Nuclear Cogeneration

International Workshop on Acceleration and Applications of Heavy Ions

26 February - 10 March 2012Heavy Ion Laboratory, Warsaw, Poland

Ludwik PieńkowskiHeavy Ion Laboratory University of Warsaw

Why the need to keep and to expand nuclear energy?

� Nuclear energy plays an important role today in the world energy production� There are more than 400 commercial nuclear power reactors

� with ≈ 370 GWe of total power and

� they provide about 15% of the world's electricity

� Nuclear power is� cost competitive with other forms of electricity generation

� CO2 emission free technology

� It would be very costly to replace nuclear power by other technologies in a near future� The expansion of nuclear power is necessary in order

to keep alive the nuclear energy market

The key challenges of nuclear energy

� High capital costs for building the new plants� Currently only large reactors are available

� Spent fuel, high-level nuclear waste� There are currently no permanent solutions

� The main subject of public debate

� Limited resources of uranium� Challenge, but not for current fleet

� Nuclear safety� Absolute priority

� Risk of nuclear proliferation� Nuclear energy expansion will raise concerns

primary barriers to growth

Short term actions to keep and expand nuclear energy

� Extend the useful life of existing nuclear power plants� Public support for new nuclear power plant construction� R&D, new technologies

� There are no simple solutions� Two times smaller plant is not two times less expensive� Revolutionary technologies, like nuclear fusion, are long-term visions

� Small and medium size reactors (SMR)� capital cost reduction� at least partial response in other challenging fields

� Fast reactors � To Close nuclear fuel cycle� Overcome limiting uranium resources and nuclear spent fuel problem

� Fuel cycle technologies including spent fuel managing

� R&D, new market� Nuclear cogeneration

� Useful thermal energy and electrical energy simultaneous production � Nuclear process heat for industry

Economy of scale

� More capacity than needed

� Very costly to purchase

� Very costly to operate and maintain

� Too big for the garage

Example: the family car

A bus offers the lowest transportation cost per person

But…

Daniel IngersollOak Ridge National Laboratoryingersolldt@ornl.gov

UC-Berkeley - Nov 9, 2009

SMR Economic Benefits

� Total project cost

� Smaller plants should be cheaper

� Improves financing options and lowers financing cost

� May be the driving consideration in some circumstances

� Cost of electricity

� Economy-of-scale (EOS) works against smaller plants but can be mitigated by other economic factors

�Accelerated learning, shared infrastructure, design simplification, factory replication

� Investment risk

� Maximum cash outlay is lower and more predictable

� Maximum cash outlay can be lower even for the same generating capacity

SMRs - cash flow

LR Construction

-4000

-3000

-2000

-1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24

Years From Start of Construction

Rev

enue

(U

S$

mill

ion)

SMR Construction

SMR1SMR2

SMR3SMR4

Max Cash Outlay = $2.7B

Max Cash Outlay = $1.4B

Based on simplified model

Comparison of 1 x 1340 MWe PlantVersus 4 x 335 MWe Plant

M.D. Carelli et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 52 (2010) 403–414

Factors offsetting the economy of scale penalty

M.D. Carelli et al. / Progress in Nuclear Energy 52 (2010) 403–414

Plant Capacity (MWe)

Plant Design

Learning

Multiple Units

Build Schedule& Unit Timing

Rel

ativ

e S

MR

Ove

rnig

ht C

ost

0 300 600 900 1200 1500

1.00

13404 x 335

Economy of Scale

1.70

1.34

1.46

1.26

1.05

Economy of Scale: Assumes SMR is scaled version of large plant

Multiple Units: Cost savings for multiple units at same site

Learning: Cost savings for additional units built in series

Build Schedule: Reduced interest during shorter construction time

Unit Timing: Cost savings from better fit of new capacity to demand growth

Plant Design: Cost savings from design simplifications

SMR safety benefit - decay heat

� Decay heat is generated even if fission chain reaction is stopped

� This was the source of problems in Fukushima

� Is it possible to build a reactor that is safe when you turn off?

� Yes, but this required evacuation of the heat by natural processes

Heat produced by decay of radioactive nuclei

• Reactor power is proportional to the volume, to R 3

• Reactor surface is proportional to R 2

• Larger reactor is cheaper (scale effect)

• Smaller reactor is safer

JAEA starts test series to demonstrate safety characteristics of HTGR under loss of core cooling transients

Dec. 22 , 2010

First test of the loss of core flow tests has been finished

JAEA has started the test series to demonstrate safety characteristics of high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR) using HTTR. The core flow rate of the HTTR stopped to decrease core cooling capacity remarkably by stopping all primary gas circulator under 30% of reactor power (9MW) on December 21, 2010. The reactor power decrease rapidly without abnormal fuel temperature rise and the reactor was kept steady state. The test is called “loss of core flow test”. The test was the first test of the test series. (…) The loss of core cooling tests is the first test in the world.

High Temperature Reactor (HTR)

� High temperature � HTR are the only reactors that can produce in the short term

high temperature heat (750oC) required by industrial processes

� Flexibility� Cogeneration of electricity and process heat

� Modular concept

� Sustainability� Opportunity for burning uranium, plutonium, thorium and minor

actinides� Huge resources, limited waste

� Passive safety concept� Natural phenomena keep the reactor in safe conditions

including in emergency situations

� Fully ceramic core� No physical possibility to melt the core

ANTARES AREVA design

UC-Berkeley - Nov 9, 2009

SMR Applications

� Electricity generation

� Smaller utilities with low demand growth

� Regions/countries with small grid capacity

� Installations requiring independent power

� Non-baseload possibilities

� Non-electrical power needs

� Potable water production (desalinations

� Advanced oil recovery for tar sands and oil shale

� Hydrogen production

� Advanced energy conversion such as coal-to-liquids conversion or synfuels

� District heating

Energy market overviewUS case

http://nuclear.gov/pdfFiles/NuclearEnergy_Roadmap_Final.pdf

45% of allEnergyServices

„nuclear” onlyindirectly, electricity

Process heat for industry today, space for nuclear cogenerationUS case

America's Energy Future: Technology and Transformation (2009)http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12091.html

1000 Trilion Btu ≈ 24 mln tons of oil

� electricity and steam production consume ~10% of oil

� HTR and nuclear cogeneration to improve productivity

Petrochemical industry → feed, cogeneration (electricity and steam), products

NGNP Project Technology Development Roadmaps:Techni cal Path Forward for 750–800°C Reactor Outlet Temper atureINL/EXT-09-16598, August 2009, http://nextgenerationnuclearplant.com/

Nuclear cogeneration; reference plant design

http://www.ne.doe.gov/newsroom/2008PRs/ProcessHeatA pplication_100308/OwnersOperators_DanKeuter.pdf

1 MMBtu ≈ 28 m3

NYMEX Natural Gas Prices 5 Years

(16.5 MPa, 540 oC)(16.5 MPa, 540 oC)

REACTORVESSEL

INTERMEDIATE HEAT EXCHANGER (IHX)

MODULE FUELSTORAGE AREA

REACTOR CAVITYCOOLING SYSTEM(RCCS) TANKS

HEAT RECOVERYSTEAM GENERATOR(HRSG)

GENERATOR

L.P. TURBINE

CONDENSERH.P./I.P. TURBINE

COMPRESSOR

GAS TURBINE

MAINTRANSFORMER

RCCS HEADERSAND STANDPIPES

FUEL TRANSFERTUNNEL

SECONDARY GASISOLATION VALVES (TYPICAL)

SECONDARYGAS BYPASS

CONDENSERCOOLING WATER

Japan: HTTR test reactor, 30MWth, in operation since

1998

Korea: NHDD project

China: HTR-10, test reactor, 10MWth, in operation since

2000China: HTR-PM, industrial

prototype, 2x250 MWth, commissioning 2013

USA: NGNP, industrial prototype for CHP and hydroge n production

Japan: GTTR 300, 600 MWth

France: ANTARES programme for a CHP

system, 600 MWth

Russia: GT-MHR project

South Africa: PBMR400 MWth,

Status of HTR development in the world

2021-2025

2015

R&DVery High Temperature Reactor

U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A.

JapanJapanJapanJapan

SwitzerlandSwitzerlandSwitzerlandSwitzerland

United United KingdomKingdom

FranceFranceFranceFrance

SouthSouthKoreaKorea

SouthSouthAfricaAfrica

EuratomEuratomcountriescountries

ChinaChina

CanadaCanada

VHTR Steering Committee

HTR programme in USNext Generation Nuclear Plant

http://www.ngnpalliance.org/

15 February 2012

AREVA modular reactor selected for NGNP development

Present European strategy for nuclear development

� Light Water Reactors (LWR)

� Currently available technology for

industrial applications

� LWR providers and users identify the main development streams

� Fast systems with closed fuel cycles

� Long term development to give the

response on limited uranium resources

and spent fuel reprocessing demand

� European project led by France. The prototype – Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor

(SFR) – is expected around 2020

� High Temperature Reactors (HTR) for process heat, electricity and hydrogen production

� Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-Plan), issued by the European Commission in 2007: � Europe needs to act now, together, to

deliver sustainable, secure and competitive energy

� European Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform (SNE-TP) recognized HTR as one of the major R&D pillars

http://www.snetp.eu

European experience in HTR technology

� Europe built HTR up to the industrial prototype scale

� Europe developed the technology of components for industrial process heat applications

THTR (FRG)1986 - 1989

AVR (FRG)1967 - 1988

DRAGON (U.K.)1963 - 76

EXPERIMENTAL REACTORS DEMONSTRATION OFBASIC HTR TECHNOLOGY

MODULAR CONCEPT

10 MW mock-up of a He-He

heat exchanger

10 MW steam CH 4reformer mock-up for nuclear application

http://europairs.eu

European programme launched in September 2009

Main task:

� EUROPAIRS should aim at initiating an international consensus on the conditions for industrial emergence of nuclear cogeneration

Reactor

HTR

cogeneration

electricity and

process heat

Industrial

Complex

HeatT=750oC

electricity

steam

Additional task:

� R&D strategy

R&Dhydrogen production,

new technologies

HeatT ≥ 750oC

EUROPAIRS partnership including observers

http://www.snetp.eu/

Demonstrator project schedule and cost

Y1 Y2 Y3 Y4 Y5 Y6 Y7 Y8 Y9 Y10 Y11 Y12REACTORR&D 311 12 18 27 69 91 68 16 8 2Conceptual design 77 16 27 33Preliminary design 181 91 91Final design 197 98 98Construction 1177 85 162 315 308 308Startup and testing 346 154 192Total reactor 2289 28 45 60 160 181 167 199 170 317 308 462 192

Additional cost for advanced larger reactor

460 4 5 6 20 18 17 170 150 70

APPLICATIONSR&D 170 10 10 20 25 30 30 25 20Conceptual design 45 15 15 15Preliminary design 60 60Final design 60 60Construction 650 100 150 200 200Startup and testing 50 50Total applications 1035 10 10 35 40 45 90 85 120 150 200 200 50

Total 3324 38 55 95 200 226 257 284 290 467 508 662 242

Preparatory phase, 5 years ~ 600 M€Impulse from technology developers

Construction phase, 7 years ~ 2700 M€Industrial process heat user leadership

Continuous cooperation between technology developers and ind ustrial heat users

Thermal power of the demonstrator: 250 MWOperating temperature up to 800°C

To alleviate European public effort, progressive involvement of �Public Private Partnership�International Cooperation

Vision of the nuclear – coal synergy programme in Poland

� Programme constrains:� Support to nuclear

energy project in Poland

� First European HTR industrial scale demonstration available around 2020 - 2025

� The basis of the programme� European experience in

HTR technology

� Coal resources and chemical industry needs in Poland and in Europe

What is important to start HTR European demonstration project in Poland?

� Intentions at the national level

�Energy Policy of Poland until 2030

� Preparatory programme

� Decision to host the programme

R&D long-term vision

Chemical products

Summary

� A breakthrough of HTR in the energy market requires a large scale demonstration of the industrial feasibility of the coupling of such a nuclear reactor with process heat applications.� This is possible in a period of time of 10 - 15 years

� Europe has the technological potential to do it

� European industry needs CO2 free and competitive process heat that HTR can provide

�Poland would benefit from this technology for coal processing.

� The first installation requires large R&D and combined licensing for a nuclear reactor and an industrial plant

� In order to minimize development risks, large international coope-ration with other HTR projects in the world should be looked for.