NUCLEAR ENERGY Safe, Clean Power for the Future

Dr. Peter Lyons Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy

U.S. Department of Energy

Georgia Institute of Technology 50th Anniversary Celebration

Founding of the School of Nuclear Engineering 1962 Symposium on the Future of Nuclear Energy

November 1, 2012

2

Global Energy Distribution

as indicated by nighttime electricity use

3

0.000

0.100

0.200

0.300

0.400

0.500

0.600

0.700

0.800

0.900

1.000

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

Hu

man

Deve

lop

me

nt

Ind

ex

Australia U.S

.

Germany

Hu

man

Deve

lop

me

nt

Ind

ex

Australia U.S

.

Germany

Hu

man

Deve

lop

me

nt

Ind

ex

Australia U.S

.

Germany

Russia

China

Sudan

Zimbabwe

Pakistan

Per Capita Electricity Consumption (kWh)

Very high quality of life

High quality of life

Medium quality of life

Low quality of life

Human Development Index - Human Development Report 2010, United Nations (2009 data)

Per Capita Electricity Consumption (kWh) - Key World Energy Statistics, International Energy Agency (2009 data)

Norway

India

Correlation Between Human Development Index and Per Capita

Electricity Consumption, 2009

4

Nuclear power is clean, reliable base load energy source

Provides 19% of U.S. electricity generation mix

Provides over 61% of U.S. emission-free electricity

Avoids about 700 MMTCO2 each year

Helps reduces overall NOx and SOx levels

U.S. electricity demand projected to increase ~24% by 2030

100 GWe nuclear capacity - 104 operating plants

Fleet maintaining approximate 90% average capacity factors

Most expected to apply for license renewal for 60 years of operation.

Nuclear Energy Plays an Important Role in US Energy Supply

Nuclear 19%

Total 4,106 BkWh

U.S. Electricity Net Generation (2011) Source: Energy Information Administration

Nuclear 61%

Conventional Hydroelectric

25%

Wind 9%

Solar 0%

Geothermal 1%

Other 4%

Net Non-emitting Sources of Electricity Source: Energy Information Administration

5

President Obama’s Nuclear Energy Goals

“We can build the next-generation nuclear reactors that are smaller and

safer and cleaner and cheaper.”

Ohio State University-March 22, 2012

“With rising oil prices and a warming

climate, nuclear energy will only become more important. That’s why, in the United States, we’ve restarted

our nuclear industry as part of a comprehensive strategy to develop

every energy source.”

Seoul, Korea - March 26, 2012

6

Nuclear Energy Objectives

Develop technologies and other solutions that can improve the reliability, sustain the safety, and extend the life of current reactors

Develop improvements in the affordability of new reactors to enable nuclear energy to help meet the Administration's energy security and climate change goals

Develop sustainable nuclear fuel cycles

Understand and minimize the risks of nuclear proliferation and terrorism

7

Recent Key Events

Fukashima Dai-ichi Accident

Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future- Final Report Issued January 26, 2012

Small Modular Reactor Program Approved

AP 1000 Design Certification and Combined Construction and Operating License (COL) Issued

8

Fukushima Dai-ichi – U.S. Responses

President Obama asked the NRC to “do a comprehensive review of the safety of our domestic nuclear plants in light of the natural disaster that unfolded in Japan”

Secretary Chu stated, “the Administration is committed to learning from Japan’s experience as we work to continue to strengthen America’s nuclear industry”

Marvin Fertel, President & CEO Nuclear Energy Institute: “The industry’s highest priority is the safe operation of the 104 reactors in 31 states and we will incorporate lessons learned from this accident at American nuclear energy facilities”

9

DOE/NE Research Impacts: Post-Fukushima

Reducing the need for operator actions in accident response enhances overall safety.

Passive Systems enhance safety

– AP1000, ESBWR, SMRs, HTGRs

Better understanding of dry cask storage systems.

Re-engineering barriers can reduce complications.

SiC cladding

Enhanced fuel properties

Re-evaluation of potential natural phenomena.

Re-evaluation of U.S. seismic criteria

Targeted use of Modeling and Simulation.

Improved modeling of operating reactors

Enlistment of the University Community.

10

Passive Safety Features of Modern Reactors

Passive Safety Systems utilize naturally occurring physical phenomena such as natural circulation of air, water and steam.

Gravity and convection drive the flow of cooling water.

There are no safety-related pumps and motor-operated valves.

There is no need for safety-rated diesel generators.

Reactor safety functions are achieved without using any safety-related AC power

reliance on “stored” energy

PASSIVE SYSTEMS IN THE UNITED STATES The U.S. NP2010 Program advanced the AP1000 and ESBWR passive safety

designs

SMRs offer extensive passive safety features

11

Rapid Core Degradation Due to Enthalpy Production by Zr Oxidation at T>1200ºC

Steam Temperature = 600°C constant

Heat-transfer coefficient from cladding OD to steam = 5×10-4 W/cm2-K

• Cladding temperature increases after exposure to steam due to decay heat

production

• At T>1200ºC self catalytic oxidation rapidly drives cladding temperature and

results in full consumption of the cladding

Period of time after

SCRAM where

water injection into

the core is

available

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

C

lad

din

g T

em

pe

ratu

re [C

]

Time after fuel exposure to steam [min]

cladding fully

consumed

Cooling Period

2 hrs

8 hrs

24 hrs

72 hrs

NRC 1204°C PCT limit

Longer cooling period = Less decay heat

*Slide provided by Oak Ridge National Lab*

12

Materials With Slower Oxidation Kinetics Offer Larger Margins of Safety

• Materials with slower oxidation kinetics in steam (~ 2 orders of magnitude

or less) delay rapid cladding degradation

Fuel exposed after

24hrs of cooling

Relative to Zr

oxidation kinetics

*Slide provided by Oak Ridge National Lab*

13

Used Fuel Generation

Each year, U.S. nuclear power plants generate ~2,200 metric tons of used fuel

Contained in the 2,200 tons of used fuel is about 20 tons of plutonium

There is currently about 64,000 MT of used fuel stored in the US

This fuel is stored in water pools or dry casks at 72 plant sites in 39 states (includes DOE used fuel)

The legislated capacity for Yucca Mt. was 63,000 MT before a second repository was licensed

Projected used fuel quantity in storage by 2035 will be about 120,000 MT

The current policy for UNF is direct geologic disposal

Siting a repository appears to be a challenge for the US

At least one repository will be needed for any option

14

Blue Ribbon Commission Recommendations

1. A new, consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste management facilities.

2. A new organization dedicated solely to implementing the waste management program and empowered with the authority and resources to succeed.

3. Access to the funds nuclear utility ratepayers are providing for the purpose of nuclear waste management.

4. Prompt efforts to develop one or more geologic disposal facilities.

5. Prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities.

6. Prompt efforts to prepare for the eventual large-scale transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste to consolidated storage and disposal facilities when such facilities become available.

7. Support for continued U.S. innovation in nuclear energy technology and for workforce development.

8. Active U.S. leadership in international efforts to address safety, waste management, non-proliferation, and security concerns.

15

Sustainable Fuel Cycles

Goals

─ In the near term, define and analyze fuel cycle technologies to develop options that increase the sustainability of nuclear energy

─ In the medium term, select preferred fuel cycle option for further development

─ By 2050, deploy preferred fuel cycle

Challenges

– Develop high burnup fuel and structural materials to withstand irradiation for longer periods of time

– Develop simplified separations, waste management, and proliferation risk reduction methods

– Develop optimized systems to maximize energy production while minimizing waste

16

Uranium Extraction from Seawater Winner of R&D100 Award in 2012

U.S. R&D Efforts Focus on –

• Increase U sorption capacity and selectivity in seawater environment

surface area; functional group density;

grafting efficiency;

• Enhanced ligand design

computational modeling of functional ligands, hard/soft donors, stereochemistry

• Enhance adsorbent durability

Increase the number of recycles/reuse; Improve U stripping methodology

• Understanding sorption mechanism, kinetics, and thermodynamics

Vast potential resource in seawater: ~4.5 billion tonnes U - provide a price cap and ensure centuries of uranium supply even

with aggressive world-wide growth in nuclear energy applications

Seawater Uranium Sorption Capacity (g U/kg Adsorbent @20°C)

Challenge is low concentration: ~3.3 ppb in seawater

PNNL Independent Verification20 °C

Flow-rate = 500 mL/min

Days of Exposure

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

µg

Ura

niu

m /

g a

dso

rben

t

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Uranium

Replicate

Japanese Sorbent

ORNL Cartridge

Ligand Saturation Model

U.S. sample 2.75 Japanese sample 0.92

17

Why are SMR technologies of interest to DOE?

Safety Benefits

Passive decay heat removal by natural circulation

Smaller source term inventory

Simplified design eliminates/mitigates several postulated accidents

Below grade reactor siting

Potential for reduction in Emergency Planning Zone

Economic Benefits

Reduced financial risk

Flexibility to add units

Right size for replacement of old coal plants

Use domestic forgings and manufacturing

Job creation

NE working definition of SMRs: reactor units with a nominal output of 300 MWe or less and are able to have large components or modules fabricated remotely and transported to

the site for assembly of components and operation.

18

SMR Licensing Technical Support Program

Modeled After NP 2010 Program $1.4B Joint government-industry program to overcome barriers to new reactor

deployment 50-50 cost-share between government and industry

Results: Three Early Site Permits (North Anna, Grand Gulf, Clinton)

Two Design Certification applications (AP1000 received, ESBWR 2012)

Two Construction and Operating Licenses issued (Vogtle, Summer)

Current Program:

Goal is design certification of up to 2 SMR designs

Supports first phase for deployment

Facilitates and accelerates commercial development and deployment of near term U.S. SMR designs at domestic locations

$452 M in cost-share program over 5 years

FY12 funding is $67M and FY13 request is $65M

19

Renewed Interest in Nuclear Energy

Early Site Permits: 4 early site permits approved for Clinton, Grand Gulf, North Anna sites, and Vogtle; additional permit applications filed.

License Applications: 18 Construction and Operating License applications for 28 new reactors have been submitted for NRC review; Areva and USEC enrichment licenses filed; 73 reactor license renewals approved.

Reactor Design Certifications: Four designs have been certified; three new designs (APWR, EPR, and ESBWR) are under review; ESBWR through ACRS; AP1000 certified.

New Plant Orders: 4 plant construction contracts initiated; 9 power companies have placed large component forging orders.

Plant Construction: TVA construction activities at Watts Bar 2, and reinstated construction permits for Bellefonte 1 and 2. LES enrichment plant operating. Vogtle and Summer COL issued.

Financial Incentives: Conditional loan guarantees approved for Vogtle and Eagle Rock.

Small Modular Reactor Program: Administration support for multiyear SMR Licensing and Deployment Program. $65M requested in FY13. Issued FOA April 22, 2012.

20

AP1000 Construction Sanmen, Vogtle, and Summer

Sanmen- January 2012

Vogtle – March 2012

Summer - May 2012

21

Nuclear Energy University Program

Initiated in 2009: Funds nuclear energy research and equipment upgrades at U.S. colleges and universities.

NEUP has awarded $233 M to 81 schools in 34 states and the District of Columbia

NEUP plays a key role in helping DOE accomplish its mission in the development and exploration of advanced nuclear science and technology.

GT has been a major recipient of NEUP awards: 23 awards totaling $12.6 million in the form of scholarships, fellowships, R&D, or general scientific infrastructure and most recently the 2012 Integrated Research Project on Integral Inherently Safe Light Water Reactor

22

Requested Budget: $5,999,784

PI: Bojan Petrovic

Collaborators: University of Michigan, Virginia Tech, University of Tennessee, University of Idaho, Morehouse College

Foreign Involvement: Polytechnic University of Milan, University of Cambridge ($450K to be provided by RCUK)

Industrial Participation: Westinghouse Electric ($600k), Southern Nuclear

($135k) National Laboratory Participation: INL ($300k)

Georgia Institute of Technology Integral Inherently Safe Light Water Reactor

23

Congratulations on 50 Years of Success

GIT was one of the first undergraduate programs in nuclear engineering to be accredited.

Highly successful in NE’s Competitive University programs winning awards under NERI and NEUP over the past 10 years

GIT has a long history of R&D and collaboration on NE related programs in reactor design, fuels design, nuclear hydrogen production and nuclear theory and physics.

Much of the early work at Georgia Tech provided data for support of the controlled thermonuclear reactor at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. High-energy beam studies fostered development of neutral beam injectors to heat and fuel such reactors.

In 2010, GIT was ranked in the top five for number of Nuclear Engineering degrees awarded, with 56 degrees issued. (Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education)

The 2012 Integrated Research Project is potentially leading the way to the next generation of LWR nuclear reactors

24

Backup Slides

25

Integral Inherently Safe Light

Water Reactor

… high-power (~1,000 MWe) LWR with inherent safety features. The enabling innovations include the use of high power density technologies/components, a compact core design achieved by using a non-oxide fuel form with improved heat removal capability, combined with fuel/clad design of enhanced accident tolerance. This allows increasing core power density while at the same time improving the core safety performance and response in transient/accident scenarios. A novel steam generating system is based on very compact printed circuit heat exchangers (PCHE) which make a 1,000 MWe power level “compatible” with an integral configuration.

The compact design leads to a small plant footprint, which helps reduce the construction cost and facilitates deployment of seismic isolators.