COST COMPARISON OF AIR FORCE DIESEL-ELECTRIC POWER GENERATION AND THE TERRESTRIAL UNATTENDED REACTOR POWER SYSTEM (TURPS).
Technical rept. Feb-Oct 67,
AIR FORCE WEAPONS LAB KIRTLAND AFB NM
Pagination or Media Count:
Compared are the total cost to the Air Force exclusive of personnel training and administrative overhead for producing electrical power from diesel engine-generator plants and the estimated cost for producing electrical power with several nuclear power systems. The comparisons consider only unprotected soft, above ground, Class A prime power plants in the range from 100 kwe to 10 Mwe. In particular, a comparison is made between small 100 kwe to 1000 kwe maximum gross demand diesel plants in geographically remote regions and the Terrestrial Unattended Reactor Power System TURPS concept. No attempt is made to assign a dollar value to parameters such as reliability, maintainability, power quality, and increases in operational capability which may accrue to users of nuclear power systems. Within these limitations, no cost advantage can be shown for nuclear plants as replacements for soft, Class A diesel-electric power plants in the ZI. Insufficient cost advantage is shown in remote areas to absorb expected development costs of the nuclear power systems which are considered. However, for applications such as hardsite buried or otherwise protected power plants, a nuclear reactor power system may possess operational advantages which outweigh its cost disadvantage. Author
- Economics and Cost Analysis
- Nuclear Power Plants and Fission Reactor Engineering
- Fission Reactor Materials