IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/enp/wpaper/eprg1018.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Minimizing the Cost of Innovative Nuclear Technology Through Flexibility: The Case of a Demonstration Accelerator-Driven Subcritical Reactor Park

Author

Listed:
  • Michel-Alexandre Cardin

    (Engineering Systems Division, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA)

  • Steven J. Steer

    (ESRC Electricity Policy Research Group and Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge)

  • William J. Nuttall

    (ESRC Electricity Policy Research Group and Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge)

  • Geoffrey T. Parks

    (Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge)

  • Leonardo V.N. Gonçalves

    (Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge)

Abstract

Presented is a methodology to analyze the expected Levelised Cost Of Electricity (LCOE) in the face of technology uncertainty for Accelerator-Driven Subcritical Reactors (ADSRs). It shows that flexibility in the design and deployment strategy of an ADSR park demonstrator significantly reduces its expected LCOE. The methodology recognizes in the conceptual design a range of possible technological outcomes for the ADSR accelerator system. It identifies flexibility “on” and “in” the design to modify the future development path in light of such uncertain scenarios. Uncertainty and flexibility are incorporated in the ADSR valuation. The resulting economic assessment is more realistic than typical discounted cash flow analysis that does not consider a range of development outcomes, or the flexibility to change development path.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Michel-Alexandre Cardin & Steven J. Steer & William J. Nuttall & Geoffrey T. Parks & Leonardo V.N. Gonçalves, 2010. "Minimizing the Cost of Innovative Nuclear Technology Through Flexibility: The Case of a Demonstration Accelerator-Driven Subcritical Reactor Park," Working Papers EPRG 1018, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    • Handle: RePEc:enp:wpaper:eprg1018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.jbs.cam.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/eprg-wp1018.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Louberge, Henri & Villeneuve, Stephane & Chesney, Marc, 2002. "Long-term risk management of nuclear waste: a real options approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 157-180, November.
    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. Abdullah Almansour and Margaret Insley, 2016. "The Impact of Stochastic Extraction Cost on the Value of an Exhaustible Resource: An Application to the Alberta Oil Sands," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 2).
    2. Richard Benjamin & Jeffrey Wagner, 2006. "Reconsidering the law and economics of low-level radioactive waste management," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, December.
    3. Iyer, Sriya & Velu, Chander, 2006. "Real options and demographic decisions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 39-58, June.
    4. Christian Gollier & Jean-Guy Devezeaux de Lavergne, 2001. "Analyse quantitative de la réversibilité du stockage des déchets nucléaires : valorisation des déchets," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 149(3), pages 1-13.
    5. Marreco, Juliana de Moraes & Carpio, Lucio Guido Tapia, 2006. "Flexibility valuation in the Brazilian power system: A real options approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(18), pages 3749-3756, December.
    6. Lappi, Pauli & Lintunen, Jussi, 2021. "From cradle to grave? On optimal nuclear waste disposal," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    7. Bobtcheff, Catherine & Villeneuve, Stéphane, 2010. "Technology choice under several uncertainty sources," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(3), pages 586-600, November.
    8. Anastasios Michailidis & Konstadinos Mattas & Irene Tzouramani & Diamantis Karamouzis, 2009. "A Socioeconomic Valuation of an Irrigation System Project Based on Real Option Analysis Approach," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 23(10), pages 1989-2001, August.
    9. Richard Benjamin & Jeffrey Wagner, 2006. "Reconsidering the law and economics of low-level radioactive waste management," Environmental Economics and Policy Studies, Springer;Society for Environmental Economics and Policy Studies - SEEPS, vol. 8(1), pages 33-53, December.
    10. Ugo Bardi, 2016. "What Future for the Anthropocene? A Biophysical Interpretation," Biophysical Economics and Resource Quality, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 1-7, August.
    11. Rothwell, Geoffrey & Wood, Thomas W. & Daly, Don & Weimar, Mark R., 2014. "Sustainability of light water reactor fuel cycles," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(S1), pages 16-23.
    12. Cardin, Michel-Alexandre & Zhang, Sizhe & Nuttall, William J., 2017. "Strategic real option and flexibility analysis for nuclear power plants considering uncertainty in electricity demand and public acceptance," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 226-237.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accelerator-driven subcritical reactor; real options; flexibility in design; electricity production; economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:enp:wpaper:eprg1018. 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: Ruth Newman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/jicamuk.html .

    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.