ML19210B506

Forwards Dk Rathbun 731026 Supplemental Testimony on Capacity Factor & Graph of Power Generation Cost in Mills Per Kwh Vs Plant Capacity Factor,In Response to 741226 Request

ML19210B506
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	01/30/1975
From:	Case E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Bell H IOWA, STATE OF
References
NUDOCS 7911090087
Download: ML19210B506 (2)

Text

'

/~~

': ?

y_,

m DISTRIBUTION:

entral File dg., NRR CBAB, Rdg.

Mr. Howard Bell 197 5 DRathbun y,$

Comissioner, Iowa Comerce MSpangler C:mmission HDenton Des Moines, Iowa FSchroeder (2)

ECase

Dear Mr. Bell:

MGroff (L-812)

In response to your letter of December 26, 1974 I am forwarding a copy of supplemental testimony prepared for a public hearing on the Three Mile Island nuclear station on the subject of generating plant capacity factors (Enclosure 1). The data contained in that testimony indicate that generating costs for nuclear plants are lower than those for coal-fired and oil-fired plants at 50 percent capacity factor. Using more recent cost data, a graph of power generation cost in mills per KWH versus plant capacity factor is,1ven in Enclosure 2.

The input data for this graph are contained in " Power Plant Capital Costs, Current Trends add Sensitivity to Economic Parameters", (WASH-1345, Cctober 1974); "The Nuclear ?ndustry - 1974" (WASH-il74-74); and " Federal Power Comission News', (November 22, 1974). These data suggest an even greater relative ecuomy of operation for nuclear plants versus coal and oil-fired plants for plant capacity factors in the range of 50 percent. -

The choice of fuel for an electric generating station on a cost basis will be influenced by the plant capital costs for the specific site and by local fuel cost factors. However, the trends in fuel prices over the past year have tended to favor on an economic basis the choice of nuclear plants even at capacity factors as low as 40 percent as may be seen from the graphical infonr.ation in Enclosure 2.

With regard to fuel price increase, "The Federal Power Comission News" reports that from September 1973 to September 1974 average coal prices rose 93.8 percent, oil prices rose 138.3 percent, and natural gas prices rose 49.7 percent.

Of course, one would expect significantly higher capacity factors in the actual operation of nuclear units particularly after the first year or so of operation.

Sincerely.

0#- " -d P; E. G. Cm Edson G. Case, Acting Director Office of Nuclear Reactor g

Regulation y

Enclosures:

As stated bX dbun:cs....MB((g.._

..... AD/Sg CBA a "'c =

• hn..

.FSt her EGC se gIe r...

.. H R uma=*

D o.v= *

...11.28/75.....

_1/Jf/_7.5._.

1/p/75.

1/Qg/75 1/} 75 Form AIC.318 (Rev. 9-53) AECM 0240 W u. s. movammuunt Paintino orwics: 1e74.sas.ess 7911090k{7 1566 001 P

'O 4,

i i i_

\\.

i L._'

\\

\\ i L

,ii,

,,e i

_U JERGEf!EPAT10:1 COST

-ii i

. i i r 1 y_g_

p'H.

'4 _L

+..L..[H-l,ii r..,

i.i -

ii

'l8 i

__L 3.- CAPACITY FACTOR i

4lL t

-i j l 2,%p-I H- 'l

R' l-i i,

iiii i i i _t ii.

i

.ii i.

.i

..I ljl l

l -l- -f !- Breakeven point- - ---- 2-----l I

l j

- T-P 'o~il VS'. nuclear i i i,

e iei i

ie i l-i "60-i,.

M-T

-l

.,,}-,

1 ii i

i,

i

, i i

i.

i I i e it i

, i i i

. i d.\\. { i i i,

e.

i,

i e

i

.ii i i i i e

i e i i >

ei.

i i i i i i, e

_l

. i i

,I t

I i i e iyi i I i i

e i i t

i.,

iii i i i i is i i

i ; i i i.

i i i I

(1 s i

ei

_i

,, i i i,

i i,

. i i 1

_.y i,

,1 3 4._,

e i i

i. i i ii,i i,

' i i

',ii i i l

e iii iii i.i);

I,..

i I i i i

}

e i 6 i i i e i i l e l l i i 6 i6 i

_ ie i gi.

i.

i i i i I, i e

. i..

i i i

! i i L i

i i i e iiit i i hti i

.. e i t i i i

i. i i 4 e i i a i I l i i e

{

k

, 1 i i

, i l i i i i i l i i i

i j

e i

i i i i i i i i i l i i i

i i i i

.\\

i i t i i_

i i LL t

. I e i l : i i i i i ii

. I e i, i t i\\ i t i i i i i i !

! I i t e i !

I i i i

i i i i i i j\\i_\\.

iL i i e

i i i i i

. \\. T i.

i..

...i i i e i

, i i i i i ii i

ii

. i i

i i i i e I i

I i Ui I

iI i i i i i i i i Je

,iiF i i i e i i i i i

, e i i i

i i !

i i i i ei i

'i I

- i i i i

e i

i e i i e i ie a i i

i i i

. i i

6 e i i

t i e i

__f_.

g I, ii e i i i l t i e Ni i i.g\\r

. i i j i e i

. i i i...

i.

i i

, i y s

i,

i,

40 i

i i,

i i

_3 i

,,. i i,,

,p

,xt i

i i i

i i i.

i i i i i..

i.N i

i i t i i i i i

, i i

N 7 pi i

e ii i ! I i i ) i i iil 6

. e,

i i e i I.,

' m'---i i i ii m

Br!ea keven s poi nt _ t.

L.%'

2 x

i I.-

ii

's i

e i

i. e i i i i i.

i i

wal vs--nucleary s

,,,93 i

1 i,

i,

i i i i i,o s.ii i, i v

i i i i i i

. i i i

-i-o-

i i.

i i i i i i i i i ii, i4 i i i i i !

, i i t i i e i i i i m

i e i

i i, i,iii i w, i i, i

.,iwiii i i i i it

. i i-i i x.

eii

, iw i i..

., t.

, i.,

. i i i i.

C-30 i

i...

.w,ii i,

,, i ;

w, i

he z T i

e i, i

! i i i

.,wo i

i i i:

i s

, i i i i,

' i i l ' _%.

ii..

' I i

i i'

' ihm l

6 i ' i i

i ',i I

e

_e i

i. f i

, i.,

s i,

,i ix i, i,

i. it i i i

~

m i i i

i,

i, i.

i..i t

.N Coal i,

, i i,

o i ie i

,,, i i

i N

, i i,, i i i

~T i

e i i t i.

iN

{ i e i i i i i i l l

t i e i iie

!,. i

. I ii

{y6

. i i

{ i i i i e i i i e ii e i j i i i 1 i i i I e I

. s. i l,xt 3

i e ii i, i i i i i i

. i i.

i,

, i i i i,

4 i.

. i i i i i

i iii,6 vI i, i.-

. i i

... ' LQ.

l.

i i l l h t

• i 1 i i

, i

e i i g

i,.

i i i i

, 1 i s i,

i i

i, x.

ix i i i e i,..

'iluc-l' ar ' M

i.,,

i.

i.'

g e

. i i i i i.

i i i

.. i, i i i

,x i

. i i i,

u

,,,i 93

,i i

i ii i

i. i i i, i i e i i

e i. --

i 8

i i ii i i i i i i i i

ii i...

, i i,

i, i i i i i..

i i i we O=

l : e s

l '

i e i i i i e t ii j i l i i i e i i i i i iie i i i i 6

e ii 1

i i 6 i i.._

., l l i i i i e

{l i e i,

i i i i 4, i e

i._

i i,,

. i u_

i_

L. i

, i i.

i i,

. i i

=-

1

, i i,

i

,i.i

, i i.,

i i i ei i

i 6 i g e

t,

t

, i I

, I i l i I e i

I i ii f

1 9

8 i

8 I

i 6

' i i 4 1 i ' i i i,._

i

, i i,

, i i

i l

l s i i.

, e i

i e. !

I e i

e i i l

i e ii

, i i.

. i. i i

i t

, i e i i.

i i i i i i i i i

i i.

L, i.

. i,

i i.

i i l

, i n+

i i

'O lb

-- -IG -

30 IO --- 5 d-

- 6'0 76 80, - 90. _--1 C-0 i i i i i -

i i

i

~l i,

i i e i

i,

i i

' i

-~1.,

T i. i,

I i i

i i i

ii l

t

, r i l l e

i i

6 L

i ii

_i.C. APAC! TY_. FACTOR--d - -

i i i !

i,.

i

' l.'

'b' i-l l'

l ---

l r--

, i Figure 1.

PowerGenerationCostvs.CapacitI'M=cor 002 o+m v

e 3.

g

-s

/,e 10/26/73 THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION - DOCKET No. 50-289 Supplemental Testimony on Capacity Factor By Dennis K. Rathbun Contention 10 "The extent to which the NEpA review concerning cost / benefit analysis and alternatives may not be complete in that the following points have not been fully analyzed or included:

(f) Capacity factors" In the cost-benefit analysis contained in the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Final Environmental Statement, the Regulatory staff used an 80 percent plant capacity factor, defined as the ratio of the average load on a plant for a period of time compared to the gross capacity rating of the plant.

Operating data from nuclear power plants comparable to Three Mile Island (THI) shows a trend which supports the use of the 80 percent plant factor. Using data accumulated by the USAEC Division of Reactor Development and TechnologyN, Table 1, following, was prepared.

From this table it can be seen tha DUPLICATE DOCUMENT U. S. Atomic Energy Commissi power Reactors 1972, Table 8, Entire document previously entered into system under:

ANO 1566 003 No. of pages:

' -y

><r I

s