Shipping nuclear fuel, cost

The United States also built and operated one nuclear-powered cargo vessel, but abandoned it as uneconomical compared to the cost of oil-powered vessels, in the 1960 period, when the cost of a barrel of oil was in the range of about 10. The Soviet Union built and launched two nuclear-powered ice breakers, and after the end of the Cold War were put into service primarily for tourist-associated business involving travel to the poles. The economics of construction and operation of new nuclear-powered commercial ships has not drawn much attention in the last several decades, despite the cost of petroleum hovering around the 100 per barrel range. Fuel costs for shipping of goods and materials is a relatively small fraction of the wholesale costs. 

The technical feasibility of the nuclear ship propulsion for merchant vessels has been demonstrated by the nuclear ships Savannah and Otto Hahn. However, these first demonstration ships have not been economical. For the second generation of nuclear merchant ships an economical advantage compared to conventional vessels has to be proven. It is well-known that the higher investment for the nuclear steam generators has to be compensated for by lower fuel costs. Therefore in the design of future ship reactors efforts have to be made to reduce the fuel costs. But it is also possible to realize lower investment of the engine by further optimization of all components. 

The reduction of fuel costs can be realized by a higher power density, higher burnup values, and an optimal fuel management, as stationary nuclear power plants have shown in the past. But the experience with these large power plants cannot be applied without modifications to nuclear ship reactors mainly because of the relatively small power requirements of ship units. 

Uranium that is used to fuel light water nuclear power reactors is generally enriched to a level of 3%-5% and considered as LEU. Several reactors that are used for research, material testing, and production of isotopes for medical and industrial applications also use LEU fuel, sometimes with as much as 19.75% U. Other research reactors and nuclear-powered ships and submarines require a higher content of the fissile isotope in order to reduce the size of the reactor core. Weapon grade uranium typically contains around 90% U (HEU). Thus, the value and cost of uranium is strongly dependent on the fraction of U present. Some sources also refer to... 

In the 1950s, many and diverse applications for nuclear energy were envisioned and explored. However, over the ensuing decades only two applications came into widespread industrial use — electricity production and naval ship propulsion. Fossil fuel was abundant, cheap, and convenient, and the use of nuclear fission for diverse energy applications was simply not cost competitive with fossil-fuelled options. 

Successful operation of the first core of the Otto Hahn reactor showed the basic feasibility of the FDR for nuclear ship propulsion. The operation of a second more advanced core should provide information for the design of future cores with lower fuel cycle costs. However for reasons of cost and time only minor alterations to the system were to be allowed, except in those cases where the value of the gained experience would compensate the expenditure. 

Another disadvantage for nuclear ship reactors is the high fabrication cost of the fuel elements which are implied by the short elements and the low number of fuel assemblies fabricated in one run. By using a standard fuel element or part of it, it is possible to reduce these costs. An important reduction would be realized by building several ship reactors of the same type. 

---