Upload
university-of-adelaide
View
897
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Professor Barry Brook explains 'Why old nuclear power is not new'. This seminar provides insight into the various forms of nuclear energy including fourth generation reactors. For more information about Barry’s ideas for our energy futures visit http://bravenewclimate.com/.
Citation preview
Environment InstituteScience Seminar Series 2009
Next Week: Monday 1 June
Why old nuclear power is not new
Presented by: Professor Barry Brook
Professor Barry W. BrookProfessor Barry W. BrookSir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate ChangeSir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change
Director of Climate Science, Environment InstituteDirector of Climate Science, Environment Institute
School of Earth and Environmental SciencesSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences
The University of AdelaideThe University of Adelaide
Email: Email: [email protected]
Energy Futures
Why old nuclear power is not new
Disclaimer!
• I am not a Nuclear Physicist, Reactor Engineer, etc.*
• I have no vested interest in any form of commercial energy**
• Everyone can (should) learn what I am about to tell you!***
*But then neither is 99% of other ‘expert commenters’ on nuclear power. For those who care, I’m an Earth
systems scientist and modeller. I read widely though.
**I do own a rooftop PV system and occasionally manage to sell back to the grid. Does that count?
*** So you too, with some effort, can become a ‘nuclear expert’ – or at least much better informed.
Why nuclear power is badWhy nuclear power is bad**
• It is a COIt is a CO22-intensive activity (mining, enrichment, plants)-intensive activity (mining, enrichment, plants)
• It leaves a 100,000 year legacy of radioactive wasteIt leaves a 100,000 year legacy of radioactive waste
• Uranium supplies will run out in 40 – 200 yearsUranium supplies will run out in 40 – 200 years
• There is a dangerous risk of nuclear meltdownThere is a dangerous risk of nuclear meltdown
• It facilitates nuclear weapons proliferationIt facilitates nuclear weapons proliferation
• Others (necessity, cost, pace, insurance, water use)Others (necessity, cost, pace, insurance, water use)
*This is all common wisdom. Of course, that doesn’t make it true.*This is all common wisdom. Of course, that doesn’t make it true.
Okay – time to get rationalOkay – time to get rational
• The China (and India) syndromeThe China (and India) syndrome
• Dispelling the myths (a big topic…)Dispelling the myths (a big topic…)
• Generation III+ (the here and now)Generation III+ (the here and now)
• Generation IV (the near future)Generation IV (the near future)
• Limits of renewable energy & EELimits of renewable energy & EE
• Bottom Line: the basket of eggsBottom Line: the basket of eggs
It’s a CO2-intensive energy source (mining, enrichment, plant operation, fuel storage, etc.)
http://www.withouthotair.com
Weisser, D: A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies (2007) Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2007.01.008
• 2005 OD output = 4,600 tU3O8 = 22 GWe (LWR)
– 192 Terawatt hours per year (SA total = 12 TWh/yr)
• 2020 expanded OD output = 19,000 tU3O8 = 94 GWe
– 794 TWh/yr (3 – 4 x Australia’s total 2020 electricity demand)
2005 Production Levels
Brown coal (new subcritical): 226 Mt CO2-e
Black coal (supercritical): 181 Mt CO2-e
Natural gas (combined cycle): 111 Mt CO2-e
Nuclear Power (full life cycle): 4 Mt CO2-e
Expanded Mine: 2020 Production Levels
Brown coal (new subcritical): 933 Mt CO2-e
Black coal (supercritical): 747 Mt CO2-e
Natural gas (combined cycle): 458 Mt CO2-e
Nuclear Power (full life cycle): 16 Mt CO2-e
Electricity generation comparison: OD substitution
• In 2005, South Australia’s emissions were 28 Mt CO2-e
– 2020 under BAU = 36 Mt CO2-e
• If CPRS 5% target met, Oz in 2020 [all sources] = 530 Mt CO2-e
• OD expansion will ‘save’ 915 Mt CO2-e vs coal
• So almost twice offset Oz total, and for SA = 25 times
Uranium ores will be depleted
in 40 to 200 years
99.3% is
U-238
Natural uranium
95 - 97% is U-238
3 - 5% is U-235
Low-enriched uranium for LWR fuel
Highly enriched uranium for weapons
90% is U-235
10% isU-238
URANIUM HAS TWO MAIN
ISOTOPES
0.7% is
U-235
THE FATE OF THE MINED URANIUM TODAY, LESS THAN 1% OF ITS ENERGY IS BEING USED
DU : 99.75% U-238, 0.25% U-235
EU: 95% U-238 5% U-235
As mined, uranium is 99.3% U-238, 0.7% U-235. For LWR fuel, the uranium first goes to an enrichment plant
After enrichment, some 85% isleft behind as depleted uranium
About 15% becomes enriched uranium for LWR fuel
In today’s LWR throwaway fuel cycle about 5% of the EU gets used; the rest is considered “waste”
Mined uranium (after the enrichment process)
USED LWR FUEL
With this portion consumed (in fast reactors), dangerous activity is gone in 300 years
All of it is now treated as waste, but it’s not
The REAL waste
LWR FUEL CYCLE TODAY
Depleted
Reprocessing, as done in France, raisesfuel utilization to 6%, vs 5% for the U.S. once-through cycle
Enriched
Used fuel
Isolation mandated for 10,000 years or more
FUEL CYCLE WITH FAST REACTORS simplified
With enough fast reactors, no more mining, milling, or enrichment of uranium will be needed for centuries – enough uranium is already on hand.
Processing Fuel for fast reactor
Waste(fission products --
no plutonium)
Permanent disposalIsolation needed for
only 300 years
Used
LWR fuel
Reactor
Recycling;Fuel fabrication
Fast-reactor power plant
Spent fuel
Refreshed fuel
Uranium for make-up
Steam
PROCESSING STREAMSwith fast reactors deployed
and before used thermal-reactor fuel has been exhausted
USED LWR FUEL
WASTEDISPOSITION
Fuelfabrication
Uranium as neededfor make-up fuel
ALL THE PLUTONIUM AND OTHER TRANSURANICS,
MIXED WITH SOME URANIUM
FISSIONPRODUCTS
MOST OF THEURANIUM0.8% U-235
Stored forfuture use
Fast-reactor plant
EVENTUAL FAST-REACTOR FUEL CYCLEDecades hence -- after the Pu and other transuranics from
used thermal-reactor fuel have been exhausted
Waste DisposalFission products only – no plutonium
One ton per year per 1 GWe power plantIsolation needed for only 300
years
Reactor
Recycling
To fuel fast reactors, no more mining, milling, or enrichment of uranium will be needed for centuries – a lot of uranium has already been mined.
Steam
Spent fuel
Refreshed fuel
Uranium for make-up, from one source or the other.One ton per year per 1 GWe power plant
Stored uranium left over from used thermal reactor fuel
Stored DU left over from past enrichment activity
Fast-reactor power plant
It leaves a 100,000 year legacy
of radioactive waste
There is a dangerous risk of
nuclear meltdown
It facilitates weapons proliferation
Necessity, pace, cost, insurance
0
200
400
600
800
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
GW
(e)
high
low
history
PFBR (India)
500 MWe (2010)
CEFR (China)20 MWe (2009)
More information, discussion, references for slides and presentation
downloads:bravenewclimate.com
Environment InstituteScience Seminar Series 2009
Next Seminar: 15 June – 3pm
How can we help biodiversity adapt to the ravages of climate change?
Presented by: Professor Andrew Lowe