbell, 1996. "Monte Carlo simulation techniques and electric utility resource decisions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 155-163, February.
    16. Mignacca, B. & Locatelli, G., 2020. "Economics and finance of Small Modular Reactors: A systematic review and research agenda," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    17. Christian von Hirschhausen, 2017. "Nuclear Power in the Twenty-First Century: An Assessment (Part I)," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1700, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    18. Rubin, Edward S. & Azevedo, Inês M.L. & Jaramillo, Paulina & Yeh, Sonia, 2015. "A review of learning rates for electricity supply technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 198-218.
    19. Froese, Sarah & Kunz, Nadja C. & Ramana, M.V., 2020. "Too small to be viable? The potential market for small modular reactors in mining and remote communities in Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    20. Michel Berthélemy & Lina Escobar Rangel, 2015. "Nuclear reactors' construction costs: The role of lead-time, standardization and technological progress," Post-Print hal-01523016, HAL.
    21. Lowe, R.J. & Drummond, P., 2022. "Solar, wind and logistic substitution in global energy supply to 2050 – Barriers and implications," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wealer, B. & Bauer, S. & Hirschhausen, C.v. & Kemfert, C. & Göke, L., 2021. "Investing into third generation nuclear power plants - Review of recent trends and analysis of future investments using Monte Carlo Simulation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    2. Sascha Samadi, 2016. "A Review of Factors Influencing the Cost Development of Electricity Generation Technologies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-25, November.
    3. Samadi, Sascha, 2018. "The experience curve theory and its application in the field of electricity generation technologies – A literature review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2346-2364.
    4. Christian von Hirschhausen, 2022. "Nuclear Power in the Twenty-first Century (Part II) - The Economic Value of Plutonium," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 2011, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    5. Ben Wealer & Simon Bauer & Leonard Göke & Christian von Hirschhausen & Claudia Kemfert, 2019. "Economics of Nuclear Power Plant Investment: Monte Carlo Simulations of Generation III/III+ Investment Projects," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1833, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    6. Elia, A. & Kamidelivand, M. & Rogan, F. & Ó Gallachóir, B., 2021. "Impacts of innovation on renewable energy technology cost reductions," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    7. Lovering, Jessica R. & Yip, Arthur & Nordhaus, Ted, 2016. "Historical construction costs of global nuclear power reactors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 371-382.
    8. Perrier, Quentin, 2018. "The second French nuclear bet," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 858-877.
    9. Christian von Hirschhausen, 2017. "Nuclear Power in the Twenty-First Century: An Assessment (Part I)," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1700, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    10. Reinhard Haas & Marlene Sayer & Amela Ajanovic & Hans Auer, 2023. "Technological learning: Lessons learned on energy technologies," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(2), March.
    11. Aghahosseini, Arman & Solomon, A.A. & Breyer, Christian & Pregger, Thomas & Simon, Sonja & Strachan, Peter & Jäger-Waldau, Arnulf, 2023. "Energy system transition pathways to meet the global electricity demand for ambitious climate targets and cost competitiveness," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 331(C).
    12. Choi, Donghyun & Kim, Yeong Jae, 2023. "Local and global experience curves for lumpy and granular energy technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    13. Lovering, Jessica R. & Nordhaus, Ted & Yip, Arthur, 2017. "Apples and oranges: Comparing nuclear construction costs across nations, time periods, and technologies," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 650-654.
    14. Haneklaus, Nils & Qvist, Staffan & Gładysz, Paweł & Bartela, Łukasz, 2023. "Why coal-fired power plants should get nuclear-ready," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 280(C).
    15. Gerbaulet, Clemens & von Hirschhausen, Christian & Kemfert, Claudia & Lorenz, Casimir & Oei, Pao-Yu, 2019. "European electricity sector decarbonization under different levels of foresight," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 141, pages 973-987.
    16. Grafström, Jonas & Poudineh, Rahmat, 2023. "No evidence of counteracting policy effects on European solar power invention and diffusion," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    17. Quentin Perrier, 2017. "The French Nuclear Bet," Working Papers 2017.18, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    18. Polzin, Friedemann & Sanders, Mark & Serebriakova, Alexandra, 2021. "Finance in global transition scenarios: Mapping investments by technology into finance needs by source," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    19. Sven-Olof Fridolfsson and Thomas P. Tangeras, 2015. "Nuclear Capacity Auctions," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 3).
    20. Linares, Pedro & Conchado, Adela, 2013. "The economics of new nuclear power plants in liberalized electricity markets," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(S1), pages 119-125.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:energy:v:281:y:2023:i:c:s0360544223015980. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/energy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.