In Figure E.5, the total investment costs for the various plant configurations with SMRs are compared to those of the currently available NPPs with large reactors. It could be seen that the projects with several SMR units, yielding significant amounts of electric power, seem to require investments comparable to those of some NPP projects with large reactors in Europe and North America. In Asia, the construction of NPPs with large reactors requires less capital than in Europe and North America, and all of the plant configurations with SMRs, except for the very small ones, appear to be significantly more expensive to build.

Figures E.6 and E.7 present the regional ranges of LUEC for large nuclear, coal and gas plants and the estimated values of SMR LUEC at 5% and 10% discount rates, for the “on-grid” locations.

The general findings from the study on the competitiveness of SMRs in the “on-grid” locations are similar to the general conclusions on nuclear power made in the recent OECD-IEA/NEA study, Projected Costs for Generating Electricity, 2010 Edition. In addition to this, there are some important SMR-specific conclusions:

• Within the assumptions of the evaluation performed, the nuclear option (NPPs with a large reactor or with SMRs) is competitive with many other technologies (coal-fired plants, gas — fired plants, renewable plants of the various types) in Brazil[5], Japan, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation and the United States, but not in China.

• SMRs, including twin-unit and multi-module plants, generally have higher values of LUEC than NPPs with large reactors.

• Similarly to large NPPs, some SMRs are expected to be competitive with several projects of coal-fired, gas-fired and renewable plants of various types, including those of small to medium-sized capacity (below 700 MWe).

For example, a plant with SMRs could be a competitive replacement for the decommissioned small and medium-sized plants using fossil fuel in the cases when certain siting restrictions exist, such
as limited spinning reserve or limited availability of water for cooling towers of a power plant. Like the nuclear option in general, SMRs would be more competitive if carbon taxes were in place.

Figure E.6. Regional ranges for LUEC and the estimated values of SMR LUEC (at 5% discount rate)

4*335 MWe (USA) „ 5*125 MWe (USA)

2*300 MWe (Russia) 2*300 MWe, barge (Russia) 1 *90 MWe (Korea)

CO

2*35 MWe, barge (Russia) 2*8 MWe, barge (Russia)

Figure E.7. Regional ranges for LUEC and the estimated values of SMR LUEC (at 10% discount rate)

4*335 MWe (USA) „ 5*125 MWe (USA)

2*300 MWe (Russia) 2*300 MWe, barge (Russia) [6]

In summary, SMRs could be competitive with many non-nuclear technologies for generating electricity in the cases when NPPs with large reactors are, for whatever reason, unable to compete.

Regarding the competitiveness of SMRs in the combined electricity and heat markets in “on — grid” locations, at least some SMRs could be competitive with other combined heat and power plant (CHP) technologies in China and in the Russian Federation at both 5% and 10% discount rates.

In the evaluations performed for the “on-grid” locations, no cases were found when small barge — mounted NPPs with the PWR-8 and the PWR-35 twin-unit plants (based on the Russian ABV and KLT-40S designs) would be competitive.