NUCLEAR ENERGY Safe, Clean Power for the Future Dr. Peter Lyons Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy U.S. Department of Energy

Transcription

1 NUCLEAR ENERGY Safe, Clean Power for the Future Dr. Peter Lyons Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy U.S. Department of Energy Georgia Institute of Technology 50 th Anniversary Celebration Founding of the School of Nuclear Engineering 1962 Symposium on the Future of Nuclear Energy November 1, 2012

2 Global Energy Distribution as indicated by nighttime electricity use 2

3 Human Development Index Correlation Between Human Development Index and Per Capita Electricity Consumption, Germany Australia U.S. Norway China India Pakistan Russia Very high quality of life High quality of life Medium quality of life Sudan Low quality of life Zimbabwe 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 Per Capita Electricity Consumption (kwh) Human Development Index - Human Development Report 2010, United Nations (2009 data) Per Capita Electricity Consumption (kwh) - Key World Energy Statistics, International Energy Agency (2009 data) 3

4 Nuclear Energy Plays an Important Role in US Energy Supply Nuclear power is clean, reliable base load energy source Provides 19% of U.S. electricity generation mix Provides over 61% of U.S. emission-free electricity Avoids about 700 MMTCO 2 each year Helps reduces overall NOx and SOx levels U.S. electricity demand projected to increase ~24% by GWe nuclear capacity operating plants Fleet maintaining approximate 90% average capacity factors Most expected to apply for license renewal for 60 years of operation. U.S. Electricity Net Generation (2011) Source: Energy Information Administration Total 4,106 BkWh Wind 9% Conventional Hydroelectric 25% Nuclear 19% Net Non-emitting Sources of Electricity Source: Energy Information Administration Geothermal 1% Solar 0% Other 4% Nuclear 61% 4

5 President Obama s Nuclear Energy Goals We can build the next-generation nuclear reactors that are smaller and safer and cleaner and cheaper. Ohio State University-March 22, 2012 With rising oil prices and a warming climate, nuclear energy will only become more important. That s why, in the United States, we ve restarted our nuclear industry as part of a comprehensive strategy to develop every energy source. Seoul, Korea - March 26,

6 Nuclear Energy Objectives Develop technologies and other solutions that can improve the reliability, sustain the safety, and extend the life of current reactors Develop improvements in the affordability of new reactors to enable nuclear energy to help meet the Administration's energy security and climate change goals Develop sustainable nuclear fuel cycles Understand and minimize the risks of nuclear proliferation and terrorism 6

7 Recent Key Events Fukashima Dai-ichi Accident Blue Ribbon Commission on America s Nuclear Future- Final Report Issued January 26, 2012 Small Modular Reactor Program Approved AP 1000 Design Certification and Combined Construction and Operating License (COL) Issued 7

8 Fukushima Dai-ichi U.S. Responses President Obama asked the NRC to do a comprehensive review of the safety of our domestic nuclear plants in light of the natural disaster that unfolded in Japan Secretary Chu stated, the Administration is committed to learning from Japan s experience as we work to continue to strengthen America s nuclear industry Marvin Fertel, President & CEO Nuclear Energy Institute: The industry s highest priority is the safe operation of the 104 reactors in 31 states and we will incorporate lessons learned from this accident at American nuclear energy facilities 8

9 DOE/NE Research Impacts: Post-Fukushima Reducing the need for operator actions in accident response enhances overall safety. Passive Systems enhance safety AP1000, ESBWR, SMRs, HTGRs Better understanding of dry cask storage systems. Re-engineering barriers can reduce complications. SiC cladding Enhanced fuel properties Re-evaluation of potential natural phenomena. Re-evaluation of U.S. seismic criteria Targeted use of Modeling and Simulation. Improved modeling of operating reactors Enlistment of the University Community. 9

10 Passive Safety Features of Modern Reactors Passive Safety Systems utilize naturally occurring physical phenomena such as natural circulation of air, water and steam. Gravity and convection drive the flow of cooling water. There are no safety-related pumps and motor-operated valves. There is no need for safety-rated diesel generators. Reactor safety functions are achieved without using any safety-related AC power reliance on stored energy PASSIVE SYSTEMS IN THE UNITED STATES The U.S. NP2010 Program advanced the AP1000 and ESBWR passive safety designs SMRs offer extensive passive safety features 10

11 Cladding Temperature [ C] Rapid Core Degradation Due to Enthalpy Production by Zr Oxidation at T>1200ºC Cladding temperature increases after exposure to steam due to decay heat production At T>1200ºC self catalytic oxidation rapidly drives cladding temperature and results in full consumption of the cladding cladding fully consumed Cooling Period 2 hrs 8 hrs 24 hrs 72 hrs Period of time after SCRAM where water injection into the core is available NRC 1204 C PCT limit 500 Longer cooling period = Less decay heat Time after fuel exposure to steam [min] *Slide provided by Oak Ridge National Lab* Steam Temperature = 600 C constant Heat-transfer coefficient from cladding OD to steam = W/cm 2 -K 11

12 Materials With Slower Oxidation Kinetics Offer Larger Margins of Safety Materials with slower oxidation kinetics in steam (~ 2 orders of magnitude or less) delay rapid cladding degradation Fuel exposed after 24hrs of cooling Relative to Zr oxidation kinetics *Slide provided by Oak Ridge National Lab* 12

13 Used Fuel Generation Each year, U.S. nuclear power plants generate ~2,200 metric tons of used fuel Contained in the 2,200 tons of used fuel is about 20 tons of plutonium There is currently about 64,000 MT of used fuel stored in the US This fuel is stored in water pools or dry casks at 72 plant sites in 39 states (includes DOE used fuel) The legislated capacity for Yucca Mt. was 63,000 MT before a second repository was licensed Projected used fuel quantity in storage by 2035 will be about 120,000 MT The current policy for UNF is direct geologic disposal Siting a repository appears to be a challenge for the US At least one repository will be needed for any option 13

14 Blue Ribbon Commission Recommendations 1. A new, consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste management facilities. 2. A new organization dedicated solely to implementing the waste management program and empowered with the authority and resources to succeed. 3. Access to the funds nuclear utility ratepayers are providing for the purpose of nuclear waste management. 4. Prompt efforts to develop one or more geologic disposal facilities. 5. Prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities. 6. Prompt efforts to prepare for the eventual large-scale transport of spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste to consolidated storage and disposal facilities when such facilities become available. 7. Support for continued U.S. innovation in nuclear energy technology and for workforce development. 8. Active U.S. leadership in international efforts to address safety, waste management, non-proliferation, and security concerns. 14

15 Sustainable Fuel Cycles Goals In the near term, define and analyze fuel cycle technologies to develop options that increase the sustainability of nuclear energy In the medium term, select preferred fuel cycle option for further development By 2050, deploy preferred fuel cycle Challenges Develop high burnup fuel and structural materials to withstand irradiation for longer periods of time Develop simplified separations, waste management, and proliferation risk reduction methods Develop optimized systems to maximize energy production while minimizing waste 15

16 Uranium Extraction from Seawater Winner of R&D100 Award in 2012 µg Uranium / g adsorbent Challenge PNNL is Independent low concentration: Verification 20 C ~3.3 ppb in seawater Flow-rate = 500 ml/min Days of Exposure Seawater Uranium Sorption Capacity (g U/kg C) Vast potential resource in seawater: ~4.5 billion tonnes U - provide a price cap and ensure centuries of uranium supply even with aggressive world-wide growth in nuclear energy applications Uranium Replicate Japanese Sorbent ORNL Cartridge Ligand Saturation Model U.S. sample 2.75 Japanese sample 0.92 U.S. R&D Efforts Focus on Increase U sorption capacity and selectivity in seawater environment surface area; functional group density; grafting efficiency; Enhanced ligand design computational modeling of functional ligands, hard/soft donors, stereochemistry Enhance adsorbent durability Increase the number of recycles/reuse; Improve U stripping methodology Understanding sorption mechanism, kinetics, and thermodynamics 16

17 Why are SMR technologies of interest to DOE? NE working definition of SMRs: reactor units with a nominal output of 300 MWe or less and are able to have large components or modules fabricated remotely and transported to the site for assembly of components and operation. Safety Benefits Passive decay heat removal by natural circulation Smaller source term inventory Simplified design eliminates/mitigates several postulated accidents Below grade reactor siting Potential for reduction in Emergency Planning Zone Economic Benefits Reduced financial risk Flexibility to add units Right size for replacement of old coal plants Use domestic forgings and manufacturing Job creation 17

18 SMR Licensing Technical Support Program Modeled After NP 2010 Program $1.4B Joint government-industry program to overcome barriers to new reactor deployment cost-share between government and industry Results: Three Early Site Permits (North Anna, Grand Gulf, Clinton) Two Design Certification applications (AP1000 received, ESBWR 2012) Two Construction and Operating Licenses issued (Vogtle, Summer) Current Program: Goal is design certification of up to 2 SMR designs Supports first phase for deployment Facilitates and accelerates commercial development and deployment of near term U.S. SMR designs at domestic locations $452 M in cost-share program over 5 years FY12 funding is $67M and FY13 request is $65M 18

19 Renewed Interest in Nuclear Energy Early Site Permits: 4 early site permits approved for Clinton, Grand Gulf, North Anna sites, and Vogtle; additional permit applications filed. License Applications: 18 Construction and Operating License applications for 28 new reactors have been submitted for NRC review; Areva and USEC enrichment licenses filed; 73 reactor license renewals approved. Reactor Design Certifications: Four designs have been certified; three new designs (APWR, EPR, and ESBWR) are under review; ESBWR through ACRS; AP1000 certified. New Plant Orders: 4 plant construction contracts initiated; 9 power companies have placed large component forging orders. Plant Construction: TVA construction activities at Watts Bar 2, and reinstated construction permits for Bellefonte 1 and 2. LES enrichment plant operating. Vogtle and Summer COL issued. Financial Incentives: Conditional loan guarantees approved for Vogtle and Eagle Rock. Small Modular Reactor Program: Administration support for multiyear SMR Licensing and Deployment Program. $65M requested in FY13. Issued FOA April 22,

20 AP1000 Construction Sanmen, Vogtle, and Summer Sanmen- January 2012 Summer - May 2012 Vogtle March

21 Nuclear Energy University Program Initiated in 2009: Funds nuclear energy research and equipment upgrades at U.S. colleges and universities. NEUP has awarded $233 M to 81 schools in 34 states and the District of Columbia NEUP plays a key role in helping DOE accomplish its mission in the development and exploration of advanced nuclear science and technology. GT has been a major recipient of NEUP awards: 23 awards totaling $12.6 million in the form of scholarships, fellowships, R&D, or general scientific infrastructure and most recently the 2012 Integrated Research Project on Integral Inherently Safe Light Water Reactor 21

22 Georgia Institute of Technology Integral Inherently Safe Light Water Reactor Requested Budget: $5,999,784 PI: Bojan Petrovic Collaborators: University of Michigan, Virginia Tech, University of Tennessee, University of Idaho, Morehouse College Foreign Involvement: Polytechnic University of Milan, University of Cambridge ($450K to be provided by RCUK) Industrial Participation: Westinghouse Electric ($600k), Southern Nuclear ($135k) National Laboratory Participation: INL ($300k) 22

23 Congratulations on 50 Years of Success GIT was one of the first undergraduate programs in nuclear engineering to be accredited. Highly successful in NE s Competitive University programs winning awards under NERI and NEUP over the past 10 years GIT has a long history of R&D and collaboration on NE related programs in reactor design, fuels design, nuclear hydrogen production and nuclear theory and physics. Much of the early work at Georgia Tech provided data for support of the controlled thermonuclear reactor at Oak Ridge, Tennessee. High-energy beam studies fostered development of neutral beam injectors to heat and fuel such reactors. In 2010, GIT was ranked in the top five for number of Nuclear Engineering degrees awarded, with 56 degrees issued. (Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education) The 2012 Integrated Research Project is potentially leading the way to the next generation of LWR nuclear reactors 23

24 Backup Slides 24

25 Integral Inherently Safe Light Water Reactor high-power (~1,000 MWe) LWR with inherent safety features. The enabling innovations include the use of high power density technologies/components, a compact core design achieved by using a nonoxide fuel form with improved heat removal capability, combined with fuel/clad design of enhanced accident tolerance. This allows increasing core power density while at the same time improving the core safety performance and response in transient/accident scenarios. A novel steam generating system is based on very compact printed circuit heat exchangers (PCHE) which make a 1,000 MWe power level compatible with an integral configuration. The compact design leads to a small plant footprint, which helps reduce the construction cost and facilitates deployment of seismic isolators. 25