View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Overview of High Temperature Gas-Cooled
Reactors Technology
and the Impact on Infrastructure
Requirements
Frederik Reitsma Gas-Cooled Reactors Technology
Nuclear Power Technology Development Section
Division of Nuclear Power | Department of Nuclear Energy
INPRO Dialogue Forum: 26 – 29 August 2014
1 26-29 August 2014 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Contents
• Overview of HTGR
• A reminder of the scope of Infrastructure in the INPRO methodology
• Comments on Infrastructure Needs for HTGRs
– What may be different … if anything
26-29 August 2014 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8 2
International Atomic Energy Agency
HTGR / LWR COMPARISON Item HTGR LWR
Moderator Graphite Water
Coolant Helium Water
Avg coolant exit temp. 750° - 1000 °C 310°C
Structural material Graphite Steel
Fuel clad Graphite & silicon Zircaloy
Fuel UCO/ UO2 UO2
Fuel damage temperature >2000°C 1260°C
Power density, w/cc 6.5 58 - 105
Linear heat rate, kW/ft 1.6 19
Avg neutron energy, eV 0.22 0.17
Migration length, cms 57 6
26-29 August 2014 3 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Pebble type HTGRs
• Spherical graphite
fuel element with
coated particles
• Possibility of
continuous fuel
loading / shuffling
• Fuel loaded in
cavity to form a
pebble bed
26-29 August 2014 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8 4
1 mm
Pebble Bed Reactor (PBR)
International Atomic Energy Agency
Prismatic (block-type) HTGRs
26-29 August 2014 5 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Why HTGRs?
Significantly improved safety characteristics
No core meltdown or core damage
Can sustain full load rejection / station blackout conditions
No need for multiple layers / multiple trains of cooling capabilities
Simplified designs and few safety related systems
Higher efficiency than conventional nuclear plants
HTGR potential market considered today is small (but growing)
Smaller reactors lend themselves to distributed generation (advantages
relate to grid stability and transmission costs)
HTGRs offers high burnup (>80,000, up to 200,000 MWd/t proven)
Can contribute to the total energy market (cogeneration)
26-29 August 2014 6 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Inherent Safety Approach Ceramic fuel retains radioactive materials
up to ~2000˚C
Coated particles stable to beyond
maximum accident temperatures
Heat removed passively without
primary coolant
Fuel temperatures remain below design
limits during loss-of-cooling events
Centre Reflector Pebble Bed Side Reflector Core Barrel RPV RCCS Citadel
RadiationConduction
Conduction
Conduction
Convection
Radiation
Convection
Conduction
Radiation
Convection
Conduction
Convection
Radiation
Convection
Conduction
Radiation
26-29 August 2014 7 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Industrial Heat Requirements (why
HTGRs are promising)
HTGRs
SFRs
Today’s Power Plants
Tomorrow’s Fuel Recyclers
Tomorrow’s Industrial Energy
26-29 August 2014 8 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Infrastructure Needs of HTGRs
26-29 August 2014 9 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
• Not to be confused with only the engineering
/ site infrastructure and equipment needs..
– Water supply, power supply
– Access roads, site security
– Component manufacturing
– Quality assurance
…. but include a much wider consideration
International Atomic Energy Agency
INPRO: Infrastructure Needs of
HTGRs
26-29 August 2014 10 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
• Within the INPRO methodology, the term
infrastructure can be defined as the collection of
necessary capabilities of national institutions to
achieve long term sustainability of a nuclear power
programme in a given country.
– a reactor and related nuclear fuel cycle facilities are not
considered to be a part of a national infrastructure, albeit
that they influence the size of the necessary
infrastructure required
…. so the technology choice will only have an
indirect impact
International Atomic Energy Agency
Infrastructure Needs of HTGRs
Assessment relative to large LWRs ( “my own first thoughts”)
26-29 August 2014 11 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
# Requirement Modular HTGR
UR1 Legal and Institutional
infrastructure
Similar.
CR1.1 Legal (Legal framework /
Nuclear law)
Guidance from IAEA and other international
organizations is focussed on LWRs
CR1.2 Institutions (Licensing)
Mixed view:
Less experience of licensing in the world for HTGRs
Much simpler design
CR1.2
Institutions (Emergency
preparedness and
response)
Mixed views: Many designs claims no emergency
response plan needed since no need to evacuate the
public. May not be acceptable to regulator and public
CR1.2 Institutions (Waste
management)
Larger volumes Higher burnup and much lower heat
load; Currently no proven industrial reprocessing or
waste minimization processes (lot of research only);
Coated particle fuel an ideal form for final disposal
International Atomic Energy Agency
Infrastructure Needs of HTGRs
26-29 August 2014 12 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
# Requirement Modular HTGR
UR2 Industrial and economic
infrastructure
Mixed – Large reactor but less safety systems;
CR2.1
Finance Smaller capital expenditure, promised shorter
construction time with associated financial benefits
Currently higher cost per MWe produced
CR2.2 Size of nuclear facility Modular so added as needed in case of smaller grids
Need all the infrastructure (independent on the size of
NPP)
CR2.3 Siting Same needs; Dry cooling a possibility and thus
additional sites may be considered
CR2.4
Support Infrastructure Same needs; but suppliers of technology and
technical support is limited
CR2.5 Added value Depends – cost of electricity generation today higher
than large LWRs
Co-generation; process heat and remote applications
may make it more attractive; GEN-IV system
International Atomic Energy Agency
Infrastructure Needs of HTGRs
26-29 August 2014 13 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
# Requirement Modular HTGR
UR3 Political Support and
Public Acceptance
Similar
Mixed views:
Inherent safety characteristics – no emergency response
plan needed since no need to evacuate the public;
no core meltdown possible;
presence of graphite and miss-information on graphite
fires
positive reactivity coefficient for steam ingress
(depending on the design)
UR4 Human resources
Similar
Knowhow required irrespective of technology and plant
size
# of people on site during construction (smaller plant) and
operation is less
International Atomic Energy Agency
Thank you!
Frederik Reitsma
Gas-Cooled Reactors Technology
Nuclear Power Technology
Development Section
Email: F.Reitsma@iaea.org
14 26-29 August 2014 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Reactor footprints …
15
• The Vogtle 3 and 4 Nuclear power plant USA
- 2 units = 2220 MWe
26-29 August 2014 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
International Atomic Energy Agency
Reactor footprints …
16
• The HTR-PM - (Two-reactor unit) = 210MWe
26-29 August 2014 INPRO Dialogue Forum 8
Recommended