Transcript Slide 1

Nuclear Power Generation
in Small States
Charles Grant
International Centre for Environmental
and Nuclear Sciences
World Energy Needs
The provision of energy has become one of
the most critical:
Political
Economic
Environmental
Developmental and
Survival issues in the world.
A developing country such as Jamaica is
also dependent upon a future supply of
secure, affordable, safe and clean energy.
......
... .
...
Without access to Energy, the poorer
nations of the world cannot develop
Annual per capita electricity use. kWh
Correlation between Electricity use and Human Development Index
1.0
Human Development Index
0.9
Ireland
Barbados
France
USA
Norway
Germany Japan
Cuba
0.8
Quatar
Russia
China
Iran (World Averagae)
0.7
India
Jamaica
0.6
Vietnam
0.5
HDI
long and healthy life
adult literacy rate
gross domestic product
0.4
0.3
Niger
0.2
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
Anual per capita electicity use, kWh
30000
Predicted Energy Consumption
 Source: OECD/IEA World Energy Outlook 2006
World Electricity Generation
Electricity Generation in Jamaica
In the past seven years, the price per barrel of
crude spiked to a high of $147, increasing
from $28 in 2003 and settling (temporarily)
between $80 and $110 in the last year
Imported barrels/yr for Electricity
3000
500
30.9 Bbl
1000
27.8 Bbl
29.1 Bbl
1500
29.9 Bbl
2000
26.3 Bbl
The proposed large scale
switch to LNG, though a most
important addition, does not
remove the need for long-term
planning for cheaper cleaner
energy production.
Cost US$M
2500
0
2004
2005
2006
Year
2007
2008
Cost US$M
Global Oil Reserve, 1348 Thousand Million Barrels as of 2011
Hubert Prediction Curve
The curve shows a peak in 2009 followed by a decline in production dropping to zero
near the year 2090.
Environmental Impact of Fossil
Fuel
The consensus of the UN Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change is that global warming is a
real and significant environmental threat during
the next century, even if fossil fuel use continues
at present global levels.
Environmental and health impacts
Annual health related damages that are
not presently included in the price of
energy. In addition to reduced carbon
footprints, wind, solar, hydro, and nuclear
have very small external costs in
comparison to fossil fuels including gas.
The hidden health and environmental
costs
of
energy
production
and
consumption in the United States could
exceed $120 billion Annually ($63 billion
from coal alone)
(National Academy of Science, 2005)
Renewable energy Sources in
Jamaica
•
Renewable energy sources such as solar; wind, tides and waves do not provide
directly either continuous base-load power, or peak-load power when it is needed.
Jamaica produced 6.3 TWh of electricity
The wind farm at Wigton was commissioned in 2004,
at a cost of US$26 million. It is rated at 20.7 MW but
averages 7 MW due to wind speed variations. It is
proposed to add a further nine 2 MW turbines almost
doubling the nominal installed wind capacity to 38.7
MW. This does not include the cost of standby
capacity for periods when the turbines cannot
operate.
Some 22.3MW of hydro-electric plants (7 units)
are installed and there is potential for another
100 MW. The conventional construction cost is
approximately US$ 2,300/kW. The proposed
6,370 kW plant in Maggotty will cost US$3,709
per kilowatt (Data from OUR).
Alternative Electricity
Generation
The use of solar water heaters is growing
and there are some demonstration
photovoltaic units. Photovoltaic prospects
would be improved with net metering.
It is expected that bagasse and waste to
energy
conversion
will
increase
renewable energy usage relative to the
current level of ~ 5%, towards 15% by
2020. There is potential but one of the
concerns is the substitution of energy
crops for food crops and the predicted
climate changes will make local food
production even more urgent.
If the proposed refinery expansion
materializes, pet coke could contribute
100MW at a cost of approximately US$300
million. This would contribute significantly
to diversification but it now seems unlikely
due to funding requirements.
Why Consider Nuclear?
•
Nuclear offers:
 a near-zero emissions option
 long-term stability on generation cost
 demonstrated and established technology: 14,000
reactor-years of operating experience
 Applications for both electricity & high temperature
heat generation (Fuel cells/desalination)
Nuclear Environmentalist
• Some of the world's most influential greens
have had a reversal of opinion on nuclear
power. These include Gaia theorist James
Lovelock, Green-peace cofounder Patrick
Moore, and the late Bishop Hugh Montefiore,
a longtime board member of Friends of the
Earth. Many persons now see nuclear power as
the only way, at present, to drastically reduce
the emission of greenhouse gases.
1973-1995, the use of nuclear worldwide
avoided the burning of fossil fuels by about
• 8.9 billion tons of coal
• 56 trillion cubic feet of gas
• 10 billion barrels of oil
For the same period the world's nuclear energy
plants reduced emissions by
 6.1 billion tons of carbon
 219 million tons of sulphur dioxide.
 98 million tons of nitrogen oxide.
Direct Comparison per MWe
700 MWe Coal-Fired
700 MWe Nuclear (PBMR)
Coal burned: 2,000,000 tons per
year
1.5 tons uranium per year
Ash dumped: 600,000 tons per
year
Spent fuel: 30 tons of
pebbles per year
Air burned: 2,000,000 m3 PER
HOUR
Nil
CO2: 6,000,000 tons per year
Nil
SO2: 400,000 tons per year
Nil
NO2: 100,000 tons per year
Nil
Smoke: 2,000 000 m3 PER HOUR
Nil
long-term stability on generation cost
~38% increase
~20% increase
~4% increase
Nuclear Shares of National Electricity
Generation, 2006
Fuente: Power Reactor Information System; en http://www.iaea.org/programmes/a2/index.html
Number of Reactors Under Construction in the World
(as of July 2010)
China
24
Russia
10
South Korea
57 Reactors being constructed, 67 %
in Asia
6
India
4
Slovakia
2
Japan
2
Canada
2
USA
1
Pakistan
1
Iran
1
France
1
Finland
1
Brazil
1
Argentina
1
0
147 reactors ordered around the
world, 56 % in Asia
Finland and France are building the
first nuclear plants in Europe since
1986
5
10
15
20
25
30
Operating Life-Time Extensions in the USA
• As of June 2009, the NRC has extended from 40 to
60 years the licenses of 54 reactors, more than half of
the US total.
• Currently, the NRC is examining license renewal
application for 16 more units.
• more than 15 additional applications are expected to
be submitted by 2013.
• The US reactors are now typically running at 90% of
capacity compared to 72% capacity in 1990.
• Equivalent to ~47 new Reactors
countries actively considering nuclear energy
programmes, Nov 2009
Region
Countries
Central and Southern Africa
Nigeria, Ghana, Uganda, Namibia
Central and southern Asia
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia,
Bangladesh
South East Asia
Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand,
Malaysia, Australia, New Zealand
Middle East and North Africa
Iran, Gulf states including UAE, Yemen, Israel,
Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria,
Morocco
Europe
Italy, Albania, Portugal, Norway, Poland, Belarus,
Estonia, Latvia, Ireland, Turkey
South America
Chile, Ecuador, Venezuela
Global Nuclear Market
2005
2015
2025
2040
GW
GW
GW
GW
3,983
4,593
5,501
7,189
Current nuclear capacity
372
328
179
66
Projected future nuclear %
9.3%
8.9%
12%
15.0%
Future nuclear capacity
372
408
660
1,078
Replacement existing nuclear
44
193
305
New nuclear sites
36
288
707
TOTAL NEW NUCLEAR BUILD
80
481
1,012
Global demand
Source: International Energy Outlook 2007 – Energy Information Agency, US Department of Energy
ffs
So
la
rP
V
O
ho
re
ns
hy
ho
dr
op
re
ow
w
w
in
in
er
d
d
O
na
tu
ra
lg
as
oi
l
nu
cl
co
ea
al
r
Comparative Costs
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
US cent/kWh
35
195
200
Comparison of electricity generation
parameters including costs
Typical range
of capital costs
(US$/kW)
Capacity
Factor
(%)
Fuel Costs
(USC/kWh)
(US Cents/kWh)
Typical
Duty
2000-3700
68
0.00
3.4 - 6.2
As Available
Wind
1250 - 2000
29
0.00
4.9 - 7.9
As Available
Nuclear
1500 - 4500
90
0.71
2.6 - 6.4
Base Load
Steam (Coal)
2500 - 4000
85
2.61
6.0 - 8.0
Base Load
750 - 1200
80
6.76
7.8 - 8.5
Base Load
500 - 700
30
9.35
11.3 - 12
Peaking
750 - 1200
80
18.37
19.4 - 28.6
Base Load
Steam (HFO)**
1800 - 2500
85
25.22
20.8 - 30.1
Base Load
Turbines (ADO)
500 - 700
30
25.41
27 - 28
Peaking
Hydro (RoR)*
Combined cycle (Gas)
Turbines (Gas)
Combined Cycle (ADO)*
Run of River*, **Automotive Diesel Oil, ***Heavy Fuel Oil
These costs are overnight costs and do not include financing, specific site conditions, specific environment and
safety requirements as may be imposed on specific projects. It is intended for comparison only.
Total Costs
Established Technology
Generation III-plus
These designs rely completely on the passive safety systems instead of gridpowered, diesel-fueled, or battery back-up electricity, in the event of an
accident. These are designs that have fully functional passive safety systems that
have the ability to function at least 72 hours without AC electrical power or
external cooling water. The Westinghouse's AP1000 design (Generation III)
circulates cool outside air around a steel containment vessel, and drains water
by gravity from a tank positioned atop the vessel. The system can provide
cooling for up to 72 hours. After that, a small diesel generator is meant to supply
power to pump water from an onsite storage container into the reactor core and
spent fuel pool at 100 gallons per minute for up to four days. The system could
then be replenished by adding water with a fire truck and pump. (That approach
doesn't work with the Generation II Fukishima Daiichi plant, because cooling
there still relies on active operation of the plant's own pumping system.)
Advanced passive designs will make boiling-water nuclear reactors 10 to 100
times safer than their active predecessors.
Is Nuclear Power Feasible for Small States?
Development of Generation IV
Today, due partly to the high
capital cost of large power
reactors generating electricity
via the steam cycle and partly to
consideration
of
public
perception, there is a move to
develop smaller units.
•Supply future worldwide needs
for electricity and hydrogen
•Improvements in sustainability,
safety, and economics
•200 MW ~US$ 300,000,000
Fast Reactors for Transmutation fuel
Cycles?
International Consortium 13 Countries
Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China,
Euroatom, France, Japan, Russia
South Africa,South Korea, Switzerland,
United Kingdom and the United States
100 of Designs considered
Six Designs Selected
Gas-cooled fast reactors
electricity/Hydrogen
288 MWe
Very high temperature gas reactors
electricity/Hydrogen
110 - 250 MWe
Molten salt reactors
electricity/Hydrogen
1000 MWe
Supercritical water-cooled reactors
electricity
1500 MWe
Lead-cooled fast reactors
electricity/Hydrogen
50 - 1200 MWe
Sodium-cooled fast reactors
electricity
150-500-1500 MWe
Reactor
MWe
Expected
Date
Manufacturer
KLT-40
38.5
2008
OKBM, Russia
Mature design well tested in icebreakers 3-4 years
refuelling cycle. Operated from a barge.
NP-300
100-300
2012
Areva, France
Submarine power plant design with passive safety
systems. Aimed at export markets for power,
heat and desalination.
HTR-PM
200
2013
INET, Beijing, China
Similar to PBMR, 9% enriched fuel, expected 60year operational life. 8% enriched fuel
PBMR
165
2013
Eskom, South Africa,
et al
Improved safety, economics and proliferation
resistance; expected 40-year operational life;
8% enriched fuel.
IRIS-100
100
2015
Westinghouse
VK-300
300
2017
Atomenergoproekt,
Russia
SMART
100
2017
KAERI, S. Korea
Advanced safety features with a design life of 60
years, with a 3-year refuelling cycle.
Demonstration plant to be in operation in 2012
CAREM
27
2018
INVAP, Argentina
10-50
2018
Toshiba, Japan
Fuel is standard 3.4% refuelled annually. It is a
mature design
TOSHIBA- 4S
Comment
Generation 3+ reactor, Enrichment is 5%, 5 years
refuelling cycle.
6 scheduled to be built in eastern Russia
Fuel is uranium hydride (UH3),
5% enriched in 235 U, life-time core
The Hyperion Power Module
This reactor was invented at the Los Alamos National Laboratory,
New Mexico and the Hyperion Power Generation, Inc. (HPG), was
formed to bring the Hyperion reactor to market and holds the
exclusive license. As shown by the human scale, the Hyperion
reactor is quite small, about 1.5 metres wide and 2 metres high.
The shipping weight is 15-20 tons. Hyperion (25 MWe) is
expected to cost about US$30 million per unit. Already they report
receipt of over 100 firm orders, largely from the oil and electricity
industries.
mPower
mPower is a smaller than rail car sized, modular, passively safe,
advanced light water reactor (ALWR) with a unit output of 160 MWe.
The reactor lifetime is rated at 60 years and used fuel is stored in a
spent fuel pool within the containment, 4 year fuel cycle. The plant
consists of a cylindrical pressure vessel 23m by 4.5m (75ft by 15 ft)
that contains all the components of the nuclear steam supply, system
core (standard fuel enriched to 5%), control rod assemblies, primary
loop pumps, steam generator and pressurizer.
Toshiba 4S
The Toshiba 4S reactor is a sodium cooled, fast reactor with a steel clad
compact core made of a uranium/plutonium/zirconium alloy. Combined
with a compact steam turbine secondary system, it will generate 10 MW of
electrical power, scalable to 50MWe, for 30 years without refueling. The
reactor would be located in a sealed, cylindrical vault 30 m (98 ft)
underground, while the building above ground would be 22 x 16 x 11 m
(72 × 52.5 x 36 ft) in size. The entire system can be accommodated in less
than ½ acre of land.
The reactor module is designed to be:
• Replaceable in order to provide the capability of extending the plant life beyond 30 years.
• Capable of being installed and ready for sodium fill within 6 months after delivery to site.
• The nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) is designed to operate for 30 years. Any NSSS
component not capable of meeting the 30-year design life is designed to be replaceable.
• The plant is factory built and can be transported by road, rail and ship.
CAREM-25
Argentina is developing their CAREM-25 which is a modular pressurized
water reactor with integral steam generators designed for use as an
electricity generator (27 MWe or up to 100 MWe), as a research reactor
or for water desalination (with 8 MWe in cogeneration configuration).
CAREM has its entire primary coolant system within the reactor pressure
vessel, self-pressurised and relying entirely on convection. The fuel is
standard 3.4% enriched PWR fuel, with burnable poison, and is refueled
annually. It is a mature design which could be deployed within a decade.
It is also a prototype for a larger reactor sized 100MWe or 300MWE.
Construction is planned to begin by end 2010. The estimated cost is about
US$200 million.
Barge Mounted Reactors
The KLT-40S is well proven in icebreakers and is now proposed for
wider use. A 150 MWt unit produces 38.5 MWe gross. These are
designed to run 3-4 years between refueling and it is envisaged that they
will be operated in pairs to allow for outages (70% capacity factor), with
onboard refueling capability and spent fuel storage. At the end of a 12year operating cycle the whole plant is taken to a central facility for
overhaul and storage of spent fuel. Two units will be mounted on a
20,000 tonne barge.
Pebble-Bed Modular Reactor
(HTR-PM)
A compact gas-cooled reactor with fuel assemblies the
size of tennis balls filled with thousands of pellets of
9% U-235. Unlike light-water reactors that use water
and steam, the PBMR cools its core and drives its
turbines with pressurized helium.
• Power ~250MWe
• helium cooled, graphite moderated
– Direct cycle gas turbine
– High outlet temperature: 900°C
– Good thermal efficiency (~ 42%)
~30% improvement
– high fuel average burnup
(~ 90 GWd/tU initially, higher later)
~100% improvement
ACCIDENTS
March 1979. Three Mile Island, USA
Reactor PWR, 792 MWe
The Three Mile Island incident was a near thing. It was largely due to operator error but
the system worked – the reactor was wrecked but no one was hurt and there was no
dispersal of radioactivity. The Chernobyl Reactor 4 disaster was a steam explosion
followed by another due to the ignition of hydrogen. The reactor core was exposed and
radioactivity was widely dispersed and there were many deaths. Such a reactor, which did
April 1986. Chernobyl, a USSR Reactor RBMK,
1000 Mwe (Graphite and water moderator).
not include a containment vessel, would not have been licensed in the West, but even so,
the use of the reactor at the time of the accident was not consistent with the established
procedures. when the fifth largest earthquake ever recorded struck Fukushima the 3
operating reactors shut down automatically. Since the input power lines were wrecked
the emergency diesel generators were used to begin removal of the decay heat. The
diesels worked for about an hour before being inundated by the tsunami. This eventually
lead to partial meltdown of the three cores and spent fuel rods causing large scale
contamination.
The lessons of these dramatic events have been well learned and safety measures have
greatly improved to the extent that the nuclear industry is one of the world’s safest.
March 2011. Reactors 1, 2 and 3 of the Fukushima
Daiichi's six reactors were in operation at the full
power rating of 1100 MWe
Nuclear Safety
Top 5 Q & A on Nuclear Waste
•
•
•
•
•
•
1. The nuclear industry still has no solution to the 'waste problem', so cannot expect
support for construction of new plants until this is remedied.
Reprocessing spent Fuel~ 3% HLW incorporated into borosilicate glass (vitrified nuclear
waste). A piece this size would contain the total high-level waste arising from nuclear
electricity generation for one person throughout a normal lifetime.
2. The transportation of this waste poses an unacceptable risk to people and the
environment.
Nuclear materials have been transported safely (virtually without incident and without
harmful effect on anyone) since before the advent of nuclear power over 50 years ago.
Transportations of nuclear materials cannot therefore be referred to as 'mobile
Chernobyls'.
3. There is a potential terrorist threat to the large volumes of radioactive wastes currently
being stored and the risk that this waste could leak or be dispersed as a result of terrorist
action.
High-level waste (HLW) and used fuel is kept in secure nuclear facilities with appropriate
protection measures. Most high-level wastes produced are held as stable ceramic solids or
in vitrified form (glass). Their structure is such that they would be very difficult to
disperse by terrorist action, so that the threat from so-called 'dirty bombs' is not high.
Top 5 Q & A on NW cont.
•
•
•
•
4. Nuclear wastes are hazardous for tens of thousands of years. This clearly is unprecedented
and poses a huge threat to our future generations.
Many industries produce hazardous waste many of which remain in the environment
permanently. In fact, the radioactivity of nuclear wastes naturally decays progressively and
has a finite radiotoxic lifetime. The radioactivity of high-level wastes decays to the level of an
equivalent amount of original mined uranium ore in between 1,000 and 10,000 years.
5. Manmade radiation differs from natural radiation
Radiation emitted from manmade radionuclides is exactly the same form as radiation emitted
from naturally-occurring radioactive materials (namely alpha, beta or gamma radiation). As
such, the radiation emitted by naturally-occurring materials can not be distinguished from
radiation produced by materials in the nuclear fuel cycle.
What does it take?
Enabling Framework
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Political Framework
Responsible Owner
Regulatory Framework
Merchant Operator
Fuel Supply and Waste Management
Finance
Contract Management
Training and Education
Industrial Infrastructure
http://www.iaea.org/books
“CONSIDERATIONS TO LAUNCH A NUCLEAR POWER PROGRAMME”
Largely because of the Jamaica SLOWPOKE, a number of programmes that would contribute
directly to the infrastructure necessary for development of a nuclear energy programme are
already in place. These include:
International Agreements and Links
(a) Jamaica is a member of the IAEA and a signatory to: the Safeguards Agreement; the Additional Protocol; the
Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material; the Non-proliferation Treaty, the Convention on the
Physical Protection of Nuclear Materials; and other international and regional agreements.
(b) On behalf of the government of Jamaica, ICENS reports, to the IAEA on the traffic of nuclear materials into and out
of the island, and is also responsible for Incident Reporting for Research Reactors to IAEA.
(c) The United States Department of Energy (DOE) agreement to replace the present highly enriched uranium core. The
process of replacement of the present SLOWPOKE core will add to our experience in the nuclear field.
(d) ICENS has:
(1) a series of training programmes for its own staff that could be readily expanded;
(2) some of the contacts that would provide training and experience overseas, e.g.: research reactor centres in Austria,
Argentina, Brazil; Canada; Mexico; the United Kingdom and the United States.
(3) a national personnel monitoring service for radiation protection for Jamaica. This service can deal with all
Jamaica’s needs if but slightly is improved by installation of a secondary calibration source; backup facilities to ensure
against instrument failure; and additional staff training. These would probably be provided at no cost to Jamaica by the
IAEA once the radiation law is in place.
(4) Several staff who have been trained in detection and security of
radioisotopes, and radiation protection.
ICENS asked to form Committee for Nuclear Energy
Summary
• Any alternative energy sources must be price competitive
• stability of nuclear electricity costs is a major benefit
• Recent analyses fail to come up with any 50-year scenario
based on sustainable development principles that do not
depend significantly on nuclear fission to provide large-scale,
highly intensive energy, along with renewables to meet smallscale low-intensity needs
• A resurgence in nuclear power generation over the course of
the next half century both for environmental and economic
reasons is therefore likely
• The relatively low initial capital cost, manageable size and
modular nature of the Generation IV reactors make them more
suitable for small and developing countries
Conclusion
Ultimately the feasibility of a nuclear option for Jamaica is
very much dependent upon the potential contributions that the
new smaller generation of nuclear reactors prove able to
make.
However, there are other aspects of peaceful uses of the atom
especially in the development of radiation safety; nuclear
engineering, regulations and improved knowledge that we
will need to continue to build upon locally if we are to
undertake such a large technical project.
It took South Korea 32 years from first commercial plant to
exporting technology, with the goal of exporting 80 reactors
by 2030 valued at 400 billion dollars!
Thank you for your attention