Large-Scale Production of Hydrogen by Nuclear Energy for the Hydrogen Economy

Schultz, K.R.; Brown, L. C.; Besenbruch, G. E.; Hamilton, Christopher

doi:10.2172/814028

Cited by 50 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The reactor core capital cost and the cost of nuclear reactor fuel are taken to be $371/kW th (based on data for the year 2003) and $8/MWh, respectively [8,21]. To convert the capital investment into the cost per time unit, one can write [12]:…”

Section: Cost Balancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Exergoeconomic Analysis of Waste Heat Recovery from a Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor via Organic Rankine Cycles

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:A comparative exergoeconomic analysis is reported for waste heat recovery from a gas turbine-modular helium reactor (GT-MHR) using various configurations of organic Rankine cycles (ORCs) for generating electricity. The ORC configurations studied are: a simple organic Rankine cycle (SORC), an ORC with an internal heat exchanger (HORC) and a regenerative organic Rankine cycle (RORC). Exergoeconomic analyses are performed with the specific exergy costing (SPECO) method. First, energy and exergy analyses are applied to the combined cycles. Then, a cost-balance, as well as auxiliary equations are developed for the components to determine the exergoeconomic parameters for the combined cycles and their components. The three combined cycles are compared considering the same operating conditions for the GT-MHR cycle, and a parametric study is done to reveal the effects on the exergoeconomic performance of the combined cycles of various significant parameters, e.g., turbine inlet and evaporator temperatures and compressor pressure ratio. The results show that the GT-MHR/RORC has the lowest unit cost of electricity generated by the ORC turbine. This value is highest for the GT-MHR/HORC. Furthermore, the GT-MHR/RORC has the highest and the GT-MHR/HORC has the lowest exergy destruction cost rate. OPEN ACCESSSustainability 2014, 6 2475

show abstract

Section: Cost Balancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Exergoeconomic Analysis of Waste Heat Recovery from a Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor via Organic Rankine Cycles

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, the Sulfur-Iodine and Hybrid Sulfur cycles [29,30] use sulfuric acid as part of their process, and tritium can undergo an isotope exchange reaction with the sulfuric acid to form tritiated sulfuric acid, HTSO 4 …”

Section: Permeationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tritium Barrier Materials and Separation Systems for the NGNP

Sherman¹,

Adams²

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The key challenge is that the process requires high temperatures (800° C) and is still in the experimental stages. Schultz (2003) has estimated the costs of a nuclear thermochemical process. We use Schultz's estimates for the S-I process to forecast comparable costs for a CSP thermochemical facility.…”

Section: Thermochemical Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These costs are summarized below. Schultz (2003) estimates the costs for a nuclear thermochemical facility utilizing the S-I cycle. The estimated capital cost for the hydrogen production facility is 669 $/kW-H 2 .…”

Section: Thermochemical Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Hydrogen Futures Simulation Model (H[2]Sim) technical description.

Jones¹,

Kamery²,

Baker³

et al. 2004

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydrogen has the potential to become an integral part of our energy transportation and heat and power sectors in the coming decades and offers a possible solution to many of the problems associated with a heavy reliance on oil and other fossil fuels. The Hydrogen Futures Simulation Model (H 2 Sim) was developed to provide a high level, internally consistent, strategic tool for evaluating the economic and environmental trade offs of alternative hydrogen production, storage, transport and end use options in the year 2020. Based on the model's default assumptions, estimated hydrogen production costs range from 0.68 $/kg for coal gasification to as high as 5.64 $/kg for centralized electrolysis using solar PV. This basic result does not change if carbon capture and sequestration costs are added ($0.16/kg). This result is fairly insensitive. For example, coal prices would have to more than triple or the assumed capital cost would have to increase by more than 2.5 times for natural gas reformation to become the cheaper option. Alternatively, natural gas prices would have to fall below $2/MBtu to compete with coal gasification. The electrolysis results are highly sensitive to electricity costs, but electrolysis only becomes cost competitive with other options when electricity drops below 1 cent/kWhr.

show abstract

Large-Scale Production of Hydrogen by Nuclear Energy for the Hydrogen Economy

Cited by 50 publications

References 1 publication

A Comparative Exergoeconomic Analysis of Waste Heat Recovery from a Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor via Organic Rankine Cycles

A Comparative Exergoeconomic Analysis of Waste Heat Recovery from a Gas Turbine-Modular Helium Reactor via Organic Rankine Cycles

Tritium Barrier Materials and Separation Systems for the NGNP

The Hydrogen Futures Simulation Model (H[2]Sim) technical description.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About