Overview of nuclear power in the US

Transcription

1 Overview of nuclear power in the US Tom Harrison, Platts Chief editor, Nuclear August 2010

2 Here and now in the US operating power reactors -- earliest reactors still operating began commercial operation in last reactor to begin commercial operation was in 1996 (Watts Bar-1) -- total nuclear generating capacity of 107,480 gross MW -- operating reactors in 31 states -- units supply about 20% of US electricity generation

3 License renewal units operating licenses have been renewed for 20 years past their initial 40-year NRC licenses -- the first extended licenses will expire in applications to renew licenses for 20 more units are under NRC review -- operators of about 20 additional reactors have told NRC they plan to submit renewal applications between August 2010 and April there are only a handful of units whose operators have not announced tentative plans to seek renewal -- there is some talk about seeking a second renewal past 60 years operation

4 Plant performance -- Refueling outages -- Capacity factors -- Annual generation

5 Refueling outage duration Year Spring Fall Average days/year

6 US nuclear fleet capacity factors Year Average gross CF % % % % % % % % % % %

7 Nuclear generation -- According to Platts data, US nuclear units generated a record 843 million gross MWh in 2007 (includes Browns Ferry-1, which restarted on May 22, 2007 after a 22-year shutdown) and returned it to commercial operation on August 1, 2007) -- Second-highest amount was 842 million MWh in Third-highest was about 834 million MWh in 2009

8 Potential new reactors -- Since July 2007, the NRC has received 18 applications for construction permit-operating licenses, or COLs, for a total of 28 new reactors -- Only 13 applications, however, representing 22 new reactors, are under review. -- Review of four applications were suspended by request of the applicants, and one by Exelon -- was withdrawn so it could file an application for an early site permit, or ESP. -- If 22 new reactors are built, that would total about 28,000 MW of generating capacity.

9 NRC licensing process -- design certification -- early site permit (possibly with a limited work authorization) -- combined construction permit-operating license

10 The idea was -- Vendors would develop designs and get them certified by NRC -- At the same time, utilities or project developers would identify sites and obtain early site permits and bank them for future use. -- Developers would then pick a certified design and submit an application for a construction permit-operating license

11 The reality is -- Not everyone sought an ESP and designs are undergoing certification review at the same time as COL applications are being reviewed.

12 New reactors planned Under the current COL applications, there are plans for: Westinghouse AP1000s (1,100 MW each) -- three Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Advanced Pressurized Water Reactors, or APWRs (1,700 MW each) -- two Toshiba Advanced Boiling Water Reactors, or ABWRs (1,350 MW each) -- two Areva US-EPRs (1,600-MW-class) -- one GE Hitachi Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor, or ESBWR (1,520 MW each) NOTE: The capacity ratings are not written in stone; Dominion plans to build an APWR at North Anna in Virginia but its environmental assessment allows only a 1,500-MW-class reactor, not the 1,700-MW nameplate model

13 Out in front -- Only one project -- Vogtle in Georgia -- has an early site permit; a limited work authorization; an engineering, procurement and construction contract; and a conditional loan guarantee from the federal government

14 Design certification -- Four designs certified, but: -- No one plans to build Westinghouse s System 80+ or Advanced Passive 600 (AP600) -- and the other two design certifications GE s Advanced Boiling Water Reactor and Westinghouse s AP are being amended -- Three designs are under review: -- GE Hitachi s ESBWR (Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor) -- Areva s US-EPR (Evolutionary Power Reactor) -- Mitsubishi Heavy Industries US-APWR (Advanced Pressurized Water Reactor) -- More applications for certification on the way: Korea Electric Power Corp. plans to submit a design certification application for its APR1400 in 2012

15 Design certification challenges -- Areva EPR instrumentation and control architecture -- Westinghouse AP1000 shield building

16 Early site permits, or ESPs An ESP represents NRC staff's finding that a site is suitable for a nuclear power reactor. The permit is valid for 10 to 20 years from the date of issuance and can be renewed for an additional 10 to 20 years

17 Early site permits issued Site Applicant Date ESP issued Clinton Exelon March 2007 Grand Gulf Entergy April 2007 North Anna Dominion November 2007 Vogtle Southern Nuclear August 2009

18 ESP applications pending Site Applicant Date submitted Victoria County, Texas New Jersey, adjacent to the Hope Creek/Salem site Exelon March 2010 PSEG May 2010 Note: Exelon originally submitted a COL for Victoria site.

19 Combined construction permit-operating license, or COL -- New reactors used to be licensed under a twostep process under Part 50 of Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations -- The process required: -- a construction permit -- an operating license -- New process (under 10 CFR Part 52): one-step for a COL

20 Engineering, procurement and construction contracts -- Georgia Power with Westinghouse/Shaw for Vogtle -- South Carolina Electric & Gas/Santee Cooper with Westinghouse/Shaw for Summer -- Progress Energy with Westinghouse/Shaw subsidiary Stone & Webster for the Levy site in Florida -- Toshiba America Nuclear Energy with STP Nuclear for the South Texas Project

21 Federal loan guarantees -- Department of Energy has $18.5 billion in loan guarantee authority for nuclear power projects. -- Only offer so far has been for the Vogtle project, totaling $8.3 billion for three partners. -- President Barack Obama's administration is seeking an additional $35.5 billion in nuclear loan guarantee authority in the administration's budget request for fiscal 2011, which begins October 1, putting the nuclear loan guarantee total at $54 billion.

22 Back to Vogtle -- units 3 and 4 would be built in Georgia at existing plant site -- two AP1000s -- COL submittal in March units would come online in 2016 and $14 billion project -- Three partners in the Vogtle project have accepted $8.3 billion in nuclear loan guarantees from DOE (the first nuclear guarantees offered) -- Georgia Power, $3.4 billion -- Oglethorpe Power, $3.1 billion -- Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, $1.8 billion

23 Next up for loan guarantees -- South Texas Project -- Calvert Cliffs-3 -- Summer-2 and -3

24 South Texas Project-3 and in Texas at existing plant site -- two ABWRs -- COL application received in September estimated start date for operation was 2016 and $13 billion cost $10 billion in overnight costs plus $3 billion in financing -- NRG reducing spending

25 Calvert Cliffs-3 -- in Maryland at existing plant site -- one US-EPR -- COL application filed in two parts: environmental report in June 2007, safety analysis report in March original estimated date to start operation was 2015 but that depended on having a loan guarantee in November cost of more than $10 billion

26 Summer-2 and at existing plant site in South Carolina -- two AP1000s -- COL submittal in March first unit would come online by April 2016 and the second by January SCE&G s 55% portion of the project estimated at $6.875 billion; Santee Cooper s 45% share an estimated $5.625 billion, with the total cost at $12.5 billion.

27 Remaining COL applicants

28 Bellefonte-3 and at site of two unfinished Tennessee Valley Authority nuclear units (Bellefonte-1 and -2) in Alabama -- two Westinghouse AP1000s -- COL application submitted October to come online in timeframe -- cost TBD Note: TVA is looking at completing Bellefonte-1 and/or -2 in a separate project

29 North Anna-3 -- in Virginia at existing Dominion plant site -- one US-APWR -- COL submittal in November would come online in Dominion to decide by end of 2010 whether to go ahead on the project -- No cost estimates given

30 William States Lee III -- in South Carolina at a site where Duke planned to build three units, but abandoned the project in two AP1000s -- COL submittal in December cost of $11 billion excluding financing -- originally to come online in 2018 and 2019, but Duke has said it is now looking at 2021 for the first unit and 2023 for the second -- later start-up date expected to reduce costs for customers, give more time to find partners, and to get federal legislation passed that would benefit non-carbon-emitting generation and state legislation in North Carolina that would allow nuclear cost recovery outside of a rate case

31 Shearon Harris-2 and at existing plant site in North Carolina -- two AP1000s -- COL submittal in February would come online in 2018 or later -- no cost estimate available

32 Levy-1 and in Florida at greenfield site (but about 10 miles away from the existing Crystal River-3 nuclear unit) -- two AP1000s -- COL submittal in July Originally 2016 and 2017; in 2010; in May 2009, Progress said the online dates for each unit would be delayed by at least 20 months due to NRC not allowing it to do excavation and foundation preparation work until a COL was issued. In May 2010, Progress said that had changed and the first unit would come online in 2021 and the second about 18 months later. -- Progress cited several factors for the change, including a need to reduce capital spending and a change in the date it expected to be issued a COL, which originally was late 2011 or early 2012 but was now expected to be late updated the cost estimate to $17.2 billion to $22.5 billion (up from a flat $17.2 billion previously); that includes land, the reactors, transmission lines, fuel and financing

33 Fermi-3 -- at existing plant site in Michigan -- one ESBWR -- COL submittal in September plans to decide in 2012 whether to actually build -- cost estimated at $8- to $10-billion

34 Comanche Peak-3 and at existing plant site in Texas -- two US-APWRs -- COL submittal in September would come online no cost estimate

35 Bell Bend -- in Pennsylvania, adjacent to the Susquehanna plant site -- one US-EPR -- COL submittal in October come online in no cost given

36 Turkey Point-6 and at existing plant site in Florida (Turkey Point-3 and -4 are the other nuclear units) -- two AP1000s -- COL submittal in June estimated cost of $12- to $18-billion -- Originally, first unit would begin commercial operation in 2018 and second in 2020, but FP&L said those dates were flexible. -- In early 2010, FP&L slowed work on development of the units after state regulators gave it a smaller-than-requested rate increase. -- And in May 2010, FP&L said it would push back those dates to 2022 and 2023, citing lower projected electricity demand, decline in natural gas prices, and delays in units being built in Finland and France that are behind schedule and over budget. -- Also cited the design certification process for the AP delay seen likely to increase project cost

37 Possible operating dates Date Unit Calvert Cliffs STP-3 -- Summer-2 -- Vogtle STP-4 -- Vogtle North Anna-3 -- Harris-2 and Bell Bend Summer Lee-1 -- Levy Levy-2 -- Turkey Point Lee-2 -- Turkey Point-7 -- Bellefonte-3 and -4 between 2017 and Comanche Peak-3 and -4 between 2015 and 2020

38 Small modular reactors -- lots of interest in the industry -- several models, including Babcock & Wilcox, Hyperion Power Generation, NuScale and Westinghouse -- no licensing submittals yet and no utility sponsors

39 Issues impacting construction plans -- whether the current fleet continues to operate safely and efficiently -- whether regulatory approvals are secured -- whether developers get financing and partners for their projects -- whether the first new units are constructed on time and on budget -- whether there is a need for additional generating capacity -- whether there is continued support from federal and state governments (such as federal loan guarantees and states allowing cost recovery during construction) -- whether waste management issues are resolved (either through a repository or reprocessing and recycling)

40 If no new units are built nuclear generating capacity is still likely to increase via: -- Uprates -- Watts Bar-2

41 Uprates -- From 1977 through 2009, NRC approved applications for uprates totaling 5,726 MW -- of that total, about 3,760 MW in uprates were approved from From , NRC expects requests for uprates totaling 2,400 MW

42 Watts Bar-2 completion -- Tennessee Valley Authority deferred construction on the unit in 1985 as it scaled back its nuclear program -- the Westinghouse 1,180-MW PWR was about 60% complete at the time -- TVA s board decided in August 2007 to finish the unit at a cost of $2.49 billion and start it up in April Unlike TVA's five-year restart effort for Browns Ferry-1, much of which was gutted and rebuilt, Watts Bar-2 is largely finished but requires upgrading obsolete equipment, replacing cables, valves, seals and gaskets, and refurbishing components.

43 Browns Ferry-1 experience -- unit had been shut since TVA restarted Browns Ferry-1 on May 22, 2007 on schedule and returned it to commercial operation on August 1, total cost including allowance for funds used during construction was about $2.1 billion -- total project cost overrun was $90 million, which TVA attributed to a greater-than-planned scope of work related to uprating the unit -- TVA: "one of the most extensive recovery efforts in the nuclear industry for an operating plant." -- Nuclear Energy Institute: the beginning of nuclear energy's rejuvenation" in the US.