NUCLEAR POWER: PROSPECTS in the 21 st CENTURY WPUI - Advances in Nuclear Mike Corradini Nuclear Engr. & Engr. Physics WINS: Wisconsin Institute of Nuclear

NUCLEAR POWER:

PROSPECTS in the

21st CENTURYWPUI - Advances in Nuclear

Mike Corradini

Nuclear Engr. & Engr. PhysicsWINS: Wisconsin Institute of Nuclear Systems

www.energy.wisc.edu

WPUI – Advances in Nuclear 2008

Background Information Population continues to increase worldwide

(US/Europe: <1%/yr; Asia: > 2%/yr) Energy usage is growing more rapidly

(US/Europe: ~1%/yr; Asia: >8%/yr)

400 quads (2000) and 444 quads (2004) Electrical energy use also increases

(US/Europe: ~2%/yr; Asia: >5%/yr)

Energy is Energy is thethe vital physical force behind our system vital physical force behind our system

Population and Energy Consumption Growth (1970-2025)

Sources: EIA, International Energy Outlook 2000 US Bureau of the Census, International Database

Actual Projected

Energy Consumption

DevelopingCountries

DevelopedCountries



ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

Conditions for Energy Sustainability: Adequate supply of energy resource Acceptable land usage for energy & fuel cycle Minimal by-product streams Economically feasible technology Neither the power source nor the technology to

exploit it can be controlled by a few nations

““Business as usual” cannot continue for energy Business as usual” cannot continue for energy without suffering from unintended consequenceswithout suffering from unintended consequences

Coal and Uranium Resources (EIA-2004)

Reserve: ~ 5 million mtons @ $80/kg

Global Consumption: ~0.06 mill-mtons/yr

Global Consumption: >6 bill-tons/yr

Reserve: <103 billion tons @ $50/ton


Wind0.79

PV

0.12

Solar

Thermal

0.08

Hydro0.07-0.37

Environmental Impacts: Area Requirements

(km2 / MW; Source - J. Davidson, 2006) Nuclear0.001/0.01

Biomass5.2

Geothermal0.003

Coal0.01/0.04

1000 MW POWER PLANT RUNNING @ 100 % CAPACITY

(8766 GWh/YEAR)


1000 Mwe-yr Power Plant Emissions COAL GAS NUCLEAR

Sulfur-oxide ~ 1000 mt

Nitrous-oxide ~ 5000 mt 400 mt

Particulates ~ 1400 mt

Ash (solids) ~ 1million mt

CO2 > 7million mt 3.5mill. mt

Trace elements ~ 1mt** ~ 1 kg** Volatilized heavy metals: e.g., Mercury, Lead, Cadmium, Arsenic

Spent Fuel 20-30 mt

Fission Products ~1 mtEIA - 2004


Environmental Impact:US Sources of Emission-Free Generation (2004)

Wind <0.4 %

Photovoltaic <0.1%

Geothermal 1.3%

Hydro 29.1%

Nuclear 69.1%

Source: EIA

UW CEO Conference

Cost of Electricity (2004 U.S. Average) (¢/kWhr)

* 2006: J. Davidson, Univ. Minn.

WPUI – Advances in Nuclear

Future Energy Choices What can be done in the short-term (~1yr) ?

Improved energy efficiency (driven by law/cost) What can be done in the mid-term (~ 10yr)?

Seek proven alternatives that do not exacerbate the situation (nuclear, hybrid cars, ‘cleaner’ coal, wind?)

What can be done in the long-term (10-50yr)? Invest in R&D for major new technology gains

(advanced nuclear, electric cars, biofuels, solar-PV) We need to make conscious choices => We need to make conscious choices =>

NUCLEAR for baseload electricityNUCLEAR for baseload electricity

http://www.energy.wisc.edu WPUI – Advances in Nuclear 2008

Top 10 Nuclear Countries (2000)

Capacity Factors Improvement

‘80‘85

‘90‘95

‘00

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%86.8% in 1999

89.6% in 2000

90.7% in 2001

91.7% in 2002 NEI - 2004

Source: NEI

Lowest Electricity Production Costs

‘80 ‘85‘90 ‘95

‘00

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

(cen

ts/k

ilo

wat

t-h

ou

r)

2.09 ¢/kWh in 1998

1.90 ¢/kWh in 1999

1.81 ¢/kWh in 2000

1.68 ¢/kWh in 2001EIA - 2004

Source: NEI

License Renewal:Extends Value104 Plants: 48 NPP Extended 30 NPP Applied 22 NPP In-process 1 Under construction1 Under construction

44 NPP Extended 34 NPP Applied 22 NPP Being Considered

New Nuclear Plants Under Consideration

CompanyLocation

(Existing Plant)ESP

Design

(Units)

COL

Submittal

Alternate Energy

Holdings /

Unistar

Owyhee County, ID Straight to COL EPR (1) FY 2009

Amarillo Power /

UnistarVicinity of Amarillo, TX Straight to COL EPR (1) FY 2009

AmerenUE / UnistarCallaway County, MO

(Callaway)Straight to COL EPR (1) FY 2008

Constellation /

UniStar

Calvert County, MD (Calvert

Cliffs)Straight to COL EPR (1)

Partial – Under

Review - FY 2008

Constellation /

UniStar

Oswego County, NY (Nine Mile

Point)Straight to COL EPR (1) FY 2009

DominionLouisa County, VA (North

Anna)

Approved November

2007ESBWR (1) Under Review

DTE Energy Fermi, MI (Fermi) TBD TBD FY 2008

Duke Oconee County, SC (Oconee) Considering TBD TBD

Duke Davie County, NC Considering TBD TBD

Duke Cherokee County, SC (Lee) Straight to COL AP1000 (2) Under Review

EntergyWest Felciana Parish, LA (River

Bend)Straight to COL ESBWR (1) FY 2008

Exelon Victoria County, TX Straight to COL ESBWR (2) FY 2008

CompanyLocation

(Existing Plant)ESP

Design

(Units)

COL

Submittal

Exelon Clinton, IL (Clinton)Approved March

2007TBD TBD

Florida Power &

Light

Miami-Dade County, FL (Turkey

Point)TBD TBD FY 2009

Luminant Glen Rose, TX (Comanche Peak) Straight to COL APWR (2) FY 2008

NRG/STPNOCMatagorda County, TX (South Texas

Project)Straight to COL ABWR (2)

Under

Review

NuStart Energy

(Entergy)Claiborne County, MS (Grand Gulf) Approved April 2007 ESBWR (1)

Under

Review

NuStart Energy

(TVA)Jackson County, AL (Bellefonte) Straight to COL AP1000 (2)

Under

Review

PPL Corp. / Unistar Luzerne County, PA (Susquehanna) Straight to COL EPR (1) FY 2009

Progress Energy Wake County, NC (Harris) Straight to COL AP1000 (2)Under

Review

Progress Energy Levy County, FL Straight to COL AP1000 (2) FY 2008

South Carolina

Electric & GasFairfield County, SC (V.C. Summer) Straight to COL AP1000 (2) FY 2008

Southern Co. Burke County, GA (Vogtle)Approval expected

2009AP1000 (2) FY 2008

New Nuclear Plants Under Consideration

Potential Locations for New Nuclear Plants


Nuclear Fission produces Energy

Energy from the fission products takes the form oflocal heating of the solid fuel rod

nA neutron is absorbed by a uranium atom, breaking into fission products & hi-speed neutrons

Energy released is over million times larger than any carbon fuel

To continue the fission reaction, the hi-speed neutrons are moderated by water as a coolant


Fission controlled in a Nuclear Reactor

SteamGenerator

(HeatExchanger)

Pump

STEAM

Water

Fuel Rods

Control Rods

Coolant and Moderator

Pressure Vessel and Shield

Connectto

RankineCycle

http://www.energy.wisc.edu

PWR Containment


Evolution of Nuclear Power Systems

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Gen IV

Generation IVGeneration IV

o Highly economical

o Enhanced Safety

o Minimized Wastes

o Proliferation Resistance

o Highly economical

o Enhanced Safety

o Minimized Wastes

o Proliferation Resistance

Gen I

Generation IGeneration I

Early PrototypeReactors

•Shippingport•Dresden,Fermi-I•Magnox

Gen II

Generation IIGeneration II

Commercial PowerReactors

•LWR: PWR/BWR•CANDU•VVER/RBMK

Gen III

Generation IIIGeneration III

AdvancedLWRs

•System 80+•ABWR, EPR

•AP1000•ESBWR


Nuclear Power Safety Current nuclear power plants have high levels of safety: i.e.,

reliable operation, low occupational radioactivity dose to workers and with minimal risk and health effects

As the number of nuclear plants increase worldwide, the level of safety must improve

Future nuclear reactors (Gen III) will exceed the safety of current plants (prevention/mitigation) by more than 10x

Key physical traits would allow ample time for operator actions to insure improved safety performance; e.g., passive heat removal, improved instrumentation, minimize transients.

http://www.energy.wisc.edu Emerging Energy Technology Summit 2007

Advanced LWR: ABWR

http://www.energy.wisc.edu

Advanced LWR: EPR

Advanced LWR: AP-1000

Advanced LWR: ESBWR


Nuclear Power Fuel Cycle[1000 MWe-yr – (A) Once Thru (B) U-Pu recycle]

Mining/Milling

Convert/Enrichment

Fuel Fabrication

Reactor (1000MWe)

Reprocessing Plant

Milling waste stream

Conv/Enrich Waste Tails

Fuel Fabrication Waste

Spent Fuel as Waste

Reprocessing Waste (FP)

U3O8 &daughters(A)10 mt (B) 6mt

UF6 &daughters(A) 167mt(B) 0.5mt

(A) 205mt (B)120mt

(A) 37mt (B)11.5mt

(A) 36.8mt (B) 36.4mt (U-Pu)

(A) 35.7 mt U, 0.32mt Pu(B) 35mt U, 0.5mt Pu

(B) 1.1 mt U, 5kg Pu

UO2 & daughters(A) 0.2mt (B) 0.16mt

Spent Nuclear Fuel

Recycling of Spent Nuclear Fuel has technical advantages:

• Most is U and Pu, which can be recycled and ‘burned’

• Most radiotoxicity is in long-lived fission products and the minor actinides, which can be transmuted and/or disposed in much smaller packages

1 metric tonne of SNF* contains:

955.4 kg U 8.5 kg Pu (5.1 kg 239Pu)

Minor actinides (MAs):

0.5 kg 237Np 0.6 kg Am 0.02 kg Cm

Long-lived fission products (LLFPs):

0.2 kg 129I0.8 kg 99Tc0.7 kg 93Zr0.3 kg 135Cs

Short-lived fission products (SLFPs):

1.0 kg 137Cs0.7 kg 90Sr*33,000 MWD/MT, 10 yr cooling

OtherPlutonium 0.9 %

Minor Actinides 0.1%

Other Long-Lived Fission Products 0.1 %

Long-lived I and Tc 0.1%Short-lived

Cs and Sr 0.2%

Stable Fission Products 3.1%

Uranium 95.5%

http://www.energy.wisc.edu Emerging Energy Technology Summit 2007

HLW Composition*


Nuclear Power High Level Waste (HLW) All nuclear fuel cycle waste (except HLW) has been safely and

reliably disposed through DoE and NRC regulations; milling, enrichment, fabrication as LLW

Since 1982, US law ‘defines’ spent nuclear fuel as HLW, since reprocessing has not occurred since 1976 (Japan & Europe is where reprocessing does occur)

Spent fuel is currently stored at ~104 nuclear power plant sites (~ 2000 mt/yr; total ~50,000 mt) and planned to be stored and buried at one site in the US (currently Yucca Mtn)

All nuclear electricity is taxed at 1mill/kwhre for a HLW fund (~ $0.8 billion/yr; total ~ $20 billion)

HLW radiation exposure at disposal site less than natural background radiation levels in that region


Generation IV Reactor Systems Safety: meet and exceed current nuclear power plant

reliability, occupational radiation exposure and risk of accident consequences

Economics: reduce the total cost of electricity ($/Mwhr-e) to remain competitive with other leading baseload technologies (e.g., coal and natural gas)

Sustainability: minimize waste streams with spent fuel disposal and/or reprocess and recycle

Provide for proliferation resistance and facility physical protection

Process Heat for Synfuel Production

Nuclear HeatNuclear HeatHydrogenHydrogen OxygenOxygen

H2O22

1

900 C400 C

Rejected Heat 100 C

Rejected Heat 100 C

S (Sulfur)Circulation

SO 2+H2O+

O221

H2SO 4

SO 2+

H2OH2O

H2

I2

+ 2HI

H2SO 4

SO 2+H2OH2O

+

+ +

I (Iodine)Circulation

2H I

I2

I2

WaterWater

Nuclear HeatNuclear HeatHydrogenHydrogen OxygenOxygen

H2O22

1 O22121

900 C400 C

Rejected Heat 100 C

Rejected Heat 100 C

S (Sulfur)Circulation

SO 2+H2O+

O221

H2SO 4

SO 2+

H2OH2O

H2

I2

+ 2HI

H2SO 4

SO 2+H2OH2O

+

+ +

I (Iodine)Circulation

2H I

I2

I2

WaterWater

L

Liquid Metal

Hydrogen

CxHy

Carbon Recycle

200 C 1000 C

Thermochemical Processes

LM Condensed Phase Reforming (pyrolysis)

Aqueous-phase Carbohydrate

Reforming (ACR)

H2, CO2

CATALYST

AQUEOUS CARBOHYDRATE

Very-High-Temperature Reactor (VHTR)

oCharacteristicso Helium coolanto 1000°C outlet temp.o 600 MWtho Water-cracking cycle

oKey Benefito High thermal efficiencyo Hydrogen production by

water-cracking

GAS-COOLED REACTOR

Advanced fuel cyclesLWRs/ALWRs

Thermal Recycle

Full Recycle

Generation IV Reactors

Fresh U

AdvancedFuel Reprocessingw/o Pu Separation


GENIV: Liq.Metal-cooled Fast Reactor

Basic viability of sodium-cooled fast reactor technology has been demonstrated

Low pressure primary coolant- Outlet temperature of 500-550oC

Pool configuration- Pumps and heat exchangers contained- Loop configurations favored by Japan

Heat exchanged to secondary coolant for energy conversion system

- Rankine steam generator or supercritical CO2 Brayton

High power density core- 250 kW/l (vs. 75 kW/l for LWR)- High fuel enrichment (>20% fissile)

Passive decay heat removal- Either from pool heat exchangers or air cooling of reactor vessel

Favorable inherent safety behavior

Thanks! Questions?www.energy.wisc.eduwww.energy.wisc.edu

Documents

NUCLEAR POWER: PROSPECTS in the 21 st CENTURY WPUI - Advances in Nuclear Mike Corradini Nuclear Engr. & Engr. Physics WINS: Wisconsin Institute of Nuclear