American Nuclear Society MIT Section Harmonizing the French and American Policies for Nuclear Reactor Development Frank Carré franck.carre@cea.fr Commissariat à l Energie Atomique 1
French, European & American Reactor R&D Policies Outline 1 Global Rising Expectations for Nuclear Power & Multilateral Frameworks of Cooperation 2 Gen3 LWRs: a Worldwide Dynamic Market with National Preferences 3 Gen4 Fast Spectrum Reactors with Closed Fuel Cycle & Transition from LWRs 4 Gen4 (Very) High Temperature Reactors & Non-electricity Applications 5 Stakes in International Cooperation & Path towards a Global Vision of Nuclear Power 2
Assets of Nuclear Power Economic competitiveness ~28 vs 41-48 /MWh (gas, coal) [DGEMP-DIDEME Study 2003] Escalating price of oil High safety level and steady improvements gc eq /kwh 400 300 Dispersion due to various technologies Energy security 200 100 0 Coal Oil Natural gas Renewable Energies Green-house gas emissions from electricity Quasi no CO 2 emission Nuclear 3
World Population -8-7 World Population (Billions) -6 4
Renewal Scenario of current French LWR Fleet 70000 Major role of LWRs over the 21st century Gen-IV Fast Reactors Installed capacity (MWe) 6060000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 58 PWRs (20 MOX) 63.2 GWe Existing fleet 40-year plant life EPR Foak Plant life extension beyond 40 years Generation 3+ Generation 4 0 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 Average plant life : 48 years 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 Source : EDF ENC 2002 2060 5
Utilization of Uranium Ore for 1 GWe x year Open fuel cycle in LWRs 200 tons U nat E 20 tons U 5% 180 tons U dep R 1 t W + PF 0.2 t Pu 18.8 ton U rep Fast neutron reactors need only 1 ton U 238 (U dep & U rep ) that is converted into plutonium and burned in situ (Regeneration Breeding of fissile fuel) U dep generated by a LWR over a 50 year lifetime is worth > 5000 years of the same power output with fast reactors 6
Generations of Nuclear Power Systems 1950 1970 1990 2010 2030 2050 2070 2090 Generation I DISMANTLING Generation IV UNGG Generation II OPERATION CHOOZ REP 900 REP 1300 N4 Generation III EPR COEX OPTIMIZATION Generation IV PROTO 2020-25 + DIAMEX/SANEX/GANEX 7
Generation IV International Forum New requirements to support a sustainable development Steady Progress: - Economic competitiveness - Safety and reliability Nuclear Power for centuries - Resource saving - HL Radwaste minimisation - Non-prolifération New applications Hydrogen, synfuels, heat, water Industrial deployment ~2040 Multilateral cooperation with 3 levels of agreements: Intergovernmental Systems (x 6) R&D ProjectsP (3 to 6 / System) China Charter: July 2001 Framework agreement: February 2005 E.U. Russia 8
A New Energy Policy in Europe A new Energy Policy for Europe proposed by the European Commission (Jan. 2007) and endorsed by the Council (March 2007): Security of Supply Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions o At least -20% by 2020 o Towards a low carbon energy system by 2050 Competitiveness Negotiation of a European «Energy-Climate package» by December 11-12, 2008 Communication from the Commission (Nov. 2007): Maintain competitiveness in fission technologies, together with long-term waste management solutions Complete the preparations for the demonstration of a new generation (Gen-IV) of fission reactors for increased sustainability Implementing initiatives of the SET Plan (> 2008): Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform European Industrial Initiative to supplement R&D by large experimental and prototype facilities SNE-TP Strategic Research Agenda 9
European Sustainable Nuclear Energy Technology Platform GEN II & III LWRs New materials & fuels GEN IV (V)HTR Process heat, electricity & H 2 Strategic Research Agenda June 2008: First draft Nov. 2008: Final version Simulation & Experiments: reactor, safety, materials & fuels R&D Infrastructures Safety rules GEN IV Fast Reactor &Closed Cycle (SFR, LFR, GFR, ADS) SNE-TP R&D priority for industrial applications Needs for large experimental facilities Prototypes within the frame of Public/Private Partnerships Industrial initiatives 10
French & American Approach to Future Reactors Global rising expectations of nuclear power require a global vision of nuclear power 1 Safety & Reliability (Passive systems, Severe accidents, Containment ) 2 Use of resource for sustainability (Ressource & Waste global optimization ) 3 Total life cycle consideration (Fuel cycle back-end ) 4 Ability of knowledge & human management Gen2-Gen3 LWRs Gen4 Fast Reactors & HTRs 11
Candidate ALWRs from the USA, Japan & Europe EPR AP1000 APWR Areva NP Westinghouse Mitsubishi SWR 1000 ABWR Areva NP ESBWR GE & Hitachi General Electric 12
Optimization and evolution of the LWR nuclear fleet General objectives Increased competitiveness: Reactors lifetime extension Increased plant availability Increased flexibility (base-load & load-following) Improved fuel performance Power upgrade Safety maintained at best level Fuel cycle back-end 1979 TMI USA 1989 EPRI Rqts AP600, SBWR... AP1000, ESBWR 2006 Westing./Toshiba 2006 GE-Hitachi Alliance Europe 1986 Tchernobyl 1990 NP-International 1991 French SA Rqts 1995 Eu-Utilities Rqts EPR, SWR1000 2003 Areva 2006 Areva-MHI Alliance 13
EPR European Pressurized water Reactor EPR Flamanville (2012) Double containment with ventilation / filtering PWR, 1600 MWe, 60 years, K D ~91% Reinforced Containment (core catcher) Heat removal from the containment EPR Olkiluoto (2011) In-containment Water tank 4 redundant safety systems Reinforced safety features and economic competitiveness 14
EPR designed for 100% MOX core EPR designed to also improve the nuclear fuel cycle back-end High flexibility and compliance with a wide variety of fuel cycles Capacity to load up to 100% MOX core An enhanced capability to use Plutonium and save Uranium MOX UOX Plutonium annual balance kg Pu/year PWR 900 Control and scram rod EPR REP 900 UO 2 : + 200 REP 900 MOX: 0 EPR 100% MOX : - 670 15
A closed Fuel Cycle: An industrial Reality for 25 years already in France U nat Mines Processing of U ore Enrichment Vitrified waste Waste Treatment of spent fuels U rep Pu Melox U dep Fuel fabrication Retraitement du combustible usé et fabrication MOX ~1100t/yr La Hague Energy Reactors Paluel 16
Towards a sustainable management of nuclear materials and waste with the Act of June 28, 2006 National Plan for managing nuclear materials and radioactive waste (PNG-MDR) Stepwise program for Long-Lived Waste (High and Medium Activity) that accounts for the complementarity of various approaches: Partitioning & Transmutation: 2012: Assessment of Gen IV fast Reactors / ADS 2020: Fast Reactor Prototype Retrievable Geological Repository: 2015: Authorization decree 2025: Beginning of operation Atalante & Phenix Interim storage: Creation of new facilities in 2015 Guarantees for long term funding of radioactive waste management 17
Fast Reactors and New Fuel Cycle Plant in France ~2040 ~2040: - Deployment of Fast neutron systems - New spent fuel treatment plant 3 options: Recycling of U-Pu and MA to waste Recycling U-Pu & some or all MA (with UPu of separately) 1975 2000 2025 2050 2075 Source: EDF, ENC 2002 Reactors Operating Fleet Lifetime extension EPR Gen IV MA? Fuel Cycle U (U dep, URT) Pu (recycling as MOX fuel) Gen IV Cycle Recycling in Gen IV FR M.A. + F.P. ---> Glas waste Storage M.A. ---> glas or recycling F.P. ---> Glas 18
Global Actinide Management in LWRs & Fast Reactors Minimizing waste with advanced actinide recycling Plutonium is the major contributor to the long term radiotoxicity of spent fuel Plutonium has a high energetic potential Plutonium recycling Radiotoxicity after 1000 years Relative radio toxicity MA + FP Plutonium recycling Pu + MA + FP Spent Fuel No reprocesisng Plutonium Uranium Ore (mine) FP P&T of MA Minor actinides (MA) Fission Products (FP) Time (years) After plutonium, MA have the major impact to the long term radiotoxicity MA transmutation 19
US Used Nuclear Fuel Management Options (Phillip Finck (INL) @ GNEP NEAC Presentation April 2008) GNEP NEAC Presentation April 2008 Source: Finck (ANL) 20
There Have Been Recent Repository Siting Successes and Failures (Charles Forsberg (MIT) @ ANS Annual conference, May 2008) Several countries (Finland, Sweden, etc.) with successful repository siting Yucca Mountain: Part of the Presidential Campaign Other countries with difficulties Why such different outcomes? Herfa-Neurode: 36-year of Hazardous- Waste Disposal Operations 21
MIT Future of The Nuclear Fuel Cycle Study (Charles Forsberg (MIT) @ ANS Annual conference, May 2008) Two Overarching Questions What are the long-term nuclear fuel cycle choices that have desirable features? What are the implications for near-term policy choices? Ground Rules and Assumptions Range of Cases Analyzed to Understand Sensitivity of Results to Input Assumptions Alternative nuclear growth rates to be considered Several fuel cycles to be analyzed Once through Recycle for fissile fuel recovery Recycle for waste management Primary emphasis on the United States but within a global context 22
US & French Nuclear Strategy for LWRs & Fuel Cycle The Effects of History & Geopolitic Situation Nuclear accidents: TMI (1979) cooling accident with no off-site impact vs Tchernobyl (1986) reactivity accident with large radioactive releases over Europe EPRI Requirements (1989): passive safety features EU-Requirements (1995): passive & active + reinforced containment Natural Uranium: exists in the continental US vs very little in Europe, Japan Non-proliferation: 1978 Act in the US vs confidence in France in dedicated safeguards & technical measures LWR fuel cycle back-end: 0.1 c/kwh paid by utilities in the US vs institutional requirement in France to reprocess all spent nuclear fuel HLLLW repository: Yucca Mountain licence application to NRC (2008) vs French Act of 2006 on Radioactive waste management US: LWR fuel cycle back-end driven by spent nuclear fuel management & burning to possibly optimize repository performance France: recycling Pu to utilize U238 in LWRs and later in Fast Reactors and minimize waste to the repository + interest in high conversion LWRs 23
Fast Reactor Prototypes in Russia, India and China BN-800, PFBR & CEFR CEFR (China) 65 MWth, 20 MWe 2010 PFBR (India) 500 MWe, 2010 24
GNEP Reliable Fuel Service Model International Centres of Fuel Cycle Services International Standards for non-proliferation & safeguards Processes possibly country-specific (waste, technologies ) Expand nuclear energy while preventing spread of sensitive fuel cycle technology Fuel Cycle Nations Operate both nuclear power plants and fuel cycle facilities Reactor Nations Operate only reactors, lease and return fuel 25
European Industrial Initiative on Gen. IV FNR technologies 2008 2012 2020 SFR Reference (proven) technology SFR Prototype (250-500MWe) 2-4 G LFR Alternative technology ETPP European Technology Pilot Plant (LFR) 600-800 M GFR Supporting infrastructures, research facilities loops, testing and qualification benches, Irradiation facilities incl. fast spectrum facility (Myrrha) AND fuel manufacturing facilities 600 M 750 M 600 + (250-450) M ALLEGRO experimental reactor (GFR) Test bed of GFR technologies Fuel qualification and Minor Actinides transmutation Flexible fast spectrum material testing reactor Test of coupling components and high temperature heat applications Total 4,8 7,2 G R&D (15 years) 1,5-3 G 26
Three Party R&D program on Sodium Fast Reactor Defines objectives " Approves work on the 4 main areas of innovation High-performance core with enhanced safety Resistance to severe accidents and external aggressions Power conversion system optimized for minimum sodium-risks Revisiting the overall plant design for best operability Proposes the pathway from commercial reactor to prototype Proposes main goals for 2009 & 2012 milestones 27
Potential of progress with dense ceramic Pu/(U+Pu) = 0.2 Heavy Atoms density (g/cm3) Carbide Nitride Oxide Metal (U,Pu)C (U,Pu)N (U,Pu)O 2 (U,Pu)Zr 12.95 13.53 9.75 14 Melting point ( C) 2420 2780 2750 1080 Thermal conductivity (W/m/K) Carbide (and nitride) have an increased margin to melting which can benefit either to increase power density (economy, HM inventory), either to improve safety (accident prevention) 16.5 14.3 2.9 14 28
15 10 5 V/V % SFR Enhanced Core Safety 15-15 Ti lot CE 16-25 Ti Nb V TS2 15-15 Ti bas C 15-25 Ti Nb DS5 15-25 bas Ti 12-25 Ti N9 T C 0 400 MA 957 15-25 Ti Nb DS4 MA 956 450 500 550 CEA Ref. Alternative: Large-diameter MOX pins, small-diameter spacing wire: need for low swelling materials : F/M ODS, advanced austenitic steels Potential interest in Carbide fuel (UPu&MA)C Ferritic steel 14 18%Cr Nanostructured ODS Martensitic steel 9%Cr Nanostructured ODS 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Dose 200 dpa Stress 100 MPa Temperatures hot spot 800 C claddings compare to F/M materials Average 316 Ti Average 15/15Ti Best lot of 15/15Ti Embrittlement limit Ferritic rritic-martensitic (F/M) steels, ODS included 0 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190 200 dose (dpa) Supernova, Matrix 1 and the Matrix 2 experiment under preparation in Phenix 29
SFR Enhanced System Safety Enhanced safety Decrease or suppression of risks of sodium/water interaction through optimizing the Power Conversion System Optimized Steam Generator or Gas Turbine (nitrogen/helium or supercritical CO 2 ) Practical exclusion of large energy release in case of severe accidents Reduced sodium void reactivity effect + Enhanced Doppler effect (carbide fuel) EMP Loop design & conversion with Gas Turbine without intermediate system Sodium/helium IHX & Gas Stripper Impact on safety features Gas stripper IHX Na Brayton Gas conversion cycle 30
SFR Enhanced Economic Competitiveness Economic competitiveness with Gen III LWRs Reduced investment cost through system simplification Pool vs loop system Simplified / suppressed intermediate system Operability, in service inspection, maintenance & repair Heat Exchanger Steam Generator 10 19 20 Control Rods Turbine Generator Ele ctrical Power 17 Hot Plenum Condenser 71 55 Primary Sodium Hot Core Pump Pump Heat Sink Cold Plenum Primary Sodium Cold Pump Secondary Sodium SFR PWR 31
Sodium Fast Reactor (SFR) A new generation of sodium cooled Fast Reactors Reduced investment cost Simplified design, system innovations (Pool/Loop design, ISIR SC CO 2 PCS) Towards more passive safety features + Better manag t of severe accidents Integral recycling of actinides Remote fabrication of TRU fuel 2009: Feasibility 2015: Performance 2020+ : Demo SFR (FR, US, JP ) Steam Generator 2007 + Russia France Japan SFR Steering Committee U.S.A. Hot Plenum Primary Sodium Hot Control Rod s Core Heat Exchanger Pump Pump Turbine Generator Conden ser Heat Sink Electrical Power China Euratom countries South Korea Cold Plenum Primary Sodium Cold Pump Secondary Sodium 32
Harmonization of Prototypes in the US, Japan & France SFR prototypes by 2020-2025 250-600 MWe pool/loop 500-750 MWe loop type SG Secondary Pump 250-2000 MWt pool type Primary Pump/IHX Primary Pump/IHX French prototype Reactor Vessel Japanese prototype (cf. JSFR) American prototype (ARR) International harmonisation of SFR prototypes: Assure complementarity of prototypes (objectives, options, ) Optimize related infrastructures (including fuel fabrication facilities) 33
Flexible Fuel Cycle (U, Pu, MA) + Burning / Breeding Resource saving Waste minimization Non-proliferation GEN IV FNS Used fuel U nat U nat Actinides Treatment & Refabrication Waste FP Develop international non-proliferation standards to allow for diverse fuel cycle processes Keep all options open as they could be deployed in sequence Udep Udep Udep R T PF AM R T PF R T PF AM U Pu U Pu U Pu AM Recycling U Pu only Heterogeneous recycling Homogeneous recycling (GenIV) 34
Physical properties of nuclear fuels & Non-Proliferation UPuMA Homogen R. HEU 10 6 10 5 10 4 10 3 LEU Gamma source (x10 10 γ/s) Power (W) Neutron source (x10 6 n/s) Critical mass (x10-3 kg) 10 2 10 1 10 0 UPu COEX U+10%NpAm Heterogen R. U+10%MA (Het R.) 10-1 10-2 Pu 2035 W-Pu Pu 2016 n γ Decay heat Critical mass UPuAM /UPu x 200 x 6 x 2.2 x 7 35
Partitioning of Minor Actinides: Results & Goals Spent Nuclear Fuel PUREX /COEX U, Pu Np Demonstrations (99.8%) Sép. Am/Cm 2002 DIAMEX Nov. 2005 SANEX Dec. 2005 3-step strategy Fission products Ln Cm DIAMEX SANEX DIAMEX Am & Cm Am CO-EXTRACTION of An & Ln SEPARATION of An from Ln SÉPARATION of Am from Cm Next steps: Am only, simplify DIAMEX-SANEX, demo GANEX 36
French Prototype-2020 & Workshops at La Hague A demonstration of Partitioning and Transmutation representative of industrial scale Prototype of New Gen-IV Fast Reactor + Optimized recycling MA-fuel Fabrication Workshop Remote Fabrication 10s kg/yr M.A. Fuels M.A. La Hague Prototype of Gen-IV Fast Reactor (U)PuO 2 MOX Driver Fuel Fab Wkshp Pu 20 % A few tonnes/yr MOX Fuel Prototype-2020 250-600 MWe Breakeven core, multi-recycling of Pu & Demos of MA management Two workshops of fuel fabrication on the site of La Hague (~2017): Co-precipitated (U,Pu)O 2 fuel as driver (a few tonnes/year) MA-bearing experimental fuels (MA,U,Pu)O 2 & (MA,U)O2 Sustained R&D for decision in 2012 on reactor & fuel options 37
Global Actinide Cycle International Demonstration (GACID) DOE (USA) Supply of MA Transport of fuel pins JOYO MONJU Transport of powder Transport of fuel pins ATALANTE (Marcoule) - Co-precipitated powders - Fabrication of UPuAmNpCm0 2 pins LEFCA (Cadarache) Fabrication of UPuAmNp0 2 pins Milestones : 2008-12 - Démonstration of GANEX & other MA separations in Atalante 2015-20 - MA partitioning Laboratory at La Hague and fabrication of MA bearing fuels 2020-25 - Irradiation tests in Monju Collaborations : CEA, AREVA, CNRS (PARIS ) + JAEA (Japan) + US-DOE (United-States) 38
NEA assessment of closed Fuel Cycles (ENC 2005) Impact of Gen IV Fast reactors + P&T Fuel cycle cost Fuel Cycle Cost Total cost Total Cost 10 1 Uranium consumption Uranium Consumption 1a: Once-through cycle as reference. Max. dose (tuff) max. dose (tuff) 0.1 0.01 TRU loss TRU Loss 1b: Full LWR park, Pu re-used once max. dose (cla y) Max. dose (clay) max. dose (granite) Max. dose (granite) HLW Volume (+SF) HLW Volume (+SF) 0.001 Decay Heat (after 200yrs) Decay heat after 200 yrs Activity (after 1000 yrs) Decay Heat heat (after 50yrs) 50 yrs Activity after 1000 yrs 1a 1b 2a 3cV1 2a: Full LWR park, multiple re-use of Pu 3cV1: Full fast reactor park and closed fuel cycle (Gen IV). 39
Phased development of Fast Nuclear Energy Systems International / National Past experience / Time line Legacy of current nuclear fleet U + Pu + MA > 2040 1990 U + Pu U FP + MA 2020 Safety standards / Codification Non-proliferation standards + Physical protection, Safeguards Resource utilization Waste form Technology U FP only 40
Phenix International Roadmap for Sustainable Nuclear Systems Demo Diamex, Sanex, Ganex Dvpt & Demo NEXT, Todga (incl. MA fuel fab) Dvpt UREX+1a & AFCF French SFR Proto-2020 Separation Am, Cm + Mox & MA fuel fab plants at La Hague GACID in Monju et al. Jap Demo 2025 CFTC (incl. MA fuel fab) ABTR ARR 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 BN800, PFBR Exp. GFR GFR Proto 41
US & French Strategy for Fast Reactors & Fuel Cycle The Effects of History & Geopolitic Situation Safety: specific national experience and preference US IFR (1989): metal fuel, passive systems, prevention of severe accidents FR/EU Phenix, SuperPhenix, EFR (1973, 1986 ): oxide fuel ( carbide), passive & active systems, strong containment, prevention & mitigation of severe accidents Economic competitiveness: simplification for reduced investment cost, modular design for increased capacity factor, improved in service inspection & maintenance Natural Uranium: exists in the continental US vs very little in Europe, Japan Non-proliferation: 1978 Act in the US vs confidence in France in safeguards Energy Policy: 2006 Sustainable Nuclear Waste Management Act in France Fast spectrum prototype by 2020 for demonstrations of TRU recycle US: SFR for burning TRUs from LWR spent nuclear fuel to possibly optimize repository performance ( GNEP National ) or serve a secure development of LWRs worldwide with a fuel leasing & retrieval approach ( GNEP International ) France: SFR with closed fuel cycle for a sustainable nuclear energy + current research on TRU recycle optimization for enhancing repository performance and possibly non-proliferation demonstration in SFR prototype > 2020 42
GFR Gas Fast reactor & Experimental Prototype Robust decay heat removal strategy (passive after 24hrs) 2007 Pre-feasibility report on 1 st reference concept 2012 Up-graded concept & Feasibility report GCFR EU-FP6 Project Ceramic (SiC) clad fuel GFR 2400 MWt reference concept ETDR (50 MWt) 43
Gas Fast Reactor Generation IV Forum (GFR) A new concept of Gas cooled Fast Reactor: an alternative to SFR and a sustainable version of VHTR Robust fuel (ceramics) 1200 MWe t He ~ 850 C Co-generation electricity + H2 Robust mgt of cooling accidents Flexible recycling of TRU fuel 2012 : Feasibility ~2020 : ETDR (EU?) 2020 : Performance 2025+ : Demo GFR GCFR in EU FP5-6 Euratom countries France GFR Steering Committee Japan Switzerland GFR System Arrangement signed on Nov. 30, 2006 Fuel & System Integration & Assessment Project Arrangements to be signed in 2008 44
LFR Lead Fast Reactor ELSY Project (Euratom FP6) L. Cinotti LFR - Progress Report Gyeongju, November 29, 2007 480 C 400 C Operating temperature < 480 C to limit corrosion of advanced steels (austenitic & ferritic) 45
Lead Fast Reactor (LFR) An alternative Liquid Metal cooled Fast Reactor: thermal management of lead in service inspection and repair Weight of primary system (seismic behaviour ) Prevention of corrosion of 1 ry system structures 600 MWe T He ~ 480 C Potential for integral recycling of Actinides 2015: Feasibility 2020+: Techno Demo (EU?) 2020: Performance 2030+: LFR Prototype ELSY EUROTRANS in EU FP6 Euratom countries Japan LFR Steering Committee South Korea U.S.A. System Arrangement LFR to be signed in 2008 46
Nuclear Hydrogen for Transportation fuels & Industrial Processes Primary Energy Electrolysis Thermochemical Cycle H 2 BIOMASS +HYDROGEN BIOFUEL C 6 H 9 O 4 + eau 5.5 H2 6 -CH2- Transportation Distribution Storage 2 nd generation Biofuel Industrial applications Transportation (FC, ICE) 47
(Very) High Temperature Reactor Technologies V/HTRs R&D challenges 1. Manufacturing of particle fuel Requirement on kernel sphericity ( max / min ) fulfilled at 90% (November 2007) UO 2 TRISO particles (natural uranium) fabricated in GAIA (Cadarache) 2. High temperature gas-gas IHX and materials Different plate concepts appear as good candidate technologies H230 Plate Stamped Heat Exchanger (PSHE) (temperature ~ 850 C) 3. Helium technology Development and qualification of helium technology & components Helium circulator Helium Technology Platform (Cadarache) 2 mm Helium purification (CIGNE) ANTARES concept (600 MWt, 850 C) The interest to VHTR is essentially driven by its potential for a large scope of process heat applications 48
NGNP Research and Development Activities (Tom O Connor (DOE-NE) @ GIF Policy Group Mtg (Prague, April 2-3, 2008) Completed pre-conceptual design studies for three different vendor concepts led by AREVA NP, General Atomics and Westinghouse R&D (Nuclear fuel, materials, Codes and methods ) NGNP Licensing strategy Westinghouse Concept for NGNP. GA Concept for NGNP Areva Concept for NGNP 49
Lab-scale S-I Loop for Hydrogen production 200 l/h H 2 Lab-scale loop in collaboration with the United-States General Atomics: HIx section Sandia NL: H 2 SO 4 section CEA: Bunsen section June-September 2007: installation on the site of General Atomics in San Diego within the frame of an I-NERI Two CEA staff members on the site 2008: operation of the loop 50
Generation IV Very High Temperature Reactor (V/HTR) A nuclear system dedicated to the production of high temperature process heat for the industry and hydrogen 600 MWth - T He >900 C Thermal neutrons Block or pebble core concept Passive safety features H 2 : I-S Cycle, Hybrid-S & HT Electrolysis 2009: Feasibility 2015: Performance ~ 2020: PBMR, NGNP & Other Near Term Projects France U.S.A. Japan 2008 + Euratom countries VHTR Steering Committee Switzerland China South Africa South Korea Canada 51
US & French/EU Strategy for High Temperature Reactors The Effects of History & Geopolitic Situation History: specific national experience and preference US: Peach Bottom (1967-74), Fort Saint-Vrain (1974-89) [Block-type cores] Europe: Dragon (1964-75), AVR (1966-88), THTR (1983-89) [Pebble bed cores] Current status: HTTR (1998) in Japan & HTR10 (2000) in China Gen IV: renewed interest for Hydrogen, synthetic hydrocarbon fuels and process heat for the industry (900 1000 C) Medium term projects: PBMR (2014) in South Africa, HTR-PM (~2020) in China, NGNP (2021) in the USA Energy Policy: 2005 Energy Policy Act in the US Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) for demonstrations of hydrogen production US: NGNP in EPAct 2005 for demonstrations of nuclear hydrogen production France: HTR development to be driven by industry & marketing prospects + nuclear hydrogen production to be first achieved by electrolysis with LWR electricity + survey of specific needs for high temperature heat & marketing of HTR products 52
Master in Nuclear Engineering Education & Training Training Courses & Technical visits Doctoral school MoU with TUM in preparation: TUM preparing a 2-year Master Course (120 ECTS) and asking INSTN to host students for 3rd semester (40 ECTS) 53
French, European & American Reactor Strategy (1/3) Summary and Perspectives Global expectations of nuclear power require a global vision of nuclear power Optimize Gen2 LWRs operation, lifetime extension + dismantling Deploy Gen3 LWRs optimized for safety & economic competitiveness Develop Gen4 Fast Spectrum Reactors for sustainability & high temperature reactors for cogeneration (H 2, heat, synfuels ) United-States 1978 Non-proliferation Act 1979 Three Mile Accident (LOCA) 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act 1987 Focus on Yucca Mountain 1989 EPRI ALWR Rqts AP600/1000, SBWR, ESBWR 2000 Generation IV Int al Forum 2002 NP2010 Program 2005 Energy Policy Act (NGNP ) 2006 GNEP (national & international) 2008 YM License Application to NRC France & Europe 1976-94 La Hague UP2-400/800 + UP3 1986 Tchernobyl (RIA) 1990 NPI (EPR, SWR1000) 2003 AREVA 1991 Nuc. Waste Mgt R&D Act 1995 European Utilities Rqts (EUR) 1998 Shutdown of SuperPhenix 2006 Nuc. Waste Policy Act Strategy for fuel cycle back-end 2020 French SFR prototype w. recycle 2006 AREVA-MHI Atmea-1 2007 EU-SET Plan & SNE-TP 54
French, European & American Reactor Strategy (2/3) Summary and Perspectives LWRs: optimize Gen2 & deploy Gen3 + fuel cycle USA: passive safety features & fuel cycle back-end driven by SNF management & burning to possibly optimize repository France/EU: active/passive safety, strong containment, reprocess SNF & recycle Pu as MOX to save Uranium and minimize ultimate waste + interest in high conversion cores Gen4 Fast Reactors with closed fuel cycle USA: burning TRUs from LWR SNF to optimize repository ( GNEP National ) or serving the secure development of LWRs worldwide ( GNEP International ) France/EU: sustainable nuclear energy Gen4 SFR French prototype for TRU recycle demo (> 2020) (Waste Mgt Act 2006) + development of alternative Fast Reactor Technology (GFR / LFR) Gen4 (Very) High Temperature Reactors USA: NGNP in EPAct 2005 for demonstrating nuclear H 2 production (~2021) France/EU: HTR development driven by industry & marketing prospects participation in a prototype abroad? (+ Europe?) 55
French, European & American Reactor Strategy (3/3) Summary and Perspectives Federating national experience, R&D and demonstration programs into a consistent international technology roadmap Enhancing R&D and technology demonstrations (Generation IV Forum ) Fostering partnership for experimental or industrial prototypes Progressing towards harmonized international standards for marketing new reactor types with confidence o Safety (Multinational Design Evaluation Program ) o Non-proliferation, Physical protection o Recycle (Global Actinide Cycle International Demonstration [US, JP, FR], French SFR Prototype ) Accelerated advent of varied Gen4 nuclear systems to meet diverse energy needs of mankind Towards a joint phased development of reactor & fuel cycle technologies? Gen3 (Reactor + Recycle of UPu) Gen4 (Reactor + Recycle of TRU?) Training a young generation of nuclear scientists!!! 56