Reply To: Nuplex.

[Rematog]

Eric,

A major difference is the lifespan and reliability requirements.

Your auto example, A car cooling system has a reliable lifespan of, say 150,000 miles, @ avg operating speed of 45 mph, this equals 3,333 hrs, as an estimate.

For a FF module, design life of what, no less then 10 years. Operating with 90% capacity factor, this is 90% x 8760 hrs/year x 10 years, 78,840 hrs. So an almost 24 to 1 ratio of design life. By the way, utilities design for a 30 year life, and typically operate equipment for >50 years.

I agree that the mass produced cost will be much lower, but, even if we grant your $33,000 figure, this is just for the external heat exchanger. This doesn’t include blowers, ductwork, controls, power supply (to blowers), etc. So the cooling system alone would be at least 10% of a $500k/module figure.

And this assumes we are not building the FF module to current nuclear plant design standards.

What I am suggesting is that a DOR (Division of Responsibility) be drawn around the module. This determines exactly what is included in the module, and what inputs and outputs are to be expected. This includes all power, utilities, controls, foundations, etc.

Then, for the module, a complete system by system breakdown, with estimated materials and assembly costs. I’ve seen this referred to as the Bill of Materials, and in my brief experience working in manufacturing, I’ve seen that this is, in mass production, taken to the level of nuts and bolts (literally). Wikipedia has a good general definition of this. Obviously, that level of detail is not possible at this time, but a preliminary, high level, bill of material could be put together.

Rematog