NUCLEAR POWER: Prospects in the 21st Century Mike Corradini Nuclear Engr. & Engr. Physics WINS: Wisconsin Institute of Nuclear Systems
Background Information Population continues to increase worldwide (US/Europe: <1%/yr; Asia: > 2%/yr) Energy usage is growing more rapidly (US/Europe: ~1%/yr; Asia: >8%/yr) 400 quads (2000) and 444 quads (2004) Electrical energy use also increases (US/Europe: ~2%/yr; Asia: >5-8%/yr) Energy is the vital physical force behind our system P. Denholm, G.L. Kulcinski. (2004) "Life-Cycle Energy Requirements and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Large-Scale Energy Systems" Energy Conversion and Management.
What is the current situation in US? U.S. Energy Usage Solar <1% Geothermal 5% Nuclear 8% Natural Gas 23% Biomass 47% Petroleum 40% Coal 23% Renewables 6% Wind 2% Hydro 45% EIA 2004 Source: Renewable Energy Trends 2004; Energy Information Administration, August 2005. Note: Total U.S. Energy Supply is 100.278 QBtu; Energy Information Administration, August 2005.
World Energy Usage Relative Energy Use 1.6 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 1990 1995 2000 2005 Year FF Ratio NP Ratio HydroR RenewR FF share
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Conditions for Energy Sustainability: Adequate supply of energy resource Acceptable land usage for energy & fuel cycle Minimal by-product streams Economically feasible technology Neither the power source nor the technology to exploit it can be controlled by a few nations Business as usual cannot continue for energy without suffering from unintended consequences
Environmental Impacts: Area Requirements (km 2 / MW; Source - J. Davidson, 2006) Coal 0.01/0.04 Nuclear 0.001/0.01 1000 MW POWER PLANT RUNNING @ 100 % CAPACITY (8766 GWh/YEAR) Biomass 5.2 PV 0.12 Wind 0.79 Geothermal 0.003 Solar Thermal 0.08 Hydro 0.07-0.37
1000 Mwe-yr Power Plant Emissions COAL GAS NUCLEAR Sulfur-oxide ~ 1000 mt Nitrous-oxide ~ 5000 mt 400 mt Particulates ~ 1400 mt Ash (solids) ~ 1million mt CO2 > 7million mt 3.5mill. mt Trace elements ~ 1mt** ~ 1 kg ** Volatilized heavy metals: e.g., Mercury, Lead, Cadmium, Arsenic Spent Fuel 20-30 mt Fission Products ~1 mt (EIA - 2004)
Environmental Impact: US Sources of Emission-Free Generation (2004) Hydro 29.1% Geothermal 1.3% Photovoltaic <0.1% Wind <0.4 % Nuclear 69.1% http://www.energy.wisc.edu Source: EIA Emerging Energy Technology Summit 2007
Cost of Electricity (cents/kwh) 35 30 Cost of Electricity (2004 U.S. Average) ( /kwhr) * 2006: J. Davidson, Univ. Minn. 30-65 25 20 19 18 15 10 5 0 14 10 12 8 8 4 2.5 6 5 5 1.5 2 2 2
Future Energy Choices What can be done in the short-term (~1-10yr)? Improved energy efficiency (driven by cost & law) What can be done in the mid-term (~10-50yr)? Seek proven alternatives that do not exacerbate the situation (hybrid cars, nuclear, clean coal, wind?) What can be done in the long-term (>50yr)? Invest in R&D for major new technology gains (biofuels, advanced nuclear, solar-pv, electric cars) We need to make conscious choices => NUCLEAR
Evolution of Nuclear Power Systems Generation I Early Prototype Reactors Generation II Commercial Power Reactors Shippingport Dresden,Fermi-I Magnox Gen I LWR: PWR/BWR CANDU VVER/RBMK Gen II 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030
billion kilowatt-hours Top 10 Nuclear Countries (2000) 800 700 727.9 Measured by generation, U.S. nuclear program is: 600 500 400 300 200 375 306.9 160.4 as large as France and Japan (#2 and #3) combined; and larger than the other 7 nations in the top 10 combined Source: IAEA - 2003 110.9 97.8 91.2 70.4 70.1 67.4 100 0 US France Japan Germany Russia Korea RP UK Canada Sweden Ukraine
Capacity Factors Improvement 95% 85% 75% 86.8% in 1999 89.6% in 2000 90.7% in 2001 91.7% in 2002 NEI - 2004 65% 55% 80 Source: NEI 85 90 95 00
(cents/kilowatt-hour) Lowest Electricity Production Costs 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.09 /kwh in 1998 1.90 /kwh in 1999 1.81 /kwh in 2000 1.68 /kwh in 2001 EIA - 2004 2.0 1.5 Source: NEI 80 85 90 95 00
License Renewal:Extends Value 44 NPP Extended 34 NPP Applied 22 NPP Being Considered (2006)
44 NPP Extended 34 NPP Applied 22 NPP Being Considered
Nuclear Power Plants: US Potential Orders Company Site(s) Early Site Permit (ESP) Design, # of units TVA (NuStart) Bellefonte (TN) W: AP1000 (2) October 2007 South Carolina E & G Summer (SC) W: AP1000 (2) October 2007 Duke Cherokee County, SC W: AP1000 (2) October 2007 Construction/Operating License Submittal Timeline Progress Energy Harris (NC) Florida (Site TBD) W: AP1000 (2) TBD (2) October 2007 July 2008 Constellation (UniStar) Calvert Cliffs (MD) or Nine Mile Point (NY) Will go to COL with early submittal of siting info Areva: EPR (5) 4Q - 2007 Dominion North Anna (VA) Under review, approval expected 2007 Entergy (NuStart) Grand Gulf (MS) Under review, approval expected 2007 GE: ESBWR (1) November 2007 GE: ESBWR (1) November 2007 NRG Energy (STP) South Texas Project (TX) GE: ABWR (2) Late 2007 Southern Company Vogtle (GA) Submitted August 2006, Approval expected early 2009 W: AP1000 (2) March 2008 Entergy River Bend (LA) GE: ESBWR (1) May 2008 Amarillo Power Near Amarillo, TX Under development for 4Q/07 GE: ABWR (2) Soon as practicable after 2007 Texas Utilities TBD Straight to COL TBD: 2-6 GWe 2008 Exelon Clinton (IL) Under review, approval expected 2007 TBD TBD Florida Power & Light TBD TBD TBD Duke Davie County, NC Under consideration TBD Duke Oconee County, SC Under consideration TBD
Nuclear Power Safety There has not been a loss of life in the US due to commercial nuclear plants (TMI released a small amount of radiation) Chernobyl accident - a terrible accident with a bad design These plants are now closed or redesigned for operation Russian nuclear plant operations are being assisted by IAEA Regional deregulation of the electricity industry poses new challenges to the safe management of nuclear power plants. - Upgrades of power plant equipment and reliable replacement schedule - Risk-informed decision-making needs to consider cost-benefit issues => New plants (GenIII) will be safer than current designs
Nuclear Energy: Defense-in-Depth Reliable Operation - Safety is foremost - Doing it right Improving Engr. System Designs -Instrumentation - Materials Credible Regulation - Risk-based stds. - Public access Recruit/retain top-notch people for all sectors
Nuclear Power High Level Waste (HLW) All nuclear fuel cycle waste (except HLW) has been safely and reliably disposed through DoE and NRC regulations; milling, enrichment, fabrication as LLW Since 1982, US law defines spent nuclear fuel as HLW, since reprocessing has not occurred since 1976 (Japan and Europe is where reprocessing does occur) Spent fuel is currently stored at ~104 nuclear power plant sites (~ 2000 mt/yr; total ~50,000 mt) and planned to be stored/buried at one site in the US (Yucca Mtn) All nuclear electricity is taxed at 1mill/kwhre for a HLW fund (~ $0.8 billion/yr; total ~ $20 billion) => HLW radiation exposure at disposal site will be less than natural background radiation