Cost Estimation and Efficiency Analysis of Korean CANDU Spent Fuel Disposal Alternatives in Consideration of Future Price Volatility

Bang, Sungsig; Chung, Yanghon; Chun, Dongphil; Kwon, Chulhong; Hong, Suk In

doi:10.1155/2016/3967572

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, depreciation cost changes according to the method of calculation as it is derived systematically instead of relying on actual expenses [9][10][11][12]. Third, it accounts for a higher proportion of cost with increasing purchasing costs of tangible assets, which are subject to depreciation [13][14][15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Depreciation Method for Long-Term Tangible Assets on Sustainable Management: From a Nuclear Power Generation Cost Perspective under the Nuclear Phase-Out Policy

Bang

Park

2021

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Korean Government has been implementing a nuclear phase-out policy since 2017. Nuclear power plants accounted for 30.0% of the total power generation in 2016; this figure fell to 25.9% at the end of 2019, and the average Capacity Factor (CF) of a nuclear power plant approximately dropped from 89.1% to 69.2%. The nuclear phase-out policy presents severe consequences for the sustainable management of the nuclear power industry. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to analyze the effect of a decrease in the nuclear capacity factor under the nuclear phase-out policy on the depreciation cost per unit using the Straight-Line Method (SLM) and Decelerated Depreciation Method (DDM) and to provide recommendations from a sustainable management perspective. The results show that the decrease in CF of nuclear power plants has a negative impact on sustainable development of the nuclear power industry. DDM is more beneficial than the SLM during this initial stage of depreciation under the nuclear phase-out policy. In addition, in the early stages of projects or immediately after attracting large-scale investments, DDM can offer more positive signs for stockholders by calculating a smaller net loss or a higher net profit.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nuclear power plants require high levels of security, automation, and robustness to ensure protection from radiation. As such, more investment is needed compared to other types of power plants, which results in a higher depreciation cost [13][14][15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Depreciation Method for Long-Term Tangible Assets on Sustainable Management: From a Nuclear Power Generation Cost Perspective under the Nuclear Phase-Out Policy

Bang

Park

2021

Sustainability

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Pyroprocessing unit cost estimation for a commercial facility using PRIDE actual costs in Korea

Kim

et al. 2023

Annals of Nuclear Energy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Break-Even Point Analysis of Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Capital Investment Cost Comparing the Direct Disposal Option and Pyro-Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Nuclear Fuel Cycle Option in Korea

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The purpose of this paper is to recommend a break-even point for the capital investment cost for a Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) when choosing between a Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle (recycling option via Pyro-processing) and a direct disposal option. This is because the selection of an alternative cannot be justified without a guarantee of economic feasibility. The calculation of a break-even point is necessary because SFR capital investment cost makes up the largest share of the cost for electricity generation. In other words, the cost of capital investment is an important cost driver, and the one that exerts the greatest effect on Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle economics. In the end, the break-even point of the SFR capital investment cost between the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle and the direct disposal was calculated to be 4284 US$/kWe. In other words, it is possible to claim that the potential for the economic viability of the Pyro-SFR nuclear fuel cycle is greater (compared to investing in direct disposal) when the SFR capital investment cost is 4284 US$/kWe or less. In addition, Pyro-SFR technology will enable sustainable nuclear power generation.

show abstract

Cost Estimation and Efficiency Analysis of Korean CANDU Spent Fuel Disposal Alternatives in Consideration of Future Price Volatility

Cited by 4 publications

References 8 publications

Effect of Depreciation Method for Long-Term Tangible Assets on Sustainable Management: From a Nuclear Power Generation Cost Perspective under the Nuclear Phase-Out Policy

Effect of Depreciation Method for Long-Term Tangible Assets on Sustainable Management: From a Nuclear Power Generation Cost Perspective under the Nuclear Phase-Out Policy

Pyroprocessing unit cost estimation for a commercial facility using PRIDE actual costs in Korea

Break-Even Point Analysis of Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Capital Investment Cost Comparing the Direct Disposal Option and Pyro-Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Nuclear Fuel Cycle Option in Korea

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About