Rooppur Nuclear Power Plant (RNPP) is going to be an important addition to the portfolio of power generation of Bangladesh. The generation of electricity of Bangladesh depended so long on native fuel, the natural gas which now faces a setback as its reserve is feared to be exhausted within a span of next 15 years. The situation prompted the policy makers to diversify the fuel mix to include coal, uranium, renewable etc. in the Power Sector Master Plan-2010. Generation wise, the nuclear power plant will occupy the third position. The licence for construction of dual nuclear power plants of nominal capacity of 2400MW at Rooppur in the district of Pabna has been issued.
The fact remains that the capital cost of plants based on uranium or solar is much higher than that of traditional plants based on fossil fuel like coal, oil and natural gas. This article will try to present the generally accepted flat rates of capital cost of power plants based on different fuels for relative comparison. It will try to highlight the normal rates of construction of nuclear power plants in different regions of the globe. The article, in particular, will study, for comparison, the capital cost of contemporary nuke plants in Asia region of China, India, UAE and Bangladesh. It will also attempt to estimate the cost of electricity to be generated from Rooppur nuclear power plant.
Capital Cost of Power Plants From Different Fuel Sources
It is customary to express the capital cost of power plants as the cost per KW capacity, generally in US$/ KW. The overnight capital cost is a suitable basis for comparison of plants from different fuel technologies. The overnight capital cost is the lump sum turn-key contract for the EPC (engineering, procurement, commissioning) of the project plus the cost of owner’s establishment. It excludes the financial service cost as if the plant were built overnight without incurring any interest during construction period.
The study of relative cost of generation of electricity from different fuel mix is a complex affair as it is largely influenced by country of location and access to fuels. Gas-based electricity from combined cycle gas turbine plants is the most cost effective followed by the coal-based power which still holds the economic status around the world. Nuclear power is invariably capital intensive and the cost is on ascending trend due to improved design and safety features.
US Energy Information Administration (EIA) conducted a study to develop cost and performance estimates of utility-scale electricity generation plants of different technologies on a uniform basis. EIA uses the information to determine future capacity addition in the power sector as to how the new capacity can compete with existing capacities. The capital cost estimates of some power plants across the technologies are shown in Table-1.
Table-1 Updated Capital Cost Estimate for Power Plants. 2013
|
Serial no |
Fuel source |
Type of plant
|
Nominal Cap. MW |
Overnight capital cost. US$/KW |
|
1 |
Coal |
Dual unit advanced PC |
1,300 |
2,934 |
|
2 |
Natural gas |
Advanced combined cycle |
400 |
1,023 |
|
3 |
Nuclear |
Dual unit |
2,234 |
5,530 |
|
4 |
Wind |
Onshore plant |
100 |
2,213 |
|
5 |
Solar PV |
– |
150 |
3,873 |
Regional variation of cost
Due to regional differences in the cost of labour and materials, the capital cost will vary in different parts of the world, depending on developed and developing countries. The OECD (Organisation of Economic Cooperation for Development), a forum of 35 developed countries has an agency to follow the growth of nuclear power plants. The OECD Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) calculated the overnight capital cost of nuclear power plants built in the member countries. According to its report published in 2015, the level of capital costs of nuclear power plants in OECD countries are recorded as below.
· The overnight capital cost of nuclear power plants in OECD countries ranges from US$ 2,021/KW in Korea to US$ 6215/KW in Hungary.
· The overnight capital cost of a nuclear power plant in the USA stands to US$ 5,339/KW
· For CHINA, there are comparable two figures US$ 1807/KW and US$ 2,615/KW.
Capital Cost of RNPP Compared to Contemporary Plants of Asia
Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission (BAEC) signed a lump-sum contract with Atomstroyexport of Russia for construction and commissioning of two plants of model VVER-1200 at a cost of US$ 12.65 bn on credit to be paid in 28 years with a grace period of 10 years at interest rate of max. 4%. The plants Rooppur-1&2 will be substantially completed in 2022 and 2033 respectively.
BANGLADESH’s RNPP: Including the cost of feasibility study (US$ 550 m), the total project cost is US$ 13.2 bn. The overnight capital cost becomes US$ 5,500/KW which is equal to the cost level of the USA. (refer Table-1)
INDIA’s Kundankulam unit 3&4: India signed a contract in 2016 with Russia for two VVER-1000 reactor plants at a total cost of US$ 5.91 bn. The overnight capital cost stands at US$ 2955/KW.
UAE’s Barakah NPP: UAE signed contract for four Korean reactor plants of model APR-1400 with total capacity of 5,600 MW at a cost US$ 20 bn. and the plants are under construction. The overnight capital cost is US$ 3570/KW.
|
The overnight capital cost of RNPP is found to be 86% and 54% higher than those of contemporary plants in India and UAE respectively. The reasons for exorbitantly high cost of RNPP can be attributed to the followings.
· The improved reactor design and unique safety systems. · Costly cooling towers and fansfor re-circulatory cooling water system (Same water will be circulated several times with regulated draining and refilling). Bangladesh got confined with Rooppur site which it inherited as the place dedicated for nuclear power plant. Had the project been at sea side with once through cooling system, the capital cost could have been substantially reduced. US Department of Energy study says that cooling tower plants are about 40% more expensive than a plant without cooling tower( Cold sea water will be circulated once and then released back to sea) Were the plant at sea side, would give a cost saving of US$ 4 billion! |
Deration & Net Capacity of RNPP
Due to hot climate, the de-rated nominal capacity of RNPP = 2232 MW
The power consumption by the auxiliary drives & re-heaters = (--) 168 MW
The power consumption by cooling tower fans = (--) 24 MW
Net capacity of RNPP = 2040 MW
|
· The nominal capacity of VVER-1200 is valid for sea side of cold country with cooling water temperature of 18°C. At high ambient condition in Bangladesh, the cold water temperature from cooling towers will be 33°C. For this 15degreehigher cooling watertemperature, the nominal capacity will be reduced by 7%. · Own electricity consumption of the plant is 7% and consumption of forced draft fans of towers will be 1% of the nominal capacity. |
Cost Calculation of Generated Power
1. Capital cost
|
EPC cost of dual RNPP |
US$ 12.65 billion |
|
Cost of feasibility study |
0.55 billion |
|
Total capital cost |
13.20 billion |
|
Effective interest @4% for 28 years |
7.42 billion |
|
Capital cost with interest |
20.62 billion |
|
Annual repayment instalment |
736 million |
2. O&M (Operation and Maintenance) cost
|
Fixed O&M cost |
@ US$ 198/KW/yr |
2400,000 KW |
US$ 475 million |
|
Variable O&M cost |
@US$ 2.4 MWh |
17,870,400MWh |
US$ 43 million |
|
Annual O&M cost |
|
|
US$ 518million |
3. Fuel cost
|
· According to an estimate for 2015, Uranium fuel cost is 0.52cent/KWh. Adding 20% for storage, handling and transportation, the resulting fuel cost will be 0.62 cent/KWh. · The yearly generation, at 85% Plant Load Factor (PLF), will be 18x109KWh. |
|
|
Yearly cost of fuel (0.62x 18x109) |
US$ 112 million |
4. Demobilisation cost
|
· The nuclear power plant is to be demobilised after expiry of plant life. Demobilisation is a costly affair and may take US$ 1.5 billion. The cost is to be earned by sale of electricity during the plant life of 60 years.
|
|
|
Yearly share for demobilisation cost |
US$ 25 million |
5. Break-even cost of electricity
|
Net plant Capacity MW |
PLF % |
Annual Saleable electricity KWh |
Annualised capital+O&M Cost. ?1 to 4 US$ |
Unit cost
US$/KWh
|
Exchange Rate 1 US$ to Tk |
Unit Cost Tk/KWh |
|
2040 |
85 |
15.19x109 |
1391 million |
0.09/KWh |
78.50 |
7.00 |
|
|
65 |
11.61x109 |
|
0.12/KWh |
|
9.40 |
|
Unit cost of electricity at ideal condition |
Tk. 7.00 per KWh |
|
Unit cost of electricity at realistic condition |
Tk. 9.40 per KWh |
Effect of External Work
The overnight capital cost covers only the internal cost and not the cost of any major infrastructure external to the plant. For cooling water, RNPP will depend on the river Padma which in dry season turns to a vast stretch of dry bed with a narrow water stream which is good neither for navigation nor for irrigation. The situation may demand a support from a water reservoir, a dam to ensure a steady supply of water to the plant. A dam itself will be a multi-billion dollar project. Again, the dredging of river channels for transportation of plant equipment will cost billion dollars. If the costs of such mega infrastructural projects are put on stack over RNPP, then the rate of electricity produced will go beyond all economics.
|
Project implementation
GOB (Government of Bangladesh) treats RNPP as a fast track project and is very earnest to see the project completed in stipulated time (2017—2023). Here comes the need of a professionally strong Construction Manager to guide and control the main contractor and sub contractors to respect the construction schedule to meet the dateline of completion. It may be noted that Rosatom took 10 years (2002-2012) for Kundankulam-1 of India and 20 years (1994-2014) for Busher-1 of Iran. Delay of project completion will raise the project cost which in turn will raise the cost of power.
|
Conclusion
A country gains when it utilises its own fuel resources for power generation. Bangladesh is blessed with natural gas and coal. The gas wealth cannot disappear all on a sudden. What is needed is extensive exploration to discover new gas fields which is important, because no other fuel technology can compete with gas based electricity whose cost is the minimum (Tk. 2-4 per KWh) and the capital cost per KW is the least being 1/5th of that of nuke power plant (refer Table-1). The countries, not having any fuel resources, may find nuclear power plant a good option. It is rightly said RNPP brings the country prestige and gives an access to nuclear technology for power generation. While the drawback is that the country lacks in expertise to handle such sophisticated and sensitive technology. Bangladesh has to wait for long to develop skilled manpower to run the nuke plant.
K.M. Mahbubur Rahman,
Senior Mechanical Engineer
Email: mahbub.r_407 @yahoo.com
