Delivered in partnership by: Delivered by

Transcription

1 Delivered in partnership by: Delivered by

2 Innovation has the potential to address the challenges we face more effectively, more efficiently and where possible, for less cost. Source: NDA Strategy - Effective from April 2016

3 What is Game Changers? Running since late 2016 A Sellafield Ltd. sponsored initiative Delivered by NNL in partnership with FIS360 Ltd Focus on encouraging innovation to help meet complex nuclear decommissioning challenges Seeking innovative solutions from across industry sectors

4 Programme Objectives Capture specific technical decommissioning challenges identified by Sellafield, authored in close consultation with internal teams. Engage with businesses and academia whose innovations may be an enabler to efficient decommissioning and waste management. Provide technical and commercialisation support for the development of early stage technologies. Develop a portfolio of de-risked early stage technologies for adoption and deployment by Sellafield and/or Tier 2 companies.

5 Focus of Activity and Support Pre-Game Changers Funding Game Changers Proof of Concept Funding Prototype Development e.g. Innovate UK, EPSRC, SBRI Tier 2 Corporate / Equity Investment Technology Readiness Level BASIC RESEARCH RESEARCH TO FEASIBILITY TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT TECHNOLOGY DEMONSTRATION SYSTEM/SUBSYSTEM DEVELOPMENT SYSTEM TEST / LAUNCH and OPERATIONS

6 Game Changers Process STAGE 1 Identify, articulate and publish specific challenges plus cross-sector briefing events. STAGE 2 Applications and poster presentations submitted (under NDA) Appraised by review panel comprising Sellafield, NNL and FIS360 personnel. STAGE 3 Applications of interest present business case and project plan. Possible technology demonstrations. IP resides with applicant STAGE 4 Projects reviewed by leadership team. Successful applications awarded Proof of Concept funding. Project completion with demonstrations and appraisal by Sellafield.

7 The Challenges Post Operational Clean Out Analytical Services Condition Monitoring and Inspection Plant Characterisation Waste Containers, Handling and Storage Surveillance and Maintenance Modelling and Knowledge Management Plant Dismantling Identifying Unknown Objects in Gloveboxes

8 Applications Assessed Applications Awarded Feasibility Grant The story so far 10 Challenge statements published and promoted 260+ Companies registered for briefing events 400+ Cross-sector delegates attended events 195 All Proof of Concept projects: Have strong Sellafield buy-in Demonstrate clear value / use case Aligned to the Sellafield challenges Receive mentoring / business support / commercialisation support Proof of Concept Grants Awarded Value to Sellafield already has the capability of saving 100s millions Different way of working which accelerates technology development Commercialisation support to translate into nuclear Collaboration between companies (SMEs, Tier 2s) Leverage significant funding - InnovateUK over 1m to-date

9 Programme Outputs Portfolio of de-risked, demonstrable, mid-trl projects Schedule for future technical development Commercialisation route map - collaboration partners, licensing, IP Quantified value to Sellafield and nuclear industry - close working with end users at Sellafield Ready to leverage further 3rd party funding - InnovateUK, SBRI, EPSRC, Tier 2 innovation funds etc.

10 Cryoroc have been using freeze casting technology for over 30 years Game Changers Proof of Concept project exploring potential for freeze cast technology to reduce overall decommissioning waste volume for certain waste streams

11

12 Engaging with the Game Changers initiative has enabled our innovative technology to gain an accelerated level of interest across the Sellafield site and the confidence that there is a potential significant new market for our technology. Bob Eden, MD, Rawwater Engineering Company Ltd.

13 Get involved! For further information about the Game Changers Innovation Programme, visit . Paul Knight Frank Allison

14 The challenges linked to measurement and analysis of both chemical and radiochemical species at the Sellafield site Dr Mike Edmondson Sub Sea UK - Lunch and Learn, Aberdeen 6 th Sept 18

15 Subsea UK Lunch & Learn Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Dr Michael Edmondson

16 Sellafield has more than 75 years of history... Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site 170 major nuclear facilities and 2200 other buildings dating from 1940s 1940s/50s 1960s/70s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s Nuclear build begins Initially a military programme Later civil programme begins Waste stored safely pending treatment Storage capacity extended incrementally Coarse segregation of waste arising from process Magnox reprocessing starts Main expansion of site Major waste treatment focus Environmental impact substantially reduced Commercialisation of reprocessing Thorp comes online Waste arising from processes treated in real time Product waste forms compatible with disposal concepts NDA formed Stop start progress in Decommissioning Calder Hall ceased generating power after 47 years in operation Decision taken to end Thorp reprocessing Vitrification of all overseas Highly Active Waste complete Decommissioning gathering pace - First sludge exports from FGMSP, Pile 1 decommissioning

17 Increasing energy/damage Radiation Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Emission from nucleus Alpha Particle Beta particle (electron) Gamma wave Skin Steel Cement

18

19 Toolbox Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Toolbox Development Toolbox Info LFE Define the Challenge Plant Knowledge / History Characterisation Coarse Cost v Benefit Tool Scenario Specific Studies Further assessment and options reduction Delivery Retrievals and Baseline washout 6

20 The changing role at Sellafield (reformat as inset) Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site The challenges can be broken down into: 7 Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site

21 The Characterisation Challenge Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Understanding the inventory, characteristics and volumes of the waste material Reduce Assumptions Improved Plans Make Savings (time, cash and dose uptake) DEMplus 3D simulation software can be used to assist in decommissioning planning Potential savings of the order of 2bn 8

22 What is it? Where is it? Substrate? Contamination Hide and Seek Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Radiation alpha, beta, gamma Blockage Phase Solid / Liquid Metallic, Oxide, Nitrate Speciation Cs, Pu, Ru etc. Vessel Pipework Glovebox Cell Wall Building structure etc. Mild Steel Stainless Steel Painted Concrete Brick Glass Asbestos Acknowledgement to A Jenkins, SL for slide content 9

23 Characterisation Precision Decreasing Monitoring Discharges Challenge/options Determination Wash effectiveness / Reagent Activity Discharges Challenge/options Determination Waste Segregation Discharges Transfer Transfer Lifecycle Characterisation Needs Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Operations POCO Decom Waste Sentencing Condition Monitoring Final Disposal Regulatory compliance Regulatory compliance Regulatory compliance CFA / LoC compliance CFA / LoC compliance Routine, reassurance Ad hoc, programme determined, monitoring Order or magnitude / substance type / basic properties Ad hoc, programme determined Order or magnitude / substance type / basic properties Free release VLLW LLW ILW PCM HLW Detection of catastrophic failure versus deterioration trending Notes: Retrievals likely to be somewhere between Operations and Decommissioning A significant amount of knowledge can also be gained through look at historical records 10

24 Measurement and Analysis Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Plant based Technical Team Analytical Services Support 11

25 In-situ: Inspections Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Inspection vehicles developed to deploy up to 55m along pipework of variable internal bore, with bends and elbows. Visible camera and light Thickness surveys performed using ultrasonic technology Radiation measurements now being deployed alongside 12 Inspections

26 In-situ: Radiation Mapping Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site ANTECH RadSearch Createc N-Visage Rad Scan (Supply Chain) Canberra I-Pix PHDS - GeGI CZT probes Hand held hot spot probes on poles

27 In-situ: Chemical (Technology Transfer Example) Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Remote Right analysis 10m distance Mobile

28 Access and Deployment How do you access this.. Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Navigate through this.. To then negotiate this. To understand this 15

29 Access and Deployment Challenges Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site 16

30 Current Practices Current Practices Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site Laser Snake (OC Robotics) Use of existing infrastructure if present e.g. Master Slave Manipulator arms. Deployment of long poles with tools attached via removal of penetrations. (6-8 ) Deployment of tethered equipment Pipe crawlers & endoscopes Basic use of remote control vehicles Tethered submersibles Basic use of UAV s Concrete drilling UAV s (Createc and React) Submersibles e.g. Avexis

31 Questions Characterisation challenges at the Sellafield site 18

32 Decontamination and effluent management Dr Luke O Brien Sub Sea UK - Lunch and Learn, Aberdeen 6 th Sept 18

33 Contamination Radioactive material that is deposited on the surface of on inside structures, areas or objects This can be fixed or loose. Contamination presents a hazard. The hazard is managed by containment and shielding. In some cases it is beneficial to decontaminate, in others it may be better to leave it or fix it further. 22

34 Contamination There are a range of materials including: Metals (mild and stainless steel) Painted surfaces Concrete/bricks Plastics Contamination may be: Chemically bound Engrained (where porous) Physically trapped (eg behind a deposit or grease) 23

35 Drivers for decontamination Savings associated with waste reclassification, e.g. ILW/PCM to LLW/VLLW. Reduced hazard. Increased man access (less remote engineering). Programme acceleration. Reduced long term CM&I cost. 24

36 Considerations for decontamination Cost benefit. Cost to develop and deploy vs savings in waste and decommissioning costs. Technical feasibility (eg): Efficacy (what DF can be achieved?) Access (can the technique be deployed?) Hazard (are the associated hazards manageable?) Effluent and waste routes (is there a route for any wastes that are generated?) Is it BAT to leave or fix the activity? In some cases it may be BAT to leave contamination in place and allow for decay, or to stabilise to allow decommissioning and disposal. Timing Aligning technology availability with programmes and availability of infrastructure. 25

37 Current practices Examples include: Chemical cleaning. Steam ejectors and process purging. Heating and cooling. Mechanical (manipulators, scrapers etc). Jet washing (lances, nozzles, spray lines). 26

38 Decontamination technology examples /21/14 9/28/14 10/5/14 10/12/14 10/19/14 27

39 Alternative decontamination examples 28

40 Opportunities There is an ongoing exercise to identify alternative technology and approaches. Areas of interest include: Low/no effluent volume decontamination approaches (to reduce or eliminate the need for effluent infrastructure). Methods to fix/immobilise contamination (to provide options where decontamination is not appropriate). Methods to remove and treat oils and solvents. Methods to remotely access pipework and vessels to deploy technology (to allow targeted intervention). Mobile abatement technology (to increase flexibility in scheduling and provide options when existing assets are no longer available/feasible). 29

41 Decontamination technology Decontamination Database compiled on behalf of the NDA that comprises information on all decontamination tools/ techniques trialled within the UK nuclear industry. Also includes open literature information from the US, Japan, Europe Free (open) access available from: 30

42 Effluent and waste compatibility Compatibility with discharge authorisation. Compatibility with effluent and waste treatment infrastructure: Volumetric capacity Chemical impact on hazards Chemical impact on infrastructure Chemical impact on abatement performance Chemical impact on disposability 31

43 Effluent technology The key abatement technologies include: Filtration and ion exchange: This process can be sensitive to low levels of salts, organics and complexants. The waste abatement material is encapsulated in cement. Chemical precipitation with ultrafiltration: This process can be sensitive to complexants, organics and some chemical additives. The dewatered waste is encapsulated in cement. Evaporation This process is less sensitive to chemical additives, organics and corrosive components are managed. The concentrate is either encapsulated in cement or turned into a glass. 32

44 Questions 33

45 Subsea UK Lunch & Learn Stores and Waste Packages: Condition Monitoring & Inspection Alex Allen

46 Solid Radioactive Waste Categories High Level waste (HLW) Significantly heat generating Intermediate Level waste (ILW) Not-significantly heat generating limit 12,000 Bq / g 10,000 (alpha limit 4,000 Bq /g) Becquerel / Gram (Bq/g) unit of radioactivity 1, Low Level Waste (LLW) Very Low Level Waste (VLLW) & High Volume VLLW (HVVLLW) EXEMPT limit 4 Bq / g limit 0.4 Bq / g September 2018

47 Overview of Solid Radioactive Waste (HLW) High Level Waste (HLW): Arises as liquid from early stages of fuel reprocessing Contains 97-99% of original fission product activity Converted into an immobilised glass form (vitrification) - the most significant hazard reduction process at Sellafield Product stored until the availability of a Geological Disposal Facility (assumed to be 2075) Some will be returned to overseas customers as per contracts 04 September

48 Overview of Solid Radioactive Waste (ILW) Intermediate Level waste (ILW) variety of items: e.g. fuel cladding, sludges, slurries, filters, graphite, stainless pieces, redundant equipment etc. Most current ILW arisings are encapsulated in real-time in a cement medium Strategies & processes currently in development for treatment of legacy wastes and stored operational & decommissioning wastes Product stored until the availability of the GDF (assumed to be 2040) 04 September

49 Overview of Solid Radioactive Waste (LLW) Low Level waste (LLW) Waste includes contaminated scrap, paper, used clothing etc. Compactable waste is High Force Compacted and grouted at LLWR Non-compactable wastes is directly placed in ISO freight containers and grouted at LLWR Very large items have been directly placed in LLWR and grouted Metals suitable for recycling are successfully decontaminated to EXEMPT levels by abrasive blasting (Wheel-abrator) Additional services now being offered by LLWR & supply chain (metals smelting, Oil destruction, etc) 04 September

50 Decommissioning and Waste Management Challenges (1) High Level waste (HLW) facilities The Highly Active Storage Tanks (HASTs) are one of the greatest decommissioning challenges on the site Tanks are very large (~ 6m x 6m) & heavy, with complex internal geometries Significant challenge for Post Operational Clean Out (POCO) and decommissioning - remove residual heels without damaging vessels & pipework Remote approach rather than hands-on - high dose and limited access Equipment needs to be effective, practicable and maintainable whilst withstanding very high radiation levels. A problem of this scale has not yet been encountered 04 September elsewhere in the UK!

51 Changing wastes & routes with time The Sellafield site is changing from reprocessing to clean-up. As the site changes, so do the wastes generated volumes, characteristics, activity, available routes, etc. Key areas: Solid waste conditioning (for LLW & ILW including PCM) Waste storage prior to disposal Ground remediation Effluents reduction in volumes & activity, but increase in risks & uncertainties.

52 Waste Packages Self Shielded Box Contact Handling (ILW) Drums / Crates 6 m 3 Reinforced Concrete Box Self Shielded Box (SSB) Cans Compacted Drums Encapsulated in a 500l Drum 200l Drums 6 m 3 Reinforced Concrete Box Thorp Can Magnox Can Overpacks 41

53 Waste Packages Remote Handling (HAW) Vitrified Product Container 42

54 Waste Packages 500l Product Drum prior to filling Remote Handling (ILW) 500 litre drum MBGW box MBGW Box Sectioned ILW 500l Product Drum 500l Product Drum Stillage 43

55 500 litre drums and stillages 44 04/09/2018

56 Other Waste Stores 45 04/09/2018

57 Representation of the Storage System 46 04/09/2018

58 Representation of a Shielded Vault Store 47 04/09/2018

59 Hypothetical Patterns of Package Evolution 48 04/09/2018

60 Benefits & Constraints Benefits Cost savings associated with re-engineering and over engineered packages. Improved efficiencies, through reduced complexity of deployment etc. Reduced human intervention = reduce conventional/ radiological safety risks Constraints Packages stored above ground in dry, often dark stores. Expected storage period is up to many decades. Poor access storage in arrays, minimal spacing (less than tens of centimetres). Dose rates could be high with gamma and neutron fluxes. Wide range of packages designs, from big boxes, to little cans. Wide range of storage configurations including stillages, racks, stacks etc For each device installed Assume conventional energy source couldn t be replaced over its lifetime Energy harvesting from the waste package would be useful. (Any disposable power source shouldn t themselves cause a potentially significant corrosion risk to the package). Different timelines and insertion points depending on waste package type /09/2018

61 Functional Requirements Package & Store Parameters Temperature/humidity of package and contents, which could infer changes in chemical reactions inside the package. Time of wetness (evidence of condensation) Air flow dead zones Airborne activity Chloride Pressure inside package, which could be indicative of the evolution of gases. Package deformation, possibly caused by increased internal pressure. Corrosion of package material, both inside and outside. Rate of change of gas evolution. Chemical analysis of gases evolved in waste package, which could indicate corrosion mechanisms Monitoring Equipment Reliability the ability to perform over the long term. Data transmission and handling. Option of retrofitting to existing packages may be desirable. Quality of data ranges from ROM to precise 50 04/09/2018

62 Risk, Hazard Overall strategy for hazard/risk reduction delayed Unconditioned Waste Storage Risks of non-passively stored wastes will rise with time If retrieval is Waste Retrieval, Conditioning and long term management/disposal Retrieve and where appropriate Condition Legacy Waste Total Site Inventory (Additional conditioning, transport and emplacement) Conditioned Waste from current processes Surface storage Passive Waste Remaining Building and Ground Inventory Development of Final Site Status Disposal or Other Long Term Management Final Building and Ground Inventory Time

63 Monitoring of Store Conditions Monitoring forms essential part of assuring product quality, parameters that might be required include: Temperature, Relative humidity Time of wetness (evidence of condensation) Air flow dead zones Airborne activity Gas generation Chloride Inactive corrosion coupons

64 Long-term Surface Storage Absence of a National Repository and/or the potential incompatibility of some package types with current disposal concepts may dictate the need for (extended) long-term surface storage of nuclear waste products. A Long-term Storage Strategy involves 4 phases 1. Passivation/Hazard Reduction Phase - material is removed from current location and packaged for storage. 2. Consolidation Phase - initial storage period, waste chemically reactive, active management of stores 3. Quiescent Phase - waste reactivity diminished allowing passive storage, minimal monitoring 4. Restoration Phase - waste packages removed/prepared for ultimate disposal

65 When is Quiescent Phase achieved? Need to be able to demonstrate to key stakeholders that waste package is passive. This will involve factors such as: Waste reactivity - Evidence of on going reactions Gas generation from corrosion Evidence of dimensional changes/ distortion. Surface temperature Package Integrity External condition of drum/ box/ stillage - e.g. general corrosion, damage to drum and features. Surface contamination. Waste radioactivity

66 Waste Packages Remote Handling (ILW) 3 m 3 Box (future) MSSS Waste(Unconditioned) PFCS Waste (Unconditioned) Legacy Waste (Encapsulated) PFCS 3 m 3 Box during Manufacture Finished PFCS 3 m 3 Box Image of a MSSS 3 m 3 Box and Skip 55

67 Generic Package Constraints and Limitations Variety of Packages - Different designs, material and methods of construction, shapes, sizes and storage configurations Condition to be monitored - Gas (type and rates), level, pressure, physical / chemical change Environment - high radiation, heat, humidity Physical - Space in, around, and on packages Lifespan - Packages may be stored for ~75 years Power / Data transmission 56

68 Example Solutions To monitor the package and/or environment Developing smart packages/floors that monitor themselves Periodically taking devices/technologies to the packages Large area scanning e.g. hydrocarbon detection on oil refineries, atmospheric monitoring etc. Visual observations and image analysis ROV / alternative deployment techniques Modular store design respond to changing requirements of package 57 04/09/2018

69 58 Questions?