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