Nuclear uprates could add 5-10GW to the US’s 100GW nuclear fleet, simply by running existing reactors harder or upgrading their equipment. The capex costs of nuclear uprates are tabulated in this data-file, across a dozen case studies, ranging from $200 – $7,000/kW. Do nuclear uprate costs undercut SMRs on the nuclear cost curve?
Nuclear uprate projects increase the capacity of pre-existing nuclear reactors. But what are the costs of nuclear uprate projects? To answer this question, we have aggregated data across a dozen case studies, capturing different kinds of nuclear uprates.
Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR) projects are the simplest nuclear uprates. Thermal limits of nuclear reactors have historically included a c2% safety margin, to reflect the instrumentation measuring heat energy dissipation. But more accurate instruments, especially ultrasonic flow-metering, can tap into this buffer, offering up to 2% more capacity, at costs as low as $200/kW.
The problem with MUR projects is that they have already taken place at substantively all applicable nuclear reactors, across 73 past projects (chart below).
Stretch uprates are similar and also upgrade instrumentation, in order to enable running existing nuclear plants harder, without requiring major plant modifications. This can increase capacity by 2-7%, with costs below $1,000/kW, but in a similar vein to MURs, 65 past projects have taken place since the 1970s, and the paucity of recent projects suggests that the low-hanging fruit is already tapped out.
Extended Power Uprates (EPUs) increase the capacity of nuclear projects by a wider margin, in the range of 7-20%, and 13.5% on average, by replacing major plant units such as reactor components, steam systems, turbines, generators, pumps and power electronics. These can be very large and complex projects.
The capex costs of Extended Power Uprates are captured in this data-file across ten case studies, where costs were released in to the public domain. Capex costs and development timelines are 20-50% better than greenfield nuclear projects.
Interestingly, this may also be lower-cost and lower-risk than the costs of SMR concepts. Therefore a desire to expand nuclear capacity may benefit the uprate supply chain first. This was the other reason for looking at case studies of past nuclear uprates, in order to see which suppliers’ names crop up, and who might benefit?
EPUs are large and elaborate projects. Some examples require upgrading over 30-120 separate systems and components, some of which have become radioactive and/or require raising and then re-installing the containment dome. The 522MW uprate at Turkey Point & St. Lucie, in Florida, involved more than 22M man-hours of work, orchestrated by Bechtel. Upgrading the steam dryers at Grand Gulf required 5,000 workers. Installation tends to take place during refueling outages.