Korean Nuclear Reactor Strategy for the Early 21st Century -A Techno-Economic and Constraints Comparison-

21세기 차세대 한국형 원자로 전략 -기술경제 제약요인 비교-

The system analysis for Korean nuclear power reactor option is made on the basis of reliability, cost minimization, finite uranium resource availability and nuclear engineering manpower supply constraints. The reference reactor scenarios are developed considering the future electricity demand, nuclear share, current nuclear power plant standardization program and manufacturing capacity. The levelized power generation cost, uranium requirement and nuclear engineering professionals demand are estimated for each reference reactor scenarios and nuclear fuel cycle options from the year 1990 up to the year 2030. Based on the outcomes of the analysis, uranium resource utilization, reliability and nuclear engineering manpower requirements are sensitive to the nuclear reactor strategy and associated fuel cycle whereas the system cost is not. APWR, CANDU longrightarrow FBR strategy is to be the best option for Korea. However, APWR, CANDU longrightarrow Passive Safe Reactor(PSR）longrightarrowFBR strategy should be also considered as a contingency for growing national concerns on nuclear safety and public acceptance deterioration in the future. FBR development and establishment of related fuel cycle should be started as soon as possible considering the uranium shortage anticipated between 2007 and 2032. It should be noted that the increasing use of nuclear energy to minimize the greenhouse effects in the early 21st century would accelerate the uranium resource depletion. The study also concludes that the current level of nuclear engineering professionals employment is not sufficient until 2010 for the establishment of nuclear infrastructure.

본 연구에서는 2030년까지의 전력수요, 전력생산중 원자력발전의 비중, 기존 원전표준화 계획, 국내제작 능력을 반영하여 개량형 경수로와 중수로 (CANDU)에 대한 참조 시나리오를 도출하고 각 참조 시나리오와 핵연료주기 전략별 핵연류주기 비용, 원자력 발전 단가, 우라늄 소요량, 인력 소요량을 계산하였다. 참조 시나리오들에 대한 분석을 한 결과 우라늄 자원활용, 원전안전성, 인력활용 측면이 노형 전략수립의 주요 인자로 작용하며 발전단가는 전략별로 큰 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다.