Keeping up with China: The Economic Advantage of Molten Salt Nuclear Technology

Last Friday, Brian Wang called attention to a Boomberg's article on Chinese nuclear cost. The Bloomberg's story reported that the French designed EPR would cost 40% less to build in China that in Europe:

Areva SA said the EPR nuclear reactor costs 3 billion euros ($4 billion) to build in China, 40 percent less than the price tag Electricite de France SA has put on building one in Normandy.

Nuclear Townhall, on the 26th, called attention to the competitiveness of both the Chinese and the Russian Nuclear Industries. In addition to Russia and China, Nuclear Green has repeatedly called attention to the cost competitiveness of South Korea, and Indian nuclear technologies. The Indians especially are following a will charted path to an innovative low cost nuclear future.

American and European nuclear development can either proceed by following the cost lowering paths being pioneered in Asia, or begin to develop low cost innovative nuclear plans. Since low labor costs, represent the most significant Chinese and Indian cost advantage, it is unlikely that European and American reactor manufacturers will be able to compete with the Asians on labor costs. Labor costs for conventional reactors can be lowered by factory construction of reactor componant moduels, but the Chinese are clearly ahead of the West in that game. Yet the weakness of the Chinese system is the relatively large amount of field labor that the manufacture of large reactors requires.

The Chines system is to introduce labor saving devices where ever and when ever possible, but clearly shifting labor from the field to a factory still offers cost advantages. The more labor which can be performed in the factory, the more labor cost savings are possible. Other savings advantages are possible by simplifying reactor design, and lowering materials input. Building a reactor with less materials and fewer parts lowers nuclear costs directly and indirectly. Decreasing core size per unit of power output also can contribute a cost advantage. Direct saving relate to the cost of parts and matetials, but fewer parts and less material also means less labor is required to put things together, since there is less to put together. In addition a small reactor core structure, would, all other things being equal, require a smaller housing. Larger cores mean more structural housing expenses. More at:

http://theenergycollective.com/charlesbarton/47933/keeping-china-economic-advantage-molten-salt-nuclear-technology