Erratum : A conceptual study of 15,000 TEU SMR-powered containerships

1. Nomenclature section The term "URECA – Ultra-safe Reactor for Containment and Application" was incorrectly included in the Nomenclature list, as it is not an officially announced designation. This entry should be removed. 2. Main text content related to URECA On page 8: All content referring to “URECA” should be replaced with more general terms, such as “MSR” or “SMR,” or deleted, and replaced with the following text. This revision also includes the correction of the incorrect unit notation (MWe → kWe) and the addition of the source citation (DNV, 2024), which is already included in the References section. “Given the wide range of SMR technologies available, each with its own advantages and challenges, the choice of reactor technology has a significant impact on both the cost and feasibility of SMR deployment. The selected SMR for this study is the MSR. This MSR design allows for stable operation at low pressures and minimizes the risk of coolant loss, contributing to its suitability for shipboard environments. Fig. 6 illustrates the schematic diagram of the MSR system. The manufacturing cost for SMR is estimated to range between $4000 and $6000 per kWe of installed capacity (DNV, 2024). Given that the MSR reactor has a capacity of 70 MWe, the total manufacturing cost is projected to be between 280 million and 420 million USD. This cost estimate will serve as a basis for evaluating the economic feasibility of implementing SMR technology in a 15,000 TEU containership.” On page 9: Replace the term “URECA” with “MSR” in the following sentence: “Unlike conventional vessels, the SMR-powered ship benefits from longer intervals between refueling, due to the high efficiency and extended fuel cycle of the MSR reactor.” 3. Figure 6 Replacement (page 8) Fig. 6 should be replaced by a new schematic diagram illustrating the MSR system instead of URECA, as described below: