The European nuclear industry and research approach for innovation

in nuclear energy

Dominique HittnerFramatome-ANP

EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

2 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Contents

The EPS and MIT approach

The approach of the European nuclear industry and R&D

The proposed programme

Why a focus on gas cooled reactors?

R&D needs

Conclusion

3 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach for defining a long term strategy for the development of nuclear energy (1)

The EPS approach

The nuclear fission energy is an industrial reality

It is difficult to imagine ways to avoid a major contribution

of fission energy satisfying in a "clean" way the increasing

world-wide demand for electricity in this century (fusion is

too long term)

Need for a strong international R&D to develop innovative

solutions to meet the challenges faced by nuclear energy

But due to the economic, political and technological

uncertainties and difficulties of long term R&D

programmes, the R&D should not be focused on a single

solution

4 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach for defining a long term strategy for the development of nuclear energy (2)

The issues with the ADS

Technical issues

The safety is not inherent: 90% of the probability of PWR core melting risk not related to reactivity accidents but to the mismatch between the heat released and extracted.

In actinide burner mode the core not in its state of maximum reactivity

It is not the only solution for burning actinides (FR, HTR…)

Economic issues

It is difficult to imagine that an accelerator + a (sub-critical) reactor is no more expensive than a reactor alone

It is difficult to imagine that the ADS could be a competitive energy producer, but it could be useful for actinide burning

Political uncertainties of large long term projects

5 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach for defining a long term strategy for the development of nuclear energy (3)

The issues with the thorium cycle

The ADS is not the only system which can work with the Th

cycle

In the long term Th cycle is more favourable as far as waste

issues are concerned, but in the short term there are

difficulties with fabrication and proliferation

The U fuel cycle industrial tools are recent and there is no

economic incentive to change them

6 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach for defining a long term strategy for the development of nuclear energy (4)

The MIT approach

The main challenge for nuclear energy is its competitiveness

The modern industrial reactors are very safe. Their safety relies on a systematic feedback from the construction and operation experience

The introduction of innovation in industrial use of nuclear energy is difficult and risky, because the feedback from experience is lost

Closed / open cycle The conditions for competitiveness of the closed cycle Vs open cycle

depend on many parameters The risks of reprocessing are mastered U supply is not an issue before several decades There are risks of proliferation with the present reprocessing

technologies but they can be overcome by processes under development which keep Pu and MA together

The key issue for the open cycle is the fast saturation of geological disposal facilities

7 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach of the European nuclear industry and R&D (1)

MICHELANGELO Network is a thematic network of the 5th Framework Programme of the EC aimed at defining a European R&D strategy supporting the industrial development innovative industrial solutions for keeping the nuclear fission energy open in the 21st Century.

PartnershipAnsaldoBNFLCEACogemaEDFEmpresarios AgrupadosENEAForschungszentrum JülichForschungszentrum Karlsruhe

FortumFramatome ANPIKE (University of Stuttgart)Joint research Centre of the EC (JRC)NNCNRGPaul Sherrer InstituteTractebelVüje

8 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach of the European nuclear industry and R&D (2)

The challenges to be met by nuclear energy are:

The economic competitiveness

The acceptability issues Wastes

Safety

Proliferation risks

Sparing of fissile resources

In order to contribute significantly to the mastering of the world-wide environmental impact of energy production, nuclear energy will have to satisfy different missions:

Production of electricity

Co-generation of electricity and heat (desalination, industrial processes…)

Hydrogen production

Transmutation of high level long-lived wastes

Need of plants with small, medium and large production capacity

9 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach of the European nuclear industry and R&D (3)

There is probably no single ideal nuclear system but different ones adapted to different missions

We cannot fix only a single long term ambitious target for R&D, we need continuity in the development of nuclear technology:

There are economic and political uncertainties about the real needs after several decades and technological uncertainties about the success of the development

There are intermediate needs of industry

The nuclear technological development must proceed in a step by step approach with industrial validation of each step (the feed- back from industrial experience is an unavoidable stage of nuclear technology progress)

The public opinion will not be convinced if we only promise long term solutions to the acceptability issues (in particular waste issue) without doing anything in between

10 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The approach of the European nuclear industry and R&D (4)

The technological development must

Be continuous

Explore a large scope of different paths with different time

horizons for industrial deployment

But there are obstacles for opening widely the scope of nuclear R&D

The present period is not a period of expansion for nuclear industry

The feedback for investments are only long term and the

financial risks are significant

The public funding is becoming rare for nuclear energy

Need of international co-operation (GENERATION IV, INPRO, European nuclear programme on innovative approaches in FP5 and FP6)

11 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Recommendations of MICHELANGELO Network (1)

MICHELANGELO Network was caught in a contradictory situation between the needs a large opening of nuclear R&D and the scarcity of funding

Need to have a very selective approach, based not only on the analysis of the potential of innovative systems for industrial deployment and of their compliance with sustainability requirements but on additional requirements

The need to get the critical size for each project

The usefulness for industrial application To give top priority to medium term / long term application

The strong points of European technology

The continuity of the European R&D effort

The complementarity of the FP projects with the national ones No duplication, critical size, European co-ordination

12 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Recommendations of MICHELANGELO Network (2)

Not to look only to R&D on future reactors, but also on the related fuel cycles

To look for synergies between the area of innovative systems and the area of P&T

Specific recommendations

Top priority to GCR technology To consolidate the basis of GCR technology: the development of a

complete set of the base HTR technologies for an industrial deployment in the next decade

To explore the operating limits of the HTR technologies in terms of temperature, burnup and fast fluence and develop solutions to get higher performances in these fields

- For the most advanced solutions (VHTR and GFR) R&D should only be focused on the identification and the reduction of the key technology gaps

V/HTR IP + GFR STRP Strong co-ordination between the 2 projects, cross-cut WPs

(materials, components and fuel…)

13 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Recommendations of MICHELANGELO Network (3)

Specific recommendations (end)

To have a more limited but still significant effort of SCWR, focused on key feasibility issues (reactor physics, safety, corrosion)

To federate the existing activities on MSR in Europe and in Russia (through ISTC) by a thematic network, without additional R&D funding

To use the capital of know-how accumulated in Europe on liquid metal reactors (Na and Pb) to be present in international projects

To address with a balanced effort in the sub area "P&T and other concepts" of the priority thematic area "waste management"

The development of solutions for actinide minimisation in present reactors by using innovative fuel elements and fuel cycles

The study of waste issues related to medium term systems and of their potential for burning actinides (e.g. deep burn transmuter)

The development of long term advanced solutions (GFR, ADS…) Separated IPs of the same magnitude

14 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Why gas cooled systems? (1)

The industry is interested in enlarging its offer towards the market for small and medium size power generation units modular HTRs

The potential for further development Cf GENERATION IV roadmap HTR VHTR GFR

Entering the "hydrogen civilisation" is a driver especially in USA: the NGNP project

15 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Why HTRs? (1)

They seem competitive with medium size production capacity

Simplification of the modular concept

High performance of modern gas turbines (at 850°C an efficiency

of nearly 50% can be reached)

Attractiveness of their safety features

Robustness of the fuel

Large thermal inertia

Large negative temperature coefficient

Inherent safety

Chemically inert coolant

Flexibility in burning different types of fissile materials

16 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Why HTRs? (2)

PCS vessel Neutroncontrolassemblies

Reactorvessel

Generator

Recuperator

Reactorcore

Turbine

Shutdowncoolingsystem

Highpressurecompressor

Lowpressurecompressor

Intercooler

Precooler Hot duct Cross vessel

GT-MHR reactor module arrangement

Net Electrical Output MWe 278

Reactor output MW 600

Thermal efficiency (net) % 46.3Primary coolant inlet pressure MPa 7Average coolant temperature, reactor inlet °C 488Average coolant temperature, reactor outlet °C 850

17 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Why HTRs? (3)

18 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Weapon plutonium destruction capability of HTRs Vs LWRs

Weapon Pu

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Re

lati

ve p

luto

niu

m is

oto

pe

qu

anti

tie

s

LWR spent fuel option

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Net consumptionPu39: ~51%Total Pu: ~27%

GT-MHR spent fuel option

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1

Net consumptionPu39: 90-95%Total Pu: 65-72%

Pu 239

Pu 240

Pu 241

Pu 242

19 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

The deep burn transmuter concept

20 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Base research needs for innovative systems

Materials

Development of high performance materials (high temperature,

high stresses, high irradiation levels, harsh chemical

environment)

Corrosion

Understanding of the physical phenomena at the atomic level on

which are based the material properties

numerical simulation of the material behaviour

Thermo-fluid dynamics

Nuclear data

"High" energy for ADS

Low energy for all systems

21 EPS, Paris, 3/10/2003

Conclusion

Do not focus R&D only on one type of technology, one type of concept

Nuclear technology is still a new developing technology, still full of resources to dig out through R&D

it will be able to meet the economic and societal challenges it faces