Small Modular Reactor Designs and Technologies for Near-Term Deployments Design Identification and Technology Assessment IAEA

Transcription

1 Technology Assessment for New Nuclear Power Programmes Vienna International Centre, M3, 1 3 September 2015 Small Modular Reactor Designs and Technologies for Near-Term Deployments Design Identification and Technology Assessment Dr. M. Hadid Subki Nuclear Power Technology Development Section International Atomic Energy Agency

2 Outline Motivation, driving forces, & definition Water-cooled reactors deployment timeline Member States with SMR Development SMR estimated deployment timeline SMRs for immediate & near term deployment Elements for Decision Making SMR Design Characteristics SMR Site Specific Considerations SMR Grid Integration SMR Plant Safety SMR Safeguardability Emergency Planning Zone SMR Economic, Cost and Financing Aspects Key barriers, challenges to deployment Elements to Facilitate SMR Deployment 2

3 Motivation Driving Forces The need for flexible power generation for wider range of users and applications Replacement of aging fossil-fired units Cogeneration needs in remote and off-grid areas Potential for enhanced safety margin through inherent and/or passive safety features Economic consideration better affordability Potential for innovative energy systems: Cogeneration & non-electric applications Hybrid energy systems of nuclear with renewables 3

4 Small Modular Reactors Advanced Reactors that produce electric power up to 300 MW, built in factories and shipped as modules to utilities and sites for installation as demand arises. Land-based, marine-based, and factory fuelled transportable SMRs There should be power limit to be modular/transportable ( 180 MWe)

5 WCRs Estimated Timeline of Deployment

6 10 Member States with SMRs (1) Argentina (4) India (8) Russia (10) United States CAREM25 27 MW(e) PFBR KLT-40S 35 x 2 NuScale 50 x 12 (2) China CEFR 20 HTR-PM 211 ACP CAP CAP-F 200MW(th) AHWR (5) Italy IRIS 325 (6) Japan 4S 30 RITM ABV-6M 6 x 2 VBER VVER BREST 300 SVBR 100 mpower 180 x 2 W-SMR 225 SMR PRISM 311 EM GT-MHR 285 GTHTR (9) South Africa (3) France DMS 300 PBMR MW(th) Flexblue 165 IMR 350 HTMR MW(th) (7) South Korea SMART 100

7 SMRs Estimated Timeline of Deployment

8 Electrical Capacity (MWe) 350 SMR Type, Capacity and Year of Deployment Planned Deployment 8

9 SMRs Under Construction for Immediate Deployment the front runners Page 9 of 37 Country Reactor Model Output (MWe) Designer Number of units Site, Plant ID, and unit # Commercial Start Argentina CAREM CNEA 1 Near the Atucha-2 site 2017 ~ 2018 China HTR-PM 250 Tsinghua Univ./Harbin Russian Federation KLT-40S (ship-borne) RITM-200 (Icebreaker) 70 OKBM Afrikantov 50 OKBM Afrikantov 2 mods, 1 turbine 2 modules 2 modules Shidaowan unit ~ 2018 Akademik Lomonosov units 1 & ~ 2017 RITM-200 nuclear-propelled icebreaker ship 2017 ~ 2018 CAREM-25 HTR-PM KLT-40S

10 SMRs under development for Near-term Deployment - Some samples 1 Name System Integrated Modular Advanced Reactor (SMART) 2 mpower Design Organization Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute B&W Generation mpower 3 NuScale NuScale Power Inc. Country of Origin Electrical Capacity, MWe Republic of Korea 100 United States of America United States of America 180/module 50/module (gross) 4 ACP100 CNNC/NPIC China 100 SMART Design Status Page 10 of 37 Standard Design Approval Received 4 July 2012 Preparing for Design Certification Application Preparing for Design Certification Application Detailed Design, Construction Starts in 2016 mpower NuScale ACP100

11 Liquid-Metal Cooled, Fast Spectrum SMRs (Please contact Mr. Stefano Monti, Head of NPTDS at Full name Designer Reactor type CEFR SVBR 100 4S PRISM China Experimental Fast Reactor China Nuclear Energy Industry Corporation Liquid metal cooled fast reactor Lead-Bismuth Eutectic Fast Reactor 100 AKME Engineering RUSSIAN Federation Liquid metal cooled fast reactor Super-Safe, Small & Simple TOSHIBA, CRIEPI JAPAN Liquid metal-cooled fast reactor Power Reactor Innovative Small Mod. GE Hitachi USA Liquid metal cooled fast breeder reactor Thermal power 65 MW 280 MW 30 MW 840 MW Electrical power 20 MW 101 MW 10 MW 311 MW Coolant Sodium Lead-Bismuth Sodium Sodium S. Pressure Low pressure 6.7 MPa Non pressurized Low pressure S. Temperature 530 o C 500 o C 510 o C 485 o C Key features Fast neutrons for irradiation testing; Indirect Rankine Cycle, Passive safety Indirect Rankine cycle Uses heterogeneous metal alloy core Design status Detailed Detail Detail Detail Deployment Connected to grid 2011 ~ 2019 ~ 2022?

12 Elements for Decision Making NE Series: NP-T-1.10 o Site specific considerations o Grid integration o Nuclear plant safety o Technical characteristics and performance o Nuclear fuel and fuel cycle performance o Radiation protection o Environment impact o Safeguards o Plant and site security o Owner s scope of supply o Supplier/ technology holder issues o Project schedule capability o Technology transfer and technical support o Project contracting options o Economics

13 SMR Design Characteristics (1): ipwr SMART Westinghouse SMR pressurizer CRDM pumps Steam generators Steam generators CRDM core + vessel pumps core + vessel 13

14 SMR Design Characteristics (2) Page 14 of 37 Multi modules configuration Two or more modules located in one location/reactor building and controlled by single control room reduced staff new approach for I&C system

15 SMR Design Characteristics (3) Modularization (construction technology) Factory manufactured, tested and Q.A. Heavy truck, rail, and barge shipping Faster construction Incremental increase of capacity addition as needed

16 SMR Design Characteristics (Summary) Main Features Integrated Reactor Coolant System Multi Modules & Modular Construction Expected Advantage Simplified, compact and less weight Enhanced Safety Performance Safer, Flexible and Efficient Operation Passive Engineered Safety Features Enhanced Maintainability Increased Safety and Reliability Advanced Instrumentations & Controls Better Radiation Control Longer Fuel Cycle Extended Design Life Better cost affordability

17 SMR Site Specific Considerations Site size requirements, boundary conditions, population, neighbours and environs Site structure plan; single or multi-unit site requirements What site specific issues could affect the site preparation schedule and costs? What is the footprint of the major facilities on the site?

18 SMR Grid Integration (1) Grid stability, size, existing and future capacity, plant connectivity Plant operation under normal, disturbed and isolated grid conditions What are the abilities of the SMRs power station to operate on load follow?

19 SMR Grid Integration (2) Design: SMR s projects propose innovative passive safety systems requiring less or no electrical power to cool down the decay heat, however: For long time operation after accident, the grid will always be the best off-site power source to feed monitoring and support systems. Expert opinion: The grid connection policy of nuclear plants may be adapted to : Integrate the benefits provided by passive systems in terms of reduced required power, absence of HV safety buses, power distribution simplification.. Confirm SBO rule (NRC 10 CFR 50.63) The expected frequency of loss of offsite power; and The probable time needed to restore offsite power Confirm NRC 10 CFR 50 GDC-17 Two independent sources of AC power of sufficient capacity and capability Onsite power sources together should meet single failure Provisions to minimize loss of electric power coincident with or as result from loss of power SMR s should have for their grid connection the same level of reliability, availability, maintainability, observability, security as electrical systems of large reactors

20 SMR Grid Integration (3) Operation: As indicated before, grid requirements should be same as or close to fossil fires units and applicable at grid connection point. Except for reactive capability requirements for multiple units Warning : Small unit does not have necessarily better transient stability A few indicative figures for active power grid performances: Power set point controlled +/- 1% Pmax (max electrical power) Power frequency control +/- 5% to 10% Pmax Automatic frequency control +/- 5 Pmax Ramp up 5% Pmax/min between 60% RTP and 100% RTP Ramp down 20% Pmax/min between 100% RTP and 60% RTP Automated load follow Load follow cycles 100%-x%-100% capable several times a day Note : Some SMR design propose to shut down units to comply with grid requirements

21 SMR Plant Safety (1) Enhanced performance engineered safety features: Natural circulation primary flow (CAREM, NuScale) No LOFA Reactivity control Internal CRDM (IRIS, mpower, Westinghouse SMR, CAREM) No rod ejection accident Gravity driven secondary shutdown system (CAREM, IRIS, West. SMR) Residual heat removal system Passive Residual Heat Removal System (CAREM, mpower, West. SMR) Passive Residual heat removal through SG and HX submerged in water pool (IRIS, SMART, NuScale) Safety injection System Passive Injection System (CAREM, CAREM, mpower) Active injection System (SMART) Flooded containment with recirculation valve

22 SMR Plant Safety (2) Page 22 of 37 Containment Passively cooled Containment : Submerged Containment (Convection and condensation of steam inside containment, the heat transferred to external pool) (NuScale, W-SMR) Steel containment (mpower) Concrete containment with spray system (SMART) Pressure suppression containment (CAREM, IRIS) Severe Accident Feature In-vessel Corium retention (IRIS, Westinghouse SMR, mpower, NuScale, CAREM) Hydrogen passive autocatalytic recombiner (CAREM, SMART) Inerted containment (IRIS)

23 SMRs in terms of Safeguards (1) Page 23 of 37 Collaborations of with Brookhaven NL and Pacific Northwest NL, USA In-house collaborations of SG, INPRO and NPTDS Supporting non-proliferation through safeguards by design for small modular reactors Summary of Approaches for Evaluation of Proliferation Resistance and Safeguardability for SMRs GIF: analytical framework, threats, pathways, outcomes INPRO: user requirements, check list, rules of good practice How they can be used together to enhance SMR safeguardability

24 SMRs in terms of Safeguards (2) Small power small radio logical inventory smaller release during off-normal conditions Small physical footprint smaller security force fewer surveillance Higher enrichment levels for some SMRs Remote locations of facilities present new challenges for inspection Page 24 of 37 24

25 Risk-Informed approach and EPZ reduction Risk-Informed approach to No (or reduced) Emergency Planning Zone Elimination or substantial reduction (NPP fences) of the Emergency Planning Zone New procedure developed: Deterministic + Probabilistic needed to evaluate EPZ (function of radiation dose limit and NPP safety level) Procedure developed within a CRP; discussed with NRC CAORSO site IRIS: 1 km France Evacuation Zone: 5 km US Emergency Planning Zone: 10 miles 25

26 SMR Economic, Cost and Financing Key issues Large Nuclear Power Plants SMRs Calculated levelized costs o o Proven lower /kw.h generating cost compared to SMRs Still struggling to compete with natural gas Capital cost o Huge upfront capital cost o Economy of scale Potential lower levelized costs (economy of multiples) o o o Fractional upfront capital cost Easier to finance Economy of serial production O&M cost Stable (Less variation) o Potential lower cost o Could fluctuate due to uncertainty in plant staffing for multi-module plant and security force Fuel cost o Inherently low; (9 15)% of total cost; technology dependent o On going R&Ds on advanced safer and more economical fuel Decommissioning costs o o High decommissioning cost More time required o o Could have the same fraction to total cost as large NPPs Many CHF tests for new truncated LWR fuels for licensing Smaller cost of decommissioning: o Replaceable modules o Factory disassembled/ decommissioned

27 Capital costs for SMRs Key Topics Prospects Issues Capital component of levelized cost of power Comparison of material quantities Impact of local labour and productivity Cost of licensing Plant design and costs include Fukushima related safety improvements Ensuring all necessary equipment is included in the cost estimate, e.g. there is no missing equipment Assurance of reliable estimates of technology holder equipment prices Potential decrease in case of large scale and serial production Design saving o o Reduced construction time for proven design Lesser work force required with modular construction Based on LWRs technology - easier licensing Better flexibility to incorporate lessons-learned from the Fukushimatype accident Learning effect: the higher the number of SMR built on the same site is, the better the cost effectiveness of construction activities on site Similar among vendors Require large initial order Standardization of new structure, system, components and materials First of a kind deployment of multimodule plant with modularization construction technology vs stickbuild First of a kind; Time required for modifying the existing regulatory and legal frameworks Additional cost required for R&D on new safety system Cost impact by delayed component delivery or defect during shipping Manufacturing of FOAK components

28 SMR Operation & maintenance (O&M) costs Key Topics Prospects Issues Evaluation of projected O&M with comparisons to experience Staffing Operating experience may lead to efficient SMR operation Regulatory-based well agreed number of staffs required Need to gain O&M experience Staffing of multi-module plant need to be addressed Plant design features to reduce O&M cost Design simplicity and proven Design simplicity yet FOAK Impact of localization versus O&M contract Applicable in countries with capable industries applying stick-built o o In contrary with the principle of modularization Embarking countries with limited industries Opportunities and costs for shared spare parts pool o o Modular construction with factory built modules Multi-module plant o Sustainability of components supply chain Reliance on passive design and redundant system trains to optimize operation and maintenance on-line High level of passive or inherent safety features with better O&M cost o Cost for R&D and V&V for FOAK technology Optimized outage schedules based on equipment performance and trending data, real and historic Multi-module plant: o Redundancy of production unit (Better flexibility) o Plant specific outage scheme proposed, but yet to be proven What is the technology holder s estimate of the O&M cost advantage or penalty for the proposed facility (cost/kw h) versus the O&M costs reported for today s fleet?

29 Cost of Specific Utilization Keys Topics Prospects Issues Flexible operation Cogeneration (e.g. desalination, district heating, hydrogen production) Load follow is an imbedded capability of all SMRs o o SMR power output suits well with existing heat and desalination plants Multi-module: guarantee of continuous supply Varied from technical to safety to O&M cost for high frequency/amplitude flexible operation How many large NPPs with desalination cogeneration? operating/utilization experience Near-term SMR designs are certified for electricity production plant only. Remote grids o Can be connected to small and weak grids, where large NPPs are not feasible o Where non-electric products (heat or desalinated water) are as important as the electricity o o Site specific Proper infrastructures required which may not be available in remote areas

30 Potential Advantages & Perceived Challenges by Investors & Users Technological Issues Non-Technological Issues Advantages Shorter construction period (modularization) Potential for enhanced safety and reliability Design simplicity Suitability for non-electric application (desalination, etc.). Replacement for aging fossil plants, reducing GHG emissions Fitness for smaller electricity grids Options to match demand growth by incremental capacity increase Site flexibility Reduced emergency planning zone Lower upfront capital cost (better affordability) Easier financing scheme Challenges Licensability (due to innovative or first-of-a-kind engineering structure, systems and components) Non-LWR technologies Operability performance/record Human factor engineering; operator staffing for multiple-modules plant Post Fukushima action items on design and safety Economic competitiveness First of a kind cost estimate Regulatory infrastructure (in both expanding and newcomer countries) Availability of design for newcomers Infrastructure requirements Post Fukushima action items on institutional issues and public acceptance 30

31 Identified and Potential Operating Issues Control room staffing for multi-module SMR Plants Human factor engineering, implication of digital I&C Defining source term for multi-module SMR Plants in regards to determining emergency planning zone, etc. Standardization of first-of-a-kind engineering structure, systems and components Rational start-up procedure for natural circulation SMR designs Power fluctuation and instability in different operating modes Conduct of Operation and Operating Limit & Condition (OLC) for SMRs intended for continuous Load-Follow operation in off-grid Associated safety and component reliability aspects Page 31 of 37

32 Key Barriers/Challenges to Deployment Limited near-term commercial availability of SMR designs for embarking countries Capacity building in embarking countries nuclear regulatory authority for advanced reactors depends on the preparedness of vendor countries regulatory and licensing infrastructures Technology developers to enhance the ability to secure significant additional EPC contracts from investors to provide the financial support for design development and deployment: first domestic, then international markets Lower price of natural gas in some countries including the US limits the need of utilities to adopt nuclear power. Unless the development and deployment were fully state-funded Economic competitiveness over alternatives Regulatory, licensing and safety issues in Post Fukushima. Page 32 of 37

33 Elements to Facilitate SMR Deployment Module 1: Design Development and Deployment Issues Average Ranking SMRs inexpensive to build and operate SMRs with lower generating cost 1 2 Multi-modules SMR deployment SMRs with flexibility for cogeneration Passive safety systems SMRs with automated operation feature Modification to regulatory, licensing SMRs with enhanced prolif resistance Build-Own-Operate project scheme Transportable SMRs with sealed-fueled Average Ranking (1 Is Most Important)

34 Summary is engaged in SMR Deployment Issues Nine countries developing ~40 SMR designs with different time scales of deployment and 4 units are under construction (CAREM25, HTR-PM, KLT-40s, PFBR500) Commercial availability and operating experience in vendors countries is key to embarking country adoption Countries understand the potential benefits of SMRs, but support needed to assess the specific technology and customize to their own circumstances Indicators of future international deployment show positive potential 34

35 THANK YOU VERY MUCH New Publication on SMR that covers Up-to-Date Water-Cooled and High Temperature Gas-Cooled SMR Designs Information Please download from: For inquiries on SMR, contact: Dr. M. Hadid Subki

36 Sample of Technology Assessment

37 Summary of advantages and challenges of SMR designs SMR Types Advantages Challenges Conventional PWR with external coolant loops Integral pressurized water reactor (ipwr) High temperature gas reactor Proven performance Established means of access to large components Eliminate large break LOCA Proven passive cooling with little operator or safety system action required Need solution to provide access for inspection or repair CRDM operability in new environment required Established system Few design options for cost reductions Large core, larger pressure vessel Internal graphite structures

38 Helical Steam Generators Advantages Some experience in nuclear applications Low pressure drop with large heat transfer path Produces superheated Steam ACP100, CAREM and SMART designs have a large number of pressure vessel connections, albeit well above the core Challenges Balancing the flow through the helical coils requires the use of flow restrictors. Testing in progress for NuScale to ensure that there are no unforeseen issues with flow induced vibration

39 SMR Coolant Pump Comparison SMR Designs Coolant Pumps Considerations SMR #1 SMR #2 4 canned motor, one in each coolant loop Helium circulator mounted on top of steam generator Proven design Integral design; no piping or additional support for separate component SMR #3 None Natural circulation. No pump support requirements (cooling, controls, indications, or power) SMR #4 SMR #5 4 canned motor horizontally mounted on RPV above top of S/G 4 canned motor short L shaped piping extension mid vessel Proven design Proven design SMR #5 None Natural circulation. No pump support requirements (cooling, controls, indications, or power) SMR #6 SMR #7 8 canned motor, vertically mounted, around pressurizer at top of vessel 8 canned motor, horizontally mounted above CRDMs Proven design Proven design SMR #8 None Natural circulation.

40 SMRs are not new : Small: Power 100 MWe Medium: Power 150 MWe : Small: Power 100 MWe Medium: Power 500 MWe ~ 1985: Small: Power 100 MWe Medium: Power 500 MWe

41 SMRs are not new : Small: Power 300 MWe Medium: 300 < P 700 MWe Including: AP600, SBWR, CANDU3 and CANDU : Small: Power 300 MWe Medium: 300 < P 700 MWe Started R&D for Advanced modular reactors Floating Nuclear Power Plants : Small: Power 300 MWe Medium: 300 < P 700 MWe Modular reactor trend of development HTGR SMR under construction in China ipwr SMR under construction in Argentina Some certified, many under licensing

42 SMR for Immediate Deployment CAREM-25 Full name: Central Argentina de Elementos Modulares Designer: National Atomic Energy Commission of Argentina (CNEA) Reactor type: Integral PWR Coolant/Moderator : Light Water Neutron Spectrum: Thermal Neutrons Thermal/Electrical Capacity: 87.0 MW(t) / 27 MW(e) Fuel Cycle: 14 months Salient Features: primary coolant system within the RPV, self-pressurized and relying entirely on natural convection. Design status: Site excavation completed, construction started in 2012

43 CAREM25 1

44 CAREM25 2

45 CAREM25 3

46 SMR for Near-term Deployment 2011 KAERI Republic of Korea SMART Full name: System-Integrated Modular Advanced Reactor Designer: Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI), Republic of Korea Reactor type: Integral PWR Coolant/Moderator: Light Water Neutron Spectrum: Thermal Neutrons Thermal/Electrical Capacity: 330 MW(t) / 100 MW(e) Fuel Cycle: 36 months Salient Features: Passive decay heat removal system in the secondary side; horizontally mounted RCPs; intended for sea water desalination and electricity supply in newcomer countries with small grid Design status: Standard Design Approval just granted on 4 July 2012

47 SMART 1

48 SMART 2

49 SMR for Near-term Deployment NuScale Full name: NuScale Designer: NuScale Power Inc., USA Reactor type: Integral Pressurized Water Reactor Coolant/Moderator: Light Water Neutron Spectrum: Thermal Neutrons Thermal/Electrical Capacity: 165 MW(t)/50 MW(e) Fuel Cycle: 24 months Salient Features: Natural circulation cooled; Decay heat removal using containment; built below ground Design status: Design Certification application expected in 4th Quarter of 2016

50 NuScale 1

51 NuScale 2

52 SMART 3

53 SMR for Near-term Deployment: mpower Full name: mpower Designer: Babcock & Wilcox Modular Nuclear Energy, LLC(B&W), United States of America Reactor type: Integral Pressurized Water Reactor Coolant/Moderator: Light Water Neutron Spectrum: Thermal Neutrons Thermal/Electrical Capacity: 530 MW(t) / 180 MW(e) Fuel Cycle: 48-month or more Salient Features: integral NSSS, CRDM inside reactor vessel; Passive safety that does not require emergency diesel generator Design status: Design Certification application expected by 3 rd Quarter of 2014

54 mpower 1

55 mpower 2

56 Westinghouse SMR 1

57 Westinghouse SMR 2

58 Main Engineering Characteristics of KLT-40s FNPP 2011 OKBM Afrikantov TYPE - SMOOTH-DECK NON-SELF-PROPELLED SHIP LENGTH, m WIDTH, m BOARD HEIGHT, m DRAUGHT, m DISPLACEMENT, t FPU SERVICE LIFE, YEARS 140,0 30,0 10,0 5, M.H.Subki 59 (/NENP/NPTDS/06Nov2012)

59 SMR for Near Term Deployment 2011 JSC AKME Engineering SVBR-100 Designer: JSC AKME Engineering Russian Federation Reactor type: Liquid metal cooled fast reactor Coolant/Moderator: Lead-bismuth System temperature: 500 o C Neutron Spectrum: Fast Neutrons Thermal/Electric capacity: 280 MW(t) / 101 MW(e) Fuel Cycle: 7 8 years Fuel enrichment: 16.3% Distinguishing Features: Closed nuclear fuel cycle with mixed oxide uranium plutonium fuel, operation in a fuel selfsufficient mode Design status: Detailed design

60 SMR for Near-term Deployment 2011 TOSHIBA CORPORATION 4S Steam Generator Reactor Turbine/ Generator Full name: Super-Safe, Small and Simple Designer: Toshiba Corporation, Japan Reactor type: Liquid Sodium cooled, Fast Reactor but not a breeder reactor Neutron Spectrum: Fast Neutrons Thermal/Electrical Capacity: 30 MW(t)/10 MW(e) Fuel Cycle: without on-site refueling with core lifetime ~30 years. Movable reflector surrounding core gradually moves, compensating burn-up reactivity loss over 30 years. Salient Features: power can be controlled by the water/steam system without affecting the core operation Design status: Detailed Design