Introduction
Desalination of saline waters to augment freshwater supplies has become an important component of the water supply portfolio of many communities around the world. Because desalination technologies typically require electricity and/or thermal energy for the conversion of saline water into freshwater, nuclear power plants can serve as ideal sources of heat and electricity for these plants. However, the cost of nuclear energy has increased in recent years due to the shifts in supply chains and global economy, and the inclusion of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind energy conversion technologies is often considered to provide cost-effective solutions. The research objective of this study is to assess various water/power schemes.
Methods
Several water/power scenarios including nuclear, solar and conventional fuel sources were studied. The technoeconomic feasibility of a plant was modeled using the DEEP software created by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (DEEP, 2018). The DEEP program allows for the modeling of desalination output and water costs powered by various energy sources. The program analyzes the process based on process variables and configurations, and it is effective in evaluating the feasibility scenarios. Several trials were completed to compare the variance in factors affecting the proposed facility along with the present configuration options. The trials were compared to determine the most economically feasible configuration for the needs and characteristics of the proposed location.
Results
A technoeconomic feasibility study performed on a coastal community in the USA has shown that the desalination option is expensive. When compared with the conventional water supply options, freshwater from nuclear desalination plants integrated with RO, MED, and MSF processes costs $0.8, $1.08 and $1.56 per m3, respectively. These values are up to 3.5-, 4.7- and 6.8-fold higher than the conventional water supply option. In addition, seasonal water temperatures have a significant effect on the freshwater and power costs. For example, for the MED process, the 9.5 °C increase in temperature decreased the cost of water by twelve cents per cubic meter. For each configuration, the cost to produce nuclear power increased from 66.8 $/MWh at the coldest temperature to 68.7 $/MWh at the warmest temperature.
Conclusions
This analysis indicates that further evaluation with nuclear and renewable energy combination should be conducted to reduce the water and power costs while enhancing energy resilience and environmental sustainability. This presentation will include (i) nuclear and renewable energy integration; (ii) integration of nuclear and wastewater systems for reuse; and (iii) integration of nuclear and bioenergy for agricultural systems. The scenarios will present the synergies, technoeconomics and environmental benefits of these innovative power/water schemes. Recommendations for developing nuclear energy-based sustainable power-water systems will be discussed.
