Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NUCLEARBY THE NUMBERS
HIGHEST GENERATION
EVER
92.3%
Capacity Factor
55.2%Emissions-Free
Electricity
19.3%
Electricity Generation
© 2019 Nuclear Energy Institute Inc.March 2019
© 2019 Nuclear Energy Institute Inc.,Nuclear By The Numbers all rights reserved.
No part of this report may be reproduced, transmitted or modified without written permissionof the Nuclear Energy Institute Inc.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
THE NUCLEAR ADVANTAGEU.S. Nuclear Power Plants ..................................................................................................................... 4Nuclear Energy Creates and Sustains Jobs ....................................................................................... 5Nuclear Energy = Clean Air .................................................................................................................... 62018 U.S. Emissions-Free Electricity Fuel Shares ............................................................................. 7CO2 Emissions Avoided by the U.S. Power Industry ....................................................................... 8
PERFORMANCE AND COSTU.S. Nuclear Electricity Generation ...................................................................................................... 9U.S. Nuclear Industrywide Capacity Factors ...................................................................................... 102018 U.S. Electricity Generation Fuel Shares .................................................................................... 112018 Industry Average Total Generating Costs ................................................................................ 12-13U.S. Nuclear Plant Costs ......................................................................................................................... 14 U.S. Nuclear Plant Capital Cost Trends ............................................................................................... 15U.S. Nuclear Plant Operations Costs ................................................................................................... 16U.S. Nuclear Plant Fuel Cost Trends .................................................................................................... 17
STATUS AND OUTLOOKPremature Closures and Announced Shutdowns ............................................................................ 18-19Plants Saved from Premature Closures .............................................................................................. 20Applications for Initial License Renewals ........................................................................................... 21Operating Reactors Around the World ................................................................................................ 22 Operating Reactors, by Supplier Country ........................................................................................... 23Reactors Under Construction In Each Country ................................................................................. 24International Nuclear Influence ............................................................................................................. 25
THE NUCLEAR ADVANTAGE
4
U.S. Nuclear Power Plants• 98 reactors across 59 sites• 99,355 megawatts-electric of baseload capacity• 807.1 billion kilowatt-hours in 2018• 92.3 percent capacity factor in 2018
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
THE NUCLEAR ADVANTAGE
5
SUPPORTS 475,000JOBS
Nuclear Energy Creates and Sustains Jobs
CONTRIBUTES $10 BILLION IN FEDERAL AND $2.2 BILLION IN STATE TAXES EACH YEAR
SAVES CONSUMERS AN AVERAGE OF
6%
ON ELECTRICITY BILLS
ADDS
$60 BILLIONTO THE COUNTRY’S
GDPSource: The Nuclear Industry’s Contribution to the US Economy, The Brattle Group, July 2015.
THE NUCLEAR ADVANTAGE
6
Nuclear Energy = Clean Air
AVOIDS
528 MILLIONMETRIC TONS OF
CARBON EMISSIONSEACH YEAR
PREVENTS286,516 SHORT TONSOF NOX EMISSIONS
PREVENTS 346,485SHORT TONS
OF SO2EMISSIONS
VALUED AT A SOCIAL COST
OF
$28.1BILLIONANNUALLY(in 2018 dollars)
Sources: Emissions avoided are calculated using regional and national fossil fuel emissions rates from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and
latest plant generation data from the U.S. Energy Information Agency. Updated: March 2019
The Nuclear Industry’s Contribution to the US Economy, The Brattle Group, July 2015.
THE NUCLEAR ADVANTAGE
7
2018 U.S. Emissions-Free Electricity Fuel Shares
55.2% NUCLEAR
20.3% HYDRO
18.8% WIND
4.6% SOLAR
1.1% GEOTHERMAL
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
THE NUCLEAR ADVANTAGE
8
CO2 Emissions Avoided by the U.S. Power IndustryMillion Metric Tons, 2018
NUCLEAR
HYDRO
WIND
SOLAR
GEOTHERMAL
Source: Emissions avoided are calculated using regional and national fossil fuel emissions rates from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and latest
plant generation data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
528.0
191.5
184.2
44.6
11.2
PERFORMANCE AND COST
9
U.S. Nuclear Electricity GenerationBillion Kilowatt-Hours
1980 1986 1992 1998 2004 2010 2016
807.11,000
800
600
400
200
0
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
2018
Last 6 Years807.1 in 2018
805.0 in 2017805.7 in 2016797.2 in 2015797.2 in 2014789.0 in 2013
PERFORMANCE AND COST
10
U.S. Nuclear Industrywide Capacity FactorsNuclear industry has had an average capacity factor of 90 percent over the last 20 years.
0
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Note: U.S. Energy Information Administration reports 92.7 percent for 2018. NEI’s calculation (92.3 percent) accurately accounts for Oyster Creek Generating Station’s closure in September 2018.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
92.3%
201820162012200820042000199619921988
Last 6 Years92.3% in 201892.2% in 201792.1% in 2016
92.2% in 201591.7% in 2014
89.9% in 2013
PERFORMANCE AND COST
11
2018 U.S. Electricity Generation Fuel Shares
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
19.3% NUCLEAR
35.1% NATURAL GAS
27.4% COAL
7.1% HYDRO
0.4% GEOTHERMAL
6.6% WIND
2.1% BIOMASS
& PETROLEUM
1.6% SOLAR
PERFORMANCE AND COST
12
Total generating cost is the sum of the fuel cost, capital cost and operations cost.
Source: Electric Utility Cost Group.
Updated: February 2019
2018 Industry Average Total Generating CostsDollars Per Megawatt-Hour
$6.14CAPITAL
$5.98 FUEL
$19.71 OPERATIONS
TOTAL GENERATING $31.83
PERFORMANCE AND COST
13
2018 Industry Average Total Generating CostsDollars Per Megawatt-Hour
Total generating cost is the sum of the fuel cost, capital cost and operations cost.
Source: Electric Utility Cost Group.
Updated: February 2019
$31.83
$42.01
$29.01
Industry Average
Single Unit Sites
Multiunit Sites
PERFORMANCE AND COST
14
Total generating cost is the sum of the fuel cost, capital cost and operations cost.
Source: Electric Utility Cost Group.
Updated: February 2019
YEAR FUEL CAPITAL OPERATIONS TOTAL GENERATING
2002 $6.07 $4.16 $19.72 $29.95
2004 $5.60 $5.99 $19.66 $31.25
2007 $5.44 $6.49 $20.22 $32.15
2010 $7.17 $9.71 $21.89 $38.76
2011 $7.53 $10.67 $23.21 $41.41
2012 $7.96 $11.48 $22.91 $42.36
2015 $7.28 $8.44 $22.09 $37.81
2016 $7.07 $7.05 $21.38 $35.50
2017 $6.59 $6.80 $20.92 $34.32
2018 $5.98 $6.14 $19.71 $31.83
2017-2018 Change -9.3% -9.7% -5.8% -7.2%
2012-2018 Change -25.0% -46.5% -14.0% -24.9%
U.S. Nuclear Plant CostsAverage total generating costs have decreased from $42.36 per megawatt-hour in 2012 peak to $31.83 per megawatt-hour in 2018, a reduction of 25 percent.
Dollars Per Megawatt-Hour In 2018 Dollars
PERFORMANCE AND COST
15
U.S. Nuclear Plant Capital Cost TrendsCapital expenditures decreased 9.7 percent in 2018 from 2017.
Note: Detailed 2018 cost breakdown will be available in June 2019.
Source: Electric Utility Cost Group.
Updated: March 2019
2006 2007 2009 2011 2013 20152008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2017 2018
$5B
SUSTAINING
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
REGULATORY
ENHANCEMENTS
INFRASTRUCTURE (NONPOWER BLOCK)
CAPITAL SPARES
10
8
6
4
2
0
9
7
5
3
1
Cos
ts ($
B, in
201
8 do
llars
)
PERFORMANCE AND COST
16
MATERIALS AND SERVICES
SUPPORT SERVICES
TRAININGWORK MANAGEMENT
U.S. Nuclear Plant Operations CostsOperations costs decreased 5.8% percent in 2018 from 2017.
Note: Detailed 2018 cost breakdown will be available in June 2019.
Source: Electric Utility Cost Group.
Updated: March 2019
2006 2007 2009 2011 2013 20152008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2017 2018
$16B
ENGINEERINGFUEL MANAGEMENT
LOSS PREVENTION
OPERATIONS
Cos
ts ($
B, in
201
8 do
llars
)
2
0
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
PERFORMANCE AND COST
17
U.S. Nuclear Plant Fuel Cost TrendsFuel costs decreased 9.3 percent in 2018 from 2017.
Source: Electric Utility Cost Group.
Updated: March 2019
2006 2007 2009 2011 2013 20152008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2017 2018
$4.8B
6
4
2
0
7
5
3
1
Cos
ts ($
B, in
201
8 do
llars
)
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
18
Premature Closures• 5,299 megawatts-electric of baseload capacity• 26.9 million metric tons of CO2 avoided• More than 4,500 jobs impacted
PLANT State MWe CLOSURE YEAR
FINAL YEAR GENERATED(billion kilowatt-
hours/year)
FINAL YEAR CO2 EMISSIONS AVOIDED
(million tons/year)
Crystal River 3 FL 860 2013 7.0 4.8
San Onofre 2 & 3 CA 2,150 2013 18.1 8.0
Kewaunee WI 566 2013 4.5 4.4
Vermont Yankee VT 620 2014 4.8 2.4
Fort Calhoun NE 478 2016 3.5 3.4
Oyster Creek NJ 625 2018 5.4 4.0
Source: Emissions avoided are calculated using regional and national fossil fuel emissions rates from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and latest plant generation data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
19
Announced Shutdowns• 11,126 megawatts-electric of baseload capacity• 53.8 million metric tons of CO2 avoided in 2018• 89.6 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity generated in 2018• More than 8,200 direct jobs impacted
PLANT State MWe CLOSURE YEAR
ELECTRICITY GENERATED
IN 2018(billion kilowatt-
hours/year)
CO2 EMISSIONS AVOIDED IN 2018
(million tons/year)
Crystal River 3 FL 860 2013 7.0 4.8
San Onofre 2 & 3 CA 2,150 2013 18.1 8.0
Kewaunee WI 566 2013 4.5 3.8
Vermont Yankee VT 620 2014 5.1 2.4
Fort Calhoun NE 478 2016 3.4 3.3
Oyster Creek NJ 610 2018 5.4 4.0
Source: Emissions avoided are calculated using regional and national fossil fuel emissions rates from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and latest plant generation data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
Three Mile Island 1 PA 803 2019 7.3 5.0
Pilgrim MA 679 2019 4.4 2.0
Davis-Besse OH 894 2020 7.4 5.1
Duane Arnold IA 601 2020 4.9 4.6
Indian Point 2 & 3 NY 2,057 2020-2021 16.3 7.6
Beaver Valley 1 & 2 PA 1,808 2021 14.7 10.1
Perry OH 1,240 2021 10.9 7.5
Palisades MI 804 2022 5.5 4.6
Diablo Canyon 1 & 2 CA 2,240 2024-2025 18.2 7.3
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
20
Plants Saved from Premature Closure• 11.816 megawatts-electric of baseload capacity• 58.3 million metric tons of CO2 avoided• More than the electricity generated by all U.S. utility solar in 2018• More than 7,400 direct jobs saved
Source: Emissions avoided are calculated using regional and national fossil fuel emissions rates from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and latest plant generation data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
Updated: March 2019
PLANT State MWe PROJECTED CLOSURE
YEAR
ELECTRICITY GENERATED
IN 2018 (billion kilowatt-
hours/year)
CO2 EMISSIONS AVOIDED IN 2018
(million tons/year)
Fitzpatrick NY 851 2017 6.5 3.1
Ginna NY 582 2017 4.7 2.2
Clinton IL 1,060 2017 8.3 8.1
Nine Mile Point 1 & 2 NY 1,916 2017-2018 15.4 7.2
Quad Cities 1 & 2 IL 1,819 2018 15.5 10.6
Hope Creek NJ 1,172 ~2020 9.5 6.6
Millstone 2 & 3 CT 2,088 ~2020 16.9 7.6
Salem 1 & 2 NJ 2,328 ~2020-2021 18.9 13.0
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
21
Applications for Initial License RenewalExtending plant life from 40 to 60 years
94 UNITS GRANTED
3 UNITS EXPECTED TO APPLY
Note: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved initial license renewal applications for 94 reactors. Four reactors, Fort Calhoun, Kewaunee, Oyster Creek and Vermont Yankee, have since ceased operations prematurely.
Source: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Updated: March 2019
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
22
BELGIUM
GERMANY
SPAIN
CZECH REPUBLIC
PAKISTAN
SWITZERLAND
OTHERS
UKRAINE
SWEDEN
Operating Reactors Around the World
FRANCE
CHINA
U.S.
CANADA
U.K.
RUSSIA
INDIA
SOUTH KOREA
JAPAN
7
7
7
6
5
5
29
15
8
58
46
98
19
15
35
22
24
39
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency-Power Reactor Information System.
Updated: March 2019
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
23
Operating Reactors, by Supplier Country
FRANCE
RUSSIA
CZECH REPUBLIC
BELGIUM
SWEDEN
U.S.
Sources: American Nuclear Society, International Atomic Energy Agency-Power Reactor Information System.
Updated: October 2018
SOUTH KOREA
U.K.
CANADA
INDIA
CHINA
JAPAN
GERMANY
68
68
137
15
15
13
10
4
6
31
15
31
38
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
24
Reactors Under Construction In Each Country
INDIA
RUSSIA
SLOVAKIA
FINLAND
UKRAINE
TURKEY
U.K.
ARGENTINA
CHINA
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency-Power Reactor Information System.
Updated: March 2019
BELARUS
JAPAN
BRAZIL
UAE
BANGLADESH
U.S.
SOUTH KOREA
PAKISTAN
FRANCE
7
6
11
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
2
5
STATUS AND OUTLOOK
25
International Nuclear InfluenceNuclear plants under construction and constructed since 1997, domestically and internationally.
RUSSIA
JAPANCONSTRUCTED DOMESTICALLY
CONSTRUCTED INTERNATIONALLY
CHINA
Source: International Atomic Energy Agency-Power Reactor Information System.
Updated: February 2019
INDIA
SOUTH KOREA
U.S.
39
15
16
3
4
15
6
24
4
8
1201 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20004nei.org