Re: Increasing energy costs

On Mar 29, 11:10 am, T. Keating <tkuse...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 10:44:24 -0700 (PDT), bill



<ford_prefec...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mar 29, 4:59 am, T. Keating <tkuse...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:06:45 -0700 (PDT), bill

<ford_prefec...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
My $25000/kg of uranium is the cost/kg at which uranium generated
electricity increases in cost by *1* cent/kwh.

wrong.. more like 77.5 cents per kWh.. not including enrichment,
construction, operational, and decommissioning costs..

math..

Initial fuel load 1GWe .. 100 metric tons of enriched UO2
before enrichment.. ~660 metric tons of U3O8(yellow cake)..
two refuelings, replacing 1/3 of fuel rods every 1.5 years
220 tonns * 2....

660MT + 220MT + 220MT == 1100 MT
1.5 years * 3 == 4.5 years @ 90% duty cycle..

1100 * 1000MT/kg * 25,000$/kg == 2.75e+10 dollars.. (27.5 Billion
dollars)

2.75e+10 / (4.5 years * 365.25 * 24 * .9 * 1,000,000(kWh/hr)) == 0.775
dollars per kWh or 77.5 cents per kWh in U3O8 costs..

except that with refuelling, 96% of the fuel that you remove from the
reactor goes back into the reactor. your numbers are correct for the
once through fuel cycle such as is practiced stupidly in the us, in
france, my number is correct.

No your numbers are NOT correct or even close..

A spent fuel's rod remaining uranium content is nearly all U-238..
inert.. 80 to 90%of the U-235 content has undergone fission..

New reactor fuel.. 3.5 to 4.5 % U-235 content..
Spent fuel.. less than 1% U-235 content.. approx 0,7% new Pu
content..

Mined U isotopic breakdown.. 0.7% U-235, 99.3% U-238 content..

P.S.. The world has plenty of spare U-238.(Depleted Uranium)..
We used it to tip anti-tank weapons.

It's the U-235 isotope that's a rare commodity..http://www.uic.com.au/nfc.htm

That's why thorium and of it's secondary birth of far less harmful
stuff is so downright nifty, that is if you're not actually looking
for another cloaked resource of breeding weapons grade Pu at public
and consumer expense.

BTW, our moon has way more than its fair share of thorium, as well as
tonnes of 3He.
.. - Brad Guth
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nukes Re: GOP could block clunkers cash
    ... elements, and make new batteries from them, save that the costs are ... And Fuel Rods are not even half used up ... pyotr filipivich. ... the Obama energy plan is for US citizens to do without,by making energy ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Increasing energy costs
    ... construction, operational, and decommissioning costs.. ... two refuelings, replacing 1/3 of fuel rods every 1.5 years ... A spent fuel's rod remaining uranium content is nearly all U-238.. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: Increasing energy costs
    ... construction, operational, and decommissioning costs.. ... replacing 1/3 of fuel rods every 1.5 years ... 220 tonns * 2.... ... dollars per kWh or 77.5 cents per kWh in U3O8 costs.. ...
    (sci.energy)
  • Re: >>> today Ive updated my "Space Solar Power hoax/illusion DEBUNKED" article with a VERY DETAILED
    ... today I've updated my "Space Solar Power hoax/illusion DEBUNKED" ... costs, that shows its "global costs" could be up to $45,000 TRILLIONS ... In the mean time and at not 1% the all-inclusive infrastructure ... The only reason we have not been using thorium as our primary nuclear ...
    (sci.space.policy)