Nuclear Renaissance

1
Nuclear Renaissance? A Reality Check
By Roger Bailey Energy Frontiers
International Orlando, Feb 2006
Walking Shadow Designs
2
Nuclear Renaissance

• Nuclear power is making a comeback after 30 year
  hiatus

3
Nuclear Renaissance?Presentation Outline

• Look at the past and learn from it
• What happened? What went wrong?
• Nuclear Energy today
• Current status,Performance and problems
• Look towards the future
• Initiatives, Road Maps, technologies and plans
• World view Whats happening elsewhere
• Uranium resources and the Plutonium Dream
• VHTRs and Nuclear Hydrogen
• A reality check

4
Source EIA DoE
5
Why did Nuclear Power Stall?
Costs
6
Why did Nuclear Power Stall?

• Economic facts stopped Nuclear Power
• Nuclear reactors became
• too expensive to build and
• too unreliable to operate profitably
• Capital costs spiraled due to construction and
  licensing delays
• 1970s - high inflation and interest rates
• Regulated utilities profited from inflated rate
  bases
• Consumers rebelled political action forced
  shutdowns and deregulation

7
Shoringham Nuclear Power Plantnear Brookhaven,
Long Island, NY

• 846 MW Nuclear plant cost over 6 billion, 85x
  original estimate in 1973
• Went critical but never commercial. S/D 1986
• Guerrilla environmental protests
• Twin across Long Island Sound, Millstone 1, built
  for 101 million, operated from 1970 to 1995

8
WHOOPS!Washington Public Power Supply System

• WPPSS started 5 NP plants at 2 sites in the
  1970s
• Only WP1 at Hanford finished operated
• WP2 4 at Hanford, WP3 5 at Satsop 65 to 90
  completed
• Costs estimates rose to over 23 billion

9
Current Status

• 1970s Construction boom and inflation
• 1980s Horror stories and cancellations
• 1990s Consolidation better operations
• Capacity Factors to over 90
• Operating Costs below coal, oil gas
• License extensions
• Nuclear 20 of US electrical generation

10
Nuclear Generation
11
Source DoE EIA 2004
12
US Electricity Production CostsOperations,
Maintenance and Fuel
No capital charges Uranium costs up
2002 /kWh
Source Strategic Plan for Light Water Reactor
RD (NE DoE)
13
Nuclear Industry Consolidation

• Deregulation 1992 Energy Planning Act
• Companies merged affecting 30 reactors
• Over 20 reactors sold at bargain prices
• 3713 MW by 2000 for 87 million (23/kW)
• 10993 MW since for 535 million (487/kW)
• Unprofitable reactors shutdown
• Operating performance improved

14
License Extensions
Original Licenses typically 40 years License
Extensions can add 20 years
To date 35 complete, 16 in progress, 25 more
expected
Source Westinghouse Worldview 0803
15
Near Term Focus

• It is time to start building nuclear plants
  again says George W Bush
• Current nuclear performance is excellent and
  future looks promising
• Cheaper, quicker, safer nuclear designs
• Environmental and economic benefits
• Safety and security vs financial risks

16
Nuclear Benefits Security

• Energy Security electricity to light homes,
  power industry and fuel vehicles without imported
  oil gas
• National Security destruction of nuclear weapons
  and Plutonium stockpiles
• Environmental Security no CO2
• Economic Security stable low fuel costs, capital
  investments providing jobs

17
Nuclear Benefits Security

• Energy Security electricity to light homes,
  power industry and fuel vehicles without imported
  oil gas
• National Security destruction of nuclear weapons
  and Plutonium stockpiles
• Environmental Security no CO2
• Economic Security stable low fuel costs, capital
  investments providing jobs

18
Nuclear Benefits Security

• Adm Skip Bowman new CEO Nuclear Energy Institute
• continuation of 38 years in the US Navy
• Over 100 nuclear propulsion systems for US Navy
• Over 400 built world wide, US, Russia, UK, France
• National Security is Energy Security

19
Nuclear Industry Risks

• Nuclear Industry needs Government to mitigate the
  Risks
• Licensing Risks combined construction
  operating licenses for standardized plants
• Financial Risks liability, loan guarantees, tax
  credits, standby support
• Technical Risks support research, development
  and design
• Environmental Risks safe secure spent fuel and
  radioactive waste repositories

20
Nuclear Industry Risks

• Nuclear Industry needs Government to mitigate the
  Risks
• Licensing Risks combined construction
  operating licenses for standardized plants
• Financial Risks liability, loan guarantees, tax
  credits, standby support
• Technical Risks support research, development
  and design
• Environmental Risks safe secure spent fuel and
  radioactive waste repositories

21
Nuclear Regulatory Commission

• Licensing and regulation a bête noire
• Construction license gives no assurance of
  operating
• Regulation arbitrary and bureaucratic
• License Extensions now proceeding
• Combined Construction and Operating License
  process established (COL)
• Standardized Designs Certified
• Westinghouse AP-600 and GE ABWR-600
• Risks remain as process is unproven

22
US Policies and Initiatives

• National Energy Policy 2001
• Nuclear Power 2010 Initiative
• Roadmap to deploy New Nuclear Plants
• Business Case for New Nuclear Plants
• The Economic Future of Nuclear Power
• Strategic Plan for Reactor R D
• Next Generation Nuclear Plant Project

23
NPI 2010 Roadmap to deploy New Nuclear Plants

• Phase 1 Demonstrate licensing process
• Standard design certification
• Construction and Operating License (COL)
• Phase 2 Design and Certify advanced nuclear
  plant options
• Phase 3 Construct new advanced nuclear plants

24
NPI 2010 Business Case for New Nuclear Plants

• Outlook for nuclear power has improved
• Nuclear competitive at 1000/kW
• Capital costs appear too high
• 1600/kW for first of a kind
• 1200/kW for 4th of a series
• Three key barriers spent fuel, accident
  indemnification, NRC licensing process
• US Government help required

25
NP 2010 Business Case
Source Business Case for New Nuclear Power
Plants DoE NE
26
Energy Policy Act 2005

• Ask and you shall receive
• Nuclear Liability Increased and extended
• Loan Guarantees 80 of project cost for advanced
  nuclear energy facilities
• Standby Support to 250 million for licensing
  delays
• Environmental Tax Credits 1.8/kWh
• NPI 2010 50 Phases 1 2
• Gen IV International Forum and VHTR
• Nuclear Hydrogen Initiative
• Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiatives

27
Advanced Nuclear Reactors

• Qualify for Energy Policy Act benefits
• New but not too novel
• Licensable by 2008, deployable by 2010, in
  service by 2015
• Extensions of currently operating proven designs
• Light water reactors either pressurized or
  boiling
• Passive safety with gravity and natural
  circulation
• Higher fuel burnup with higher U235 enrichment
• Lower Capital Costs
• Quick construction

28
Westinghouse AP 1000

• Advanced Passive safety PWR design 1100 MW
• Based on AP 600, commercial in Japan
• NRC approved final Standard Design
  Certification Jan 06

29
General Electric ESBWR 1500

• Advanced BWR Based on 1350 MW ABWR commercial in
  Japan
• ESBWR Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor
• Passive safety natural circulation for normal
  operation
• Design Certification application to NRC Aug 05

30
AREVA Evolutionary Power Reactor

• European Power Reactor Framatom 1600 MW
  advanced pressurized water reactor
• Under Construction in Finland AREVA Siemens
• US EPR Evolutionary Power Reactor with Bechtel

31
NP 2010 Current Status

• Nuclear Industry consortia projects
• NuStart Energy 9 companies 58 capacity
• COL applications for 2 technologies
• Entergy Grand Gulf Miss GE - ESBWR .
• TVA Bellefonte AB Westinghouse - AP 1000
• UniStar Nuclear Constellation Energy and AREVA
• 1600 MW PWR Evolutionary Power Reactor EPR
• TVA Bellefonte AB, 2 GE ABWR 1371 MW
• Feasibility study, cost and schedule estimates
• 40 months construction 1611/kW
• Dominion Energy Early Site Permit for North Anna
• Duke Power intends COL application for 2 AP
  1000s

32
NP 2010 Assessment Yes

• It is time to start building nuclear power plants
  again
• Benefits in Energy Policy Act will attract
  project developers to design, construct and
  operate new nuclear power plants
• Expect at least six projects and two
  technologies, 8 GW capacity by 2020 or 8
  over 15 years
• Energy Policy Act benefits are limited to 6
  plants and 6 GW

33
NP 2010 Assessment But

• Six new nuclear plants with 8 GW only maintains
  nuclear share at 20 of electrical generation
• Continued growth depends on exceeding targets
• Capital costs and construction schedules during
  boom
• Operating performance capacity factor, O M
  costs, fuelling, safety, security
• Environmental benefits beyond status quo are not
  achieved maintaining nuclear share at 20
• Coal will remain the dominant fuel in the US
• No off foreign oil benefits
• Problems unresolved spent fuel, radioactive
  wastes and Plutonium

34
Future Potential

• Nuclear Energy Institute Vision 2020 is 50 GW
  by 2020. Achievable?
• DoE EIAs Annual Energy Outlook base case shows
  no nuclear expansion due to capital costs
• EIA side case using vendors estimates for
  capital costs shows 25 GW by 2025
• The Future of Nuclear Power by John Deutch and
  Ernest Moniz of MIT says 3X to 300 GW by 2050
• Tripling nuclear capacity is a challenging target
  but necessary to achieve benefits
• Current nuclear capacity will be shutdown by 2050

35
Nuclear Power Worldwide

• Current Capacity
• 441 reactors, 368 GW, 16 generation
• Europe Over 30 in OECD
• 75 in France and Lithuania
• 50 in Belgium, Slovakia, Sweden, Ukraine
• 25 in Switzerland, Germany,Hungary, Czech,
  Finland
• 20 in United Kingdom Spain
• Asia Nuclear is booming!
• Japan, China, South Korea, India, Pakistan

36
United Kingdom

• 15 reactors, 73 GW, 19
• Capacity declining
• First S/D MAGNOX, then Advanced Gas Reactors and
  then PWRs
• Renewables insufficient
• wind power limited, costly and not dispatchable
• Tony Blair Nov 2005
• reviewing energy strategy
• reopening nuclear option
• and controversy

The Economist
37
South Africa

• Only nuclear power in Africa
• Twin Framatome 1840MW
• Pebble Bed Modular Reactor development
• High temperature gas cooled graphite moderated
• Helium Brayton GT cycle
• Developed in Germany
• 15 MW AVR 22 years
• 300 MW commercial S/D
• South Africa now leading commercialization
• 165 MW module proposed
• Eco opposition vocal

Source Scientific American
38
Japans Nuclear Outlook

• Currently 55 reactors, 48 GW, 30
• 11 more under construction or planned for 2011 to
  meet Kyoto targets
• Nuclear is a strategic energy security priority
• Most new reactors ABWRs
• Fuel reprocessed for plutonium and uranium at
  Rokkasho Japan
• MOX plutonium/uranium fuel cycle
• Monju Fast breeder s/d in 1995 may reopen

39
Chinas Nuclear Outlook

• Currently 9 reactors, 6.6 GW
• 4 Framatome PWR,
• 2 AECL CANDU-6 PHWR
• 3 CNNC PWR
• Construction 2 Russian VVER PWRs
• Test Pebble Bed Reactor HTR-10
• Planned for 2006 - 9 reactors 9.5 GW
• Proposed by 2020 43 reactors, 46 GW
• Future to 300 GW
• Taiwan currently 6 reactors, 4.9 GW

40
Canada

• AECL CANDU Reactor
• Natural Uranium
• Heavy Water
• Tube Shell
• On-line fueling
• 18 CANDU, 12 GW, 15
• In recovery in Ontario
• 13 now operating
• 3 s/d, 2 to be rebuilt
• Bruce A rebuild 4.25 B
• Proposed 50 nuclear

41
South Koreas Nuclear Outlook

• 20 PWRs, 16.8 GW, 40
• 2 Framatome PWRs
• 4 AECL CANDU 6
• 6 CE PWR, 2 System 80
• 6 Korean Standard KNSP
• Construction or Ordered
• 8 PWRs, 9.8 GW by 2015
• 4 KNSP (System 80)
• 4 APR 1400 (Advanced)

Yonggwang KNSPs
Nuclear Power is a strategic priority
42
Indias Nuclear Outlook

• Currently 12 PHWR, 2 BWR, 3 GW, 3
• Construction 8 reactors , 3.1 GW by 2010
• 6 Indian PHWR, 2 Russian PWR (VVER-1000)
• Fast Breeder 500 MW, Plutonium/Thorium fuel
• Planned for 2010 2020
• 14 Indian PHWR, 3 FBR, 6 VVER-1000
• Potential by 2050, 250 GW, 100x !
• Did not sign nuclear non-proliferation treaty
• Local designs, natural fuels (Uranium Thorium)
• Recycled Plutonium and U233 from Thorium

43
Pakistans Nuclear Outlook

• India? Pakistan says Me too to nuclear energy
• 2 reactors
• 125 MW PHWR, 300 MW Chinese PWR
• Construction Twin 300 MW PRW
• Planned 2005 Energy Security Plan
• x 20 increase to 8.4 GW by 2030
• Did not sign nuclear non-proliferation treaty
• Pakistan has Uranium enrichment, Plutonium fuel
  reprocessing technology and the bomb

44
Pakistans Nuclear Outlook
A Q Khan Centrifuge U235 enrichment Pakistans
nuclear bomb
45
Uranium Resources

• Nuclear so much energy from so little fuel
• Lifetime electricity from a teacup of uranium
• Half US uranium is from old Russian bombs
• 226 tonnes weapons grade to 6684 tonnes reactor
  fuel
• Low uranium costs 12/lb U3O8 in 2004 but rising

U3O8 Yellowcake
46

• Known Recoverable Resources of Uranium
• Tonnes of World
• Australia 1,074,000 30
  
• Kazakhstan 622,000
  17
• Canada 439,000 12
• South Africa 298,000 8
• Namibia 213,000 6
• Brazil 143,000 4
• Russian Fed. 158,000 4
• USA 102,000 3
• Uzbekistan 93,000 3
• World total 3,537,000

47
Uranium Resources

• Price quadrupled in 2 years
• Uranium Reserves?
• Low cost
• Ultimate
• End of Uranium?
• Fissile U235? Yes
• (0.7 of natural uranium)
• Fertile U238 fissile Plutonium? No
• Fertile Thorium fissile U233? No

48
Plutonium Dream

• Seduction of unlimited nuclear fuel
• Plutonium from reprocessed spent fuel
• Plutonium from fast breeder reactors
• Fast breeders can make more fuel than they burn
  producing nuclear power
• Fast breeders use fast neutrons for fission and
  fertile capture
• U235 n fission products many n
• U238 n U239 Pu239 ß
• Fast breeders use highly enriched fuel, liquid
  metal coolant and no moderator

49
Plutonium Dream? Reality Check!

• Proliferation? Plutonium to weapons
• 6 kg Pu239 can make a Nagasaki bomb
• Reactor grade Plutonium can make bombs
• May fizzle but tested by US in 1962
• Plutonium stockpiles 450 tonnes, 43 in Japan
• Reprocessing spent fuel problematic
• discouraged by US Ford, Carter, Clinton
• Radioactive liquid wastes problem
• Repeated recycle concentrated Pu242
• Mixed Oxide reactor fuels problematic

50
Plutonium Dream? Reality Check!Fast Breeder
Reactors problematic

• More expensive to build
• More difficult to operate
• Sodium fires, low reliability, high costs
• US Fermi 1, Detroit 200MW S/D 1972
• British Dounreay 250 MW S/D 1994
• France SuperPhenix 1200 MW S/D 1998
• Japan Monju 300 MW S/D 1995
• Russian BN 600 operating 25 Years

51
Plutonium Dream? IFR

• Integral Fast Breeder Reactor (IFR) or Advanced
  Liquid Metal Reactor (ALMR)
• Fast reactor to fission all actinides
• On-site pyroprocessing of spent metal fuels
• On-site recycle of metal fuels (UPuZr)
• Utilization of all uranium, not just U235
• Destruction of long lived radioactive wastes (92
  actinides)
• No Plutonium stockpiles or transportation

Ref Scientific American, Dec 2005
52
Tested 1983 to 1994 using EBR II at Argonne West
National Lab, Idaho Falls Program terminated
in 1994
53
Generation IV Roadmap
The Evolution of Nuclear Power
Source Generation IV Roadmap NE DoE
54
Next Generation Nuclear ReactorsGeneration IV
International Forum

• 13 Countries set goals, developed Roadmap
• Goals lower cost, higher efficiency, better
  economics, passive safety, better resource
  utilization
• Six technologies including 3 fast breeders
• GFR -Gas Cooled Fast Reactor System
• LFR -Lead cooled Fast Reactor System
• MSR -Molten Salt Reactor System
• SFR -Sodium Cooled Fast Reactor System
• SCWR -Supercritical Water Cooled Reactor System
• VHTR Very High Temperature Reactor System

Back to the Future!
55
Generation IV US Priorities
56
Nuclear Hydrogen Priority
Nuclear Hydrogen Priority Why?

• Hydrogen offers Freedom
• Security Benefits, off oil vehicle fuel
• Environmental Benefits, CO2 reductions
• Nuclear electricity does not get US off oil
• Justification required for Next Generation
  Nuclear System Research
• Plutonium and fast breeders are non-starters
• Security Proliferation, terrorists, etc
• Costs FBR and recycling Plutonium are not
  economic
• Reality of hydrogen economy is not an issue.
• Nuclear hydrogen research is a means to an end

57
Electrolytic Hydrogen ?

• Electrolytic hydrogen well known
• Commercial on small scale
• Reasonable thermal efficiency 70
• 50 kWhe/kg of hydrogen 1 usg gasoline
• High operating costs for electricity
• CO2 emissions high with coal electricity
• No CO2 emissions with nuclear electricity
• Off peak power opportunity to lower cost
• Feasible but not currently economic

58
Thermochemical Hydrogen?

• Direct thermal splitting of water? 2000C
• Carbon based Thermochemical Hydrogen
• C 2H20 heat (165kJ_at_800c) CO2 2H2
• Steam methane reforming, coal gasification,
  Partial oxidation, water gas shift, etc
• Well known commercial workhorse
• Heat from carbon burning increases CO2
• Other cycles possible eg. CO2 Acceptor
• Nuclear heat possible from VHTR - 850C
• But nuclear carbon cycles are unacceptable!
• Black Hydrogen

59
CO2 from Hydrogen Production
Kg Carbon Dioxide Kg Hydrogen
SMR Nuclear
SMR Carbon
Electrolysis Coal
Nuclear
Gasoline
Gasification
60
Nuclear Thermochemical HydrogenHydrogen via
Sulfur Iodine Cycle
Source DoE NE ORNL

• H2O heat in H2 out by indirect cycle
• High temp (450 C) HI decomposition
• Higher temp (850C) H2SO4 decomposition

61
VHTR for Electricity Hydrogen
GT-MHR
62
Nuclear Thermochemical HydrogenSulfur Iodine
Cycle Reality Check

• Incredible as a commercial process!
• Sulfuric and Hydroiodic acids at high temp?
• Aggressive corrosion, material problems
• Separation of chemical and nuclear cycles
• Half mile distance, heat exchanger loop
• Temperature stresses, heat losses
• Energy Efficiency does not justify risks
• Iodine Sulfur 48, Separations 30
• O2, H2O, SO2 HI, H2, H20, H2SO4

Costs?
Risks vs Returns
63
Future Outlook Nuclear Renaissance
Yes!

• Nuclear Energy continues to promise a better
  future
• Safe, secure energy without oil, gas and coal
• No CO2 emissions, low operating costs
• Advanced reactors cheaper safer, quicker
• Next generation fast reactors limitless fuel,
  radioactive waste (actinide) destruction
• Nuclear Renaissance can potentially
• add 25 nuclear capacity by 2050
• triple nuclear capacity by 2050

But!
64
A Reality Check!

• Nuclear Energy is not a panacea
• Many aspects have been oversold economics,
  hydrogen
• Problems unresolved
• spent fuel disposal, radioactive waste, Plutonium
  
• Nuclear Energy is a difficult technology
• Accidents will happen
• Nuclear weapons technology is available to
  terrorists and rogue states
• Nuclear Energy demands competence
• Civilized competent society
• Technical managerial financial competence
• Costs must be competitive
• Safe operation is paramount

65
Reality Exists!

• BNFL Report leaked June 2005
• Homer Simpson works at Sellafield reprocessing
  plant
• Leak undetected for 9 months, 83000 l, 20t
  Uranium, Plutonium

Source Irish Times June 2005
"After the last incident, I compared the
managerial skills of those who run Sellafield to
those of Homer Simpson. Well maybe I was doing
Homer a disservice on this occasion I would like
to know who are the Mr Burns and Smithers of this
operation