Open bgrierson21 opened 8 months ago
We were talking to this with @agarofal this afternoon. I think he mentioned $2M per MW, so $2/W ?
I think @adrianaghiozzi may be the best person to take on this
Actually, it was $20M / MW. But this may be capital + install including transmission. Please see recent article here and dig into what's in the contract. https://fusionforenergy.europa.eu/news/europe-signs-contract-for-the-manufacturing-of-iter-electron-cyclotron-gyrotrons/
@bgrierson21 Thanks for pointing this out - I'll go ahead and take a look into it.
Some initial thoughts that come to mind: in general in both the ARIES and Sheffield models that we currently have in FUSE, system-specific direct capital costs are provided and costs associated to install/operation (e.g. labor as you mentioned above) are lumped together in one big "indirect costs" function at the end, which typically takes the total direct capital cost of all systems, multiplies it by some factor (0.4 is the default but this can be changed) and adds that on to the total. That said, I think for the sake of consistency with the models we'll be most interested in the capital cost to the extent that it's reasonable to isolate that from the rest of the contract.
Whether you split the cost in several boxes or not, the total should be the same. For 50 MW of ECH, we are talking about one billion $ in cost. This is hard to miss. If you don't see it, there is something wrong with your some of your estimates. A great source of information on this is George Sips. He has all the receipts.
The existing cost of EC, even when including inflation, appears too small. Since devices such as STEP are including 100 MW or more of EC power, there is an increasing impact of EC power cost on the overall capital cost. Please also look into the cost buildup for overnight capital vs. full install (incl. labor) and which parts of the system are costed (gyrotron, sockets, cooling, transmission, launchers, etc...). Reach out to Matthias Knolker for market assessment.