1. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 1 L. Waganer Consultant for ARIES Project / UCSD / DOE ARIES Project Meeting 26-27 September 2012 Bethesda, MD Assessing ACT Cost Results & Status of Cost Documentation

2. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 2 Status of ARIES Systems Code Results The ARIES Systems Code produced the ACT-1d performance and cost results on 26 July 2012. I used the print files for the source of data. The code has incorporated the costing algorithms recommended and this assessment was conducted to validate those results. PS. Where is the Availability shown?

3. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 3 Systemic Error The first finding was that the method for the GDP escalation factors is being incorrectly applied. ASC costs are reported in 2010$. All costs seem to be inflated by about 9.5%. GDP Implicit Price Deflator 27 July 2012 Cost Algorithm Basis ASC Reported Basis Example Calculation – Land Cost C 20.01 = $20 M x (P net /1000) 0.3 x 110.9921 / 109.5298 (where P net = 1006.01 MW) = $20 M x (1006.01/1000) 0.3 x 110.9921 / 109.5298 = $20.303 M As opposed to reported cost of $22.238 M, 9.5298% high Second Example – Site Improvements and Facilities C 21.01 = $27 M x 110.9921 / 109.5298 = $27.3605 M vs. reported cost of $29.9676 M, 9.529% high This error seems to be systemic to all the reported costs. The 2010$ base value is correct, but the base cost used was 2005$ instead of the 2009$ algorithm cost basis. Simple Fix. GDP Chained Basis Reported costs should = 110.9921/109.5298 = 1.01335 times 2009$

4. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 4 Some Accounts Not Estimated A few Cost Accounts, shown below, are not being estimated, probably due to lack of definition. These accounts need to be examined to determine the primary cost parameters and then develop cost algorithms for them. 22.1.7 Shield Cooling, Low Temperature 22.2.1.6 Thermal Isolation Struts (TF Coils) 22.2.3 Feedback Control Coils 22.2.4 Cryogenics for Plasma Confinement 22.2.5 Power Supplies for Plasma Confinement 22.3.3 Stability Control Subsystem with Power Supplies 22.4.3 Primary Vacuum Pumps 22.4.4 Roughing or Backing Pumps 22.4.6 Plumbing, Cryogenic (for Vacuum System)

5. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 5 Costs Are Reported in Two ASC Files The Systems Costs are reported in the “Costing Accounts” file, whereas more detailed cost data are reported in the “Systems - Full Part Printout” file. The latter has many different sections pertaining to different subsystems. However, the data in these two files do not agree in organization or content. The next two slides generally show how they correspond. Additional slides will provide more information about specific subsystems. Generally, I try to identify inconsistencies and not fix them.

6. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 6 “Costing Accounts” Results Do Not Match with “Systems - Full Part Printout” 22.1.0 Fusion Energy Capture and Conversion:300.398 22.1.1 First Wall and Blanket, replaceable, IB & OB:45.7235 22.1.2 Second Blanket, life of plant: 56.1438 22.1.3 Divertor Assembly, upper and lower, replaceable:17.7512 22.1.4 High Temperature Shield, outside blanket &/or divertor, replaceable24.1795 22.1.5 High Temperature Shield, outside of replaceable HT Shield, life of plant:122.586 22.1.6 Penetration Shielding (low temperature, active and passive):34.0147 22.1.7 Shield cooling, low temperature: 0 ASC Full Part File 15.9934 110.446 41.196 50.584 The ASC file “Costing Accounts” data is inconsistent with the “Systems, Full Part Printout” Data. Only the Fusion Energy Capture and Conversion data is shown above. The categories do not correspond in all cases. e.g., There are two HT shields. I believe the upper one is the HT Shield/Structure (aka Steel Ring) and the lower one is the LT Shield. In the Full Part File, they are given the name HT, IB/OB and HT, Top and Bottom. See another VG for more info. Where do Manifolds show up? Vacuum Subsystem costs are inconsistent (see another VG) The CryoDome is estimated but where does it show up?

7. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 7 Costs Differ Between ASC “Systems - Full Part Printout” and “Costing Accounts” These two sets of data from the ASC output files differ. Mark needs to determine the source of the differences. Purple font text items are added for sums or non-mentioned data

8. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 8 Fusion Energy Capture Accounts 22.1.4 and 22.1.5 Need To Be Renamed 22.1.0 Fusion Energy Capture and Conversion:300.398 22.1.1 First Wall and Blanket, replaceable, IB & OB:45.7235 22.1.2 Second Blanket, life of plant: 56.1438 22.1.3 Divertor Assembly, upper and lower, replaceable: 17.7512 22.1.4 High Temperature Shield, outside of blanket and/or divertor, replaceable:24.1795 22.1.5 High Temperature Shield, outside of replaceable HT shield, life of plant:122.586 22.1.6 Penetration Shielding (low temperature, active and passive):34.0147 22.1.7 Shield cooling, low temperature: 0 22.1.122.2.122.1.522.4.122.1.422.1.2Acct Acct 22.1.4 should be labeled “High Temp Shield and Support Structure - Replaceable or Life of Plant?” - Drop use of “Steel Ring” Acct 22.1.5 should be labeled “Low Temperature Shield Outside the Vacuum Vessel, Life of Plant”

9. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 9 Lifetime Power Core Components Removed with Sector are SCR Items 22.1.0 Fusion Energy Capture and Conversion:300.398 22.1.1 First Wall and Blanket, replaceable, IB & OB:45.7235 22.1.2 Second Blanket, life of plant: 56.1438 22.1.3 Divertor Assembly, upper and lower, replaceable: 17.7512 22.1.4 High Temperature Shield & Support Structure, outside of blanket, replaceable:24.1795 22.1.5 Low Temperature Shield, outside Vacuum Vessel, life of plant:122.586 22.1.6 Penetration Shielding (low temperature, active and passive):34.0147 22.1.7 Shield cooling, low temperature: 0 A potential replacement strategy is to remove an entire sector, including FWB, Bkt II, Divertor and HT Shield/Support Structure to Hot Cell. Then a refurbished sector is moved back to the power core. During operation, the FWB and Divertors are removed, the Blanket II and HT Shield/Support Structure are inspected and the FWB and Divertors are replaced. Therefore, the Bkt II and HT Shield/Support Structure are in the Hot Cell about half the time. But the second set needs to be accounted as Scheduled Component Replacement hardware, SCR. We need to rename recommends the “steel ring” should be replaced at 10 or 20 yrs. Which is being used? What is best terminology for replaced components? Replaceable, Recyclable, LOP?

10. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 10 Radial Builds Differ Between ASC Code and Laila’s 5/31-6/1 Meeting Data Radial Build from 5/31-6/1/12 Meeting Laila, Xueren and Mark need to resolve differences.

11. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 11 Material Costs Are Slightly Out of Date In the Materials Properties file, the material unit cost basis is Rev P, so Les just provided Mark the current Rev S version. The material cost database is presently displayed in 2011$. Are these values converted to 2010$ for the Cost Accounts? Lithium enrichment should be 55-60% per El-Guebaly presentation on 5/31/12. (60% OK?)

12. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 12 Errors in the FWBS Reporting Volume of FWB and Bkt II are similar, yet the Bkt II mass is double with identical materials. However costs are similar. Materials for LT Shield in ASC data seem to be FS/SiC, not FS/WC/B-FS, per El-Guebaly, 5/12. Eliminating the SiC and adding WC and B-FS would significantly lower the LT Shield cost. The ratio of volume, mass and cost between the LT Shld and HT Shield/Support (aka Steel Ring) at roughly 10 seems excessive, although the LT Shield/Str is thicker and at a larger radius on the OB region. In the Systems Data/Full Parts file, the product of the mass times the most expensive material unit cost for that component is only a small fraction of the reported cost in either the Full Parts file or the Cost Accounts.

13. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 13 Further Examination of FWBkt and Bkt II Full Parts File Data OB Bkt has twice the volume of IB, but 66% of the mass and 128% of the cost, Tungsen in the IB might help explain the higher weight, but not the cost difference. Blanket II is 50% thicker than the OB Blanket and has 67% more volume, which is probably correct. However the mass is five times as much and cost 2.67 times as much. Is this due to material composition errors (should be FS/WC/B-FS)? $45.72 M Cost Acct Data $56.14M

14. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 14 Examination of HT and LT Shields In Systems – Full Part File Data is from System – Full Part Printout It is difficult to identify the shielding components by name. All categories are called “HT”. Some are called IB and OB, others are called replaceable Top and Bottom. Suggest correcting nomenclature per prior slides. The HT IB/OB Shields (LT Shield?) volumes are 8.25 times as large as Replaceable HT Top/Bottom Shields (HT Shield/Structure?), 12.1 times as heavy, and costs 5.1 times as much – this is probably due to the SiC content in the Rep HT T/B Shields. Need to verify data.

15. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 15 Power Core Vacuum System Costs Do Not Agree With Part File Data Vessel components costs are not consistent. Maintenance ports show up as a higher cost as they are more massive. Not sure what “Maintenance Port Sum” means. VV ducts do not match the Account Cost results. Primary and Roughing Pumps and Cryo Plumbing are not in Part File Full Part File Cost AcctsVacuum vessel Main86.26$ Vacuum Vessel327.33$ Vacuum Vessel Outboard42.30$ He Liq-Refr16.65$ Maintenance Port166.37$ Includes doors? Primary V. Pumps-$ Maintenance Port Sum192.02$ Roughing Pumps-$ UpperVVDuctBottomWall4.36$ Vac Pump Ducts 30.40$ UpperVVDuctTopWall2.49$ Plumbing, Cryo-$ UpperVVDuctSideWall9.41$ Total374.38$

16. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 16 Summary of ASC ACT Costs The cost reporting methodology is in place and is working The consistency of the nomenclature should be improved Compatibility of cost data internal to the Parts File and between the Cost Accounts needs to be corrected An error in the escalation methodology needs to be fixed The materials data base needs to be updated

17. ARIES- ACT, 26-27 Sept, 2012, Bethesda, MD Page 17 Status of ARIES Cost Documentation  From 2007 to 2009, I have been documenting the historical economic basis for the ARIES Systems Code and updating the costing algorithms.  The updated cost algorithms have been implemented in the ASC code.  A comprehensive ARIES Cost Account Document has been written and updated that describes the evolution of MFE power plant economic cost estimating process from the early 1970’s to the current time. The basis for the current costing algorithms are defined and substantiated.  The present intent is to publish the document on the ARIES web as an evolving economic document that is the basis for the ASC economic analyses.