Nuclear Cogeneration: State of Play, Perspectives and Challenges

Transcription

1 Nuclear Cogeneration: State of Play, Perspectives and Challenges S. de Groot (NRG), on behalf of the Nuclear Cogeneration Working Group SNETP General Assembly Brussels, 14 September 2010

2 Outline Nuclear Cogeneration: Working Group Perspective Challenges New technology in a new market Meeting the challenges Conclusions

3 SNE-TP Vision: the 3 Pillars 1 Maintain safety and competitiveness of today s technologies Develop Gen IV Fast Reactors with closed cycle to enhance sustainability (U-Pu fuel cycle) 2 SNETP Vision, SRA and DS Reports 3 Enlarge the nuclear fission portfolio beyond electricity production (heat supply, synthetic fuels, H 2, petrochemical/ steelmaking/ paper/ cement industries, seawater desalination, etc.)

4 Nuclear Cogeneration Working Group Activities Represent and provide content to the alternative use of nuclear energy pillar in SNETP Focus on HTR as a short to medium term contribution to meeting European SET-plan goals Establish the Nuclear Cogeneration Industrial Initiative (NC2I) Provide link with relevant (international) activities, networks and projects Investigate cogeneration broader than just (V)HTR systems, guided by end user requirements and their (future) needs, and licensability (from EUROPAIRS) This presentation will focus on the developments of HTR coupled to industrial processes

5 NCWG composition Engineering companies Utilities R&D End users and vendors NCWG organisation has not yet been finalised: lack of time, and the approach depends strongly on Europairs conclusions and recommendations, which are now coming

6 Nuclear Cogeneration Potential in Europe Nuclear is the largest (GHG-free) electricity supplier in EU (31%) Electricity is only 20% of the EU energy market Nuclear Cogeneration: = Electricity + Process Heat from nuclear energy enhances efficiency, saves prime fossil fuel, cuts emissions, if (waste) heat is used unlocks a huge new market and GHG reduction opportunity Electricity generation shares in EU (2005) Energy consumption shares in EU (2005)

7 Potential key end users and uses Users: (Petro)chemical plants Refining plants Fertilizer producers Steel makers Hydrogen Suppliers Additional uses: De-salination (important) Coal to syngas production Electricity in remote areas Paper production CO 2 recycling (instead of storage) Aluminium production Oil sands and oil shale recovery Synfuel for transport opportunity Possibilities and potential for nuclear cogeneration deployment in industry are very large..

8 The Challenge of Nuclear Cogeneration Expanding the application of nuclear energy to cogeneration in conventional industry can not be achieved by systems currently available New Market Market Development Diversification High Risk Existing Market Market Penetration Technology Development Low Risk Existing New Ansoff Matrix Technology Technology Expansion opportunities by either developing new technology in an existing market, or adopt existing technology in a new market New technology in a new market (diversification) is generally considered (too) risky

9 The Challenge of Nuclear Cogeneration: Demonstration Risks percieved by industry: Licensing risks (can it be licensed, nuclear systems on/near an industrial site) Technological risks Public acceptance And (subsequently): financial risks (affordability) Additionally, industry normally outsources energy supply: they do not (and will not) built their energy supply units, but buy the energy from someone who does (utilities). Industry (end user and utilities) will not take the risks by itself, as long as the concept (feasibility, reliability and affordability) is not proven HTR has been developed up to market readiness, but: A demonstrator, showing (nuclear) industry convincingly that HTR systems connected to industrial processes is feasible is required.

10 The Challenge of Nuclear Cogeneration The Nuclear Cogeneration Working Group aims to meeting the challenge by making and keeping HTR technology as existing as possible, and by developing the new market effectively: Establish direct communication and information exchange with end users, for end user industry to learn about the nuclear options, and for the nuclear community to understand their boundary conditions and risks perceived link with EUROPAIRS Prepare for demonstration by setting up the Nuclear Cogeneration Industrial Initiative - NC2I Establish HTR as off-the-shelf technology (not very high temperatures) and ensure the European (V)HTR knowledge base is maintained and expanded on key R&D aspects by FP and national programs link with ARCHER Combine efforts and share risks by establishing international collaboration

11 Consortium Europairs targets an information exchange between potential industrial end users and the European HTR community Based on that identify the requirements for establishing nuclear cogeneration connection to industrial processes Observers: Applied: Withdrew:

12 Consortium Europairs progress and NCWG initiation meeting at the Chemelot (DSM-SABIC) industrial site, Geleen, The Netherlands In front of the gas-fired cogeneration unit

13 Industry Requirements (preliminary Overview) The three main requirements: Reliability, reliability & reliability i.e. no unexpected outages, and maximized availability Typical large industrial sites require 500 MW-1000 MW (th+el) Heat supply: Bulk moderate temperature heat supply by steam Very high temperatures by locally burning fossil fuel Cogeneration (electricity need) Flexibility (supply to (very) different processes) Licensable safety Affordable (stable prices) Available on the short to medium term (15 years)

14 Industry Requirements (preliminary Conclusion) Moderately high temperature systems that can provide steam ( ºC) are adequate for a large share of the heat market replace current fossil energy supply For very high temperature application, both nuclear unit and industrial process system require significant R&D There is an opportunity for in-between temperatures, but this requires further development of industrial processes. Modular, standardized: one system should fit most needs (flexibility) to reduce costs Redundancy (more systems at one site) for increased reliability/availability relatively small unit size ( MW) Cogeneration Electricity requirement Increased economy Added reliability/flexibility (switch to heat production) Short-medium term deployable ((licensing) experience should be available as much as possible)

15 kj) Very High Temperatures not required for significant market share Current end user energy usage can be met with modest gas temperature conditions (750 C 800 C) particularly in supply of steam and heat

16 Very High Temperatures not required for significant market share

17 Nuclear Cogeneration Industrial Initiative (NC2I) In line with EUROPAIRS (preliminary) conclusion, NC2I will most likely focus on demonstration of a moderate temperature, moderate size HTR connected to industrial processes, as a replacement of fossil fuel cogeneration supply Cogeneration steam cycle (heat supply by steam and electricity production) Based as much as possible on existing experience and know-how, which is possible The demonstrator can be and should be a first of a kind, to allow deployment. NC2I is developed by the nuclear cogeneration working group, HTR-TN and EUROPAIRS, targeting demonstration Via NC2I, the working group targets a large contribution to meeting SET-plan goals

18 Europe has the largest HTR experience Europe built HTR up to the industrial prototype scale DRAGON (U.K.) AVR (FRG) THTR (FRG) HTR-Modul Market ready Europe developed the technology of components for industrial process heat applications 10 MW mock-up of a He-He heat exchanger 10 MW steam CH 4 reformer mock-up for nuclear application

19 Maintain and expand nuclear cogeneration EU competence After the successful European HTR R&D framework programs (PUMA and RAPHAEL last in series), parallel to HTR related projects CARBOWASTE and EUROPAIRS, currently a new HTR project is under negotiation (likely to start beginning of 2011): ARCHER Advanced High-Temperature Reactors for Cogeneration of Heat and Electricity Research & Development Polish initiative on HTR development, to be detailed and funds allocated end of Representatives are taking part in the Working Group.

20 International Cooperation End user industry operates globally To combine efforts, alleviate risks and create broad support in industry, international collaboration is sought, and likely essential In ARCHER contacts are strengthened with all international HTR activities, especially China (combined EU-China effort in HTR-10) and US (fuel performance test) EC requires ARCHER to accommodate GIF participation in the relevant PMB s. EUROPAIRS US NGNP Alliance meeting will take place in Paris in October 2010 HTR2010 conference in Prague in October 2010 is taken as an opportunity for continued discussion on international collaboration in the field of HTR R&D and demonstration

21 Conclusions The Nuclear Cogeneration Working Group intends to represent and shape the alternative uses of nuclear energy pillar in SNETP Key activities are to investigate cogeneration potential (including other systems than V/HTR), establish NC2I and form the liaison between SNETP and relevant networks, initiatives, activities, end-users in Europe and beyond Via NC2I, the working group targets a large contribution to meeting SET-plan goals Europairs is a key project, in which the conditions for cogeneration viability are determined and a strategic alliance is forged, between non-nuclear end user and nuclear communities. There is a large international dimension to nuclear cogeneration. The Nuclear Cogeneration Working Group and NC2I intend to ensure European interests are met while profiting from international context SNETP members are invited to join the working group

22 On behalf of the Nuclear Cogeneration Working Group: Thank you for your attention S. de Groot (NRG)

23 Nuclear Cogeneration Working Group Liaison Function Link with end-user industry and utilities and non-nuclear industry network EUROPAIRS: key priority Establish the links between SNETP and: HTR-TN SET (via DG-ENER) International cogeneration activities and projects Europe: LWR heat usage projects, Poland HTR initiative US: NGNP China: HTR-10 & HTR-PM Japan: HTTR & GTTR Republic of Korea: NHDD IAEA HTGR (CRP) Relevant FP-programs: EUROPAIRS, ARCHER, CARBOWASTE (RAPHAEL, PUMA)

24 The ARCHER Project Proposal Consortium Industry: Alfa-Laval, Alstom, AMEC, AREVA NP, FNAG, Westinghouse, SAIPEM, Empresarios Agrupados, Thyssenkrupp VDM, UCAR, Graftech, SGL Carbon, British Energy R&D Institutes: FZ Julich, JRC, PSI, CVR, MPA, CEA, KIT, FZ Dresden, NRG Universities: AGH Krakow, Armines, TU Delft, TU Dresden, Manchester University, RWTH Aachen, Stuttgart University - IKE, Cambridge University Technical Support Organisations: IRSN, TÜV Rheinland Projectmanagement: LGI International connections: INET (China), JAEA (Japan), INL (US), KAERI (Korea)

25 The ARCHER project proposal targets generic R&D in the field of (V)HTR technology, in support of demonstration Sub-Project 0: Coordination SP Leader: Ir. Sander De Groot, NRG, The Netherlands Sub-Project 1: System Integration SP Leader: Ir. Sander De Groot, NRG, The Netherlands Sub-Project 2: Safety Aspects SP Leader: Dipl.-Ing. Norbert Kohtz, TÜV Rheinland, Germany Sub-Project 3: Fuel & Fuel Cycle SP Leader: Dr Joseph Somers, JRC-ITU, EU Sub-Project 4: Materials & Components SP Leader: Mr Derek Buckthorpe, AMEC, UK Sub-Project 5: Knowledge Management SP Leader: Dr Walter Scheuermann, Ustutt-IKE, Germany

26 Conventional Industry Perspective: Alternatives CCS 2 nd generation biomass Other renewable energies Increased energy efficiency Nuclear energy Large EU support Action outside the gate (no site implications) CO 2 neutral Renewable energy source CO 2 free Indefinite resources Direct contribution to reducing resource usage and GHG emission Large perspective CO 2 free Plenty of resources + - Increased use of resources Public acceptance Economics Feasibility demonstration required Conversion economics Space available in Europe? Ecological impact Energy vs food needs Intermittent Distributed energy source Not adapted to the needs of large energy sinks (cities, industrial complexes) Only marginal impact Efficiency improvement is in percentages not in factors Increased economic development induces additional energy demand Public acceptance Relatively large (initial) investment costs Feasibility demonstration required

27 Conventional Industry Perspective: Alternatives There is also the alternative for industry to negotiate their way out (which has been very successful) Or leaving the EU: During HTR2008, Fred Moore from DOW chemical stated that new plants will not be built in the western world, but where the fuel is, and the energy policy is more favourable and stable. Subsequently the western world would face a feedstock dependency, in case adequate alternatives are not available for industry. Next to the negative economic impact on and increased dependency of Europe, this will not help the world to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Plenty of reasons to go nuclear

28 Conventional Industry Alternatives: CCS Barendrecht CCS has the full support by industry, as consequences take place outside the site gate, and there is large EU (financial) support: minimized risks But. The technicians and scientists forgot to discuss with stakeholder no.1, the public, to determine their boundary conditions and acceptance criteria A lesson they could have learned from nuclear

29 Demonstration in China China is building HTR-PM 2 x HTR-Module with pebble bed core 250 MW th each / 210 MW el total 750/250 C primary He C/13.2 MPa steam waiting for permission to pour concrete

30 Considering the international nature of (V)HTR development, and the fact that end users are generally global players, the international dimension will sought by the NCWG. Other International Activities Japan (HTTR) Republic of Korea (NHDD) South Africa (PBMR) - stopped

31 Demonstration in US status NGNP budget: doubled from 88 M$ to 169 M$ in 2010 R&D program: extended (e.g. Fuel, Materials, Safety, ) DOE Planning: Sept. 2009: DOE announced 40 M$ for NGNP conceptual design, cost share requested, now in line with end-user requirements ( 750 C, steam and power, proximity to large industrial platform, block and pebble design) Nov. 2009: deadline Dec. 2009: proposals selected Feb. 2010: contract award Aug. 2010: conceptual design reports 40 M$ project per concept in only 7 months

32 Demonstration in US status NGNP Industry Alliance Reaction: NGNP Industry Alliance: Chevron, ConocoPhillips, DOW, Entergy, Potash Corp, AREVA, BW, GA, Westinghouse/PBMR/Shaw Nov. 2009: GA, Westinghouse, AREVA proposed 3 designs, cost share refused Dec. 2009: letter from Alliance to Chu + Congress requesting e.g.: Better risk coverage by DOE More stable long-term governmental commitment to avoid load peaks Stronger role of Alliance to form a public-private partnership for NGNP Stronger international integration

33 Demonstration in US status March 2010: US DOE awards 40 M$ to General Electric and Westinghouse/PBMR - AREVA Inc. has dropped out. The selections announced today will support the development of conceptual designs, cost and schedule estimates for demonstration project completion and a business plan for integrating Phase 2 activities. The Department of Energy will use information from its independent Federal advisory committee, the Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, information and data gathered in Phase 1, and other factors in determining whether the project should continue to Phase 2. Phase 2 would entail detailed design, license review and construction of a demonstration plant. NCWG will explore International Collaboration Potential. Opportunity for International Industrial Initiative may open soon and NCWG should be ready to respond.