Nuclear Power: Great Potential & Great Challenges Hans Gougar, Director INL Advanced Reactor Technologies Development Office www.inl.gov 14 September 2016 isee Congress 2016
Over the next 20 minutes Is nuclear power sustainable? Points to ponder: Energy Use in an Industrial Society Availability of Resource Resource Utilization and Recycling Lifecycle emissions Generation IV concepts cleaner, safer, cheaper What s the holdup? What will it take to deploy? 2
How we make and use energy Served by carbonbased fuel 3
Sustainability: How long can we power today s reactors with known reserves? Worldwide Annual Requirements, shown in metric tons (MT)** Pre-Fukushima Projected by 2035 Assuming best case economic growth Projected by 2035 Assuming mean case economic growth 82 years (64,875 MT/yr) 39 years (136,000 MT/yr) 55 years (96,000 MT/yr) Reasonably Assured Reserves of Uranium, shown in metric tons (MT)* Australia 1,661,000 Kazakhstan 629,000 Russia 487,200 Canada 468,700 Niger 421,000 South Africa 279,100 Brazil 276,700 Namibia 261,000 USA 207,400 China 166,100 Ukraine 119,600 Uzbekistan 96,200 Mongolia 55,700 Jordan 33,800 Other 164,000 TOTAL 5,326,500 Assumes a once-through burning of 3-5% enriched U Does not include unproven reserves (10.5B MT) and seawater (4.5B MT) 230 years *World Nuclear Association, July 2016 ** OECD Nuclear Energy Agency
Fuel Recycling High conversion or even breeding could extend known U reserves for thousands of years essentially unlimited, 24/7, carbon-free electricity and heat. It also would enable the use of thorium, which is more abundant than uranium More energy from the same fuel means less waste Both options would require retooling of the nuclear fuel supply infrastructure and new reactor concepts ($$) Sustainable: of, relating to, or being a method of harvesting or using a resource so that the resource is not depleted or permanently damaged - Merriam-Webster Dictionary U-235, 3% U-235, 1% Plutonium, 1% U-238, 97% U-238, 95% Uranium Mining Fuel Fabrication Fresh Fuel Power Plants Spent Fuel Recycled Uranium Electricity, Process Heat Spent Fuel Advanced Recycling Reactor Fission Products Advanced Recycling Center Fission Products, 3% Reusable material, 97% Geologic Repository Nuclear Fuel Recycling Center
8000 7000 6000 5000 Impact Land, Concrete, and Steel* * Compiled by The Breakthrough Institute from multiple sources; www.thebreakthrough.org check the report for the assumptions made Land Use Shown in m 2 per GWh/yr 5700 7500 400 350 300 250 Concrete Use Shown in metric tons per GWh/yr 338 120 100 80 Steel Use Shown in metric tons per GWh/yr 105 4000 3000 3200 200 150 159 60 40 43 2000 1000 900 1100 1200 100 50 43 43 20 8 10 0 Geothermal Wind - Onshore Nuclear Concentrated Solar Coal (Strip Mining) Photovoltaic Solar 0 Nuclear Photovoltaic Solar Wind - Onshore Concentrated Solar 0 Nuclear Photovoltaic Solar Wind - Onshore Concentrated Solar 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% Capacity Factor * Energy Information Administration 2015 figures 92% 50% 40% 30% 20% 29% 34% 23% 10% 0% Nuclear Photovoltaic Solar Wind - Onshore Concentrated Solar Base of Yangjiang containment dome prior to concrete pour World Nuclear Association Base for a Wind Turbine prior to concrete pour - Windfarmaction
Lifecycle emissions in kg CO 2 equivalent* *Compiled by The Breakthrough Institute from multiple sources; www.thebreakthrough.org Includes construction, fuel mining, transport, operation, decommissioning, and waste disposal 1200 Lifecycle emissions Shown in kg CO 2 equivalent 1062 1000 800 757 795 657 600 400 http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/heat/art/graph3.jpg 398 500 245 247 200 130 0 3 4 4 7 9 13 CCS - Carbon Capture and Storage IGCC - Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle CCGT- Combined Cycle gas turbine
Nuclear consumes a lot of water though* 1600 Water consumption, shown in gal/mwh 1400 1200 1000 Beaver Valley NPP (PA) 800 600 400 200 0 Ratcliffe-on-Soar Coal Power Station (UK) - By Alan Zomerfeld - Own work, CC BY-SA 2.5, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=866641 Data Source: http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/etip-dp-2010-15-final-4.pdf Low Average High OT Once-through cooling CL Closed-loop cooling Dry Indirect cooling, dry cooling tower0 *Mielke, et al, Energy Technology Innovation Policy Research Group, Discussion Paper #2010-15
Generations of Nuclear Power Why not this? 9
Generation IV Mission To realize the promise, GenIV reactors must be better than LWRs with respect to Resource Management less fuel and waste per useful energy produced) Economics lower life cycle costs, especially capital (Core) Safety lower risk of core damage, smaller or no EPZ) Proliferation not a credible weapons path, secure against terrorism World nuclear generation by reactor type BWR 21% LWGR GCR 3% 2% PHWR 6% PWR Pressurized Water Reactor BWR Boiling Water Reactor PHWR Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor FBR 1% PWR 67% LWGR Light Water Graphite-Moderated Reactor GCR Gas-Cooled Reactor FBR Fast Breeder Reactor 10
Generation IV reactor concepts Common attributes All have negative temperature feedback All rely, in some cases exclusively, on simple passive decay heat removal mechanisms All can be configured to burn thorium, plutonium, All will exhibit modularity in one way or another And, of course, they will safer, cleaner, and cheaper than LWRs eventually VHTR SFR MSR SCWR Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) SuperCritical Water Reactor (SCWR) Lead-Cooled Fast Reactor (LFR) Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor (GFR) LFR GCR *These span a wide range of technologies, but there are others 11 Source: https://www.gen4.org/gif/jcms/c_60729/technology-roadmap-update-forgeneration-iv-nuclear-energy-systems?hltext=roadmap
What does it take to deploy a new reactor type? Time and money All systems, structures, components, fuels, materials, and analytical methods must be qualified for use under the anticipated chemical, thermofluidic, and perhaps neutronic conditions Standards are developed which codify conditions and procedures for qualification Testing may take years and M$ (ex. ASTM C 1051 85: Standard Specification for Sodium as a Coolant For Liquid Metal-Cooled Reactors (withdrawn in 2000). 12
The Path to (and cost of) Deployment 10 The US Government can help here Fermi-1, Ft St. Vrain, BN-800, THTR, HTR-PM Sanmen I AP1000 $B invested 5 EBR-II, AVR Peach Bottom-1 Technical Readiness Level GFR MSR/LFR/SCWR VHTR/SFR LWR/PHWR 13
Can we speed up deployment? More money for qualification activities usually helps Level playing field Licensing Technology-neutral licensing Bounded, phased licensing pathways that recognize inherent safety features, allow for experimentation and innovation An acknowledgement that nuclear is a relatively benign and very safe technology create a licensing pathway that allows experimentation Modular construction New experimental and data analysis techniques get more out of measurements and legacy data Science and engineering to help identify/design candidate materials Automation to reduce staffing; intelligent diagnostics innovate or die There are great concepts waiting for a chance to compete. We must do nuclear differently (R&D, construction, licensing, financing, and public communications) 14
Thank you Hans.Gougar@inl.gov Bobhill@anl.gov National Technical Co-Director National Technical Co-Director Tom.O Connor@nuclear.energy.gov Program Director DOE-NE Advanced Reactor Technologies http://www.energy.gov/ne/nuclear-reactor-technologies 15
BACKUP 16
Sustainability: Known Uranium Resources and Exploration Expenditure There will always be ample fuel for nuclear reactors we will never run out. The only questions are from where, and at what cost. James Graham, Chairman, Board of Governors, World Nuclear Fuel Market, 2003
Very High Temperature Reactor (VHTR) This is the pressure boundary Prismatic or Pebble Bed Core 18
Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor Japan Sodium Fast Reactor 19
SFR Distinguishing Features Fast neutron spectrum High conductivity metallic coolant High power density Selling Points High fuel utilization (can breed fuel or burn actinides) Low operating pressure Sodium is mostly non-corrosive Fairly mature technology (EBR-2, Fermi-1, Monju, Phénix, BN-600, BN-800) Weaknesses or Development Issues Opaque coolant (in-service inspection). Some issues with larger cores (e.g. Na-voiding risk) Some fuel/source term qualification remaining. Analysis methods are outdated. Long-life cores (e.g. TerraPower TWR) need a cladding material 20
Selling Points Process heat driven ammonia fertilizer plant VHTR Fuel/core combination cannot melt under any circumstances High coolant temperature can serve many process heat applications But the cost of these reactors are such that they cannot yet compete with natural gas for the process heat market SFR Passively safe designs exist Much higher fuel utilization, can burn spent LWR fuel But the cost of recycling fuel is still much higher than once through burning and disposal Uranium Mining Fuel Fabrication Electricity, Process Heat Recycled Uranium Advanced Recycling Reactor Geologic Repository Fission Products Nuclear Fuel Recycling Center Power Plants Spen t Fuel Advanced Recycling Center 21
Tangent Recycling Fuel U-235, 3% Fresh Fuel U-235, 1% Plutonium, 1% Spent Fuel Fission Products, 3% U-238, 97% U-238, 95% Reusable material, 97% Uranium Mining Fuel Fabrication Power Plants Spen t Fuel Electricity, Process Heat Recycled Uranium Advanced Recycling Reactor Advanced Recycling Center Geologic Repository Fission Products Nuclear Fuel Recycling Center Difference in electricity cost between a FR with recycling and an LWR with direct disposal as a function of the price of uranium and for different initial capital cost differentials (FR-LWR in $/KWe) Bunn, M. et al, The Economics of Reprocessing vs. Direct Disposal of SNF, JFK School of Government, Harvard U., 2003. Reality Check: TradeTech Spot Price of U3O8 =$26.80 on June 24, 2016 There will always be ample fuel for nuclear reactors we will never run out. The only questions are from where, and at what cost. James Graham, Chairman, Board of Governors, World Nuclear Fuel Market, 2003 22
Tangent the Process Heat Market 23
Process heat applications are temperature dependent SFRs/LFRs HTRs/MSRs/GFRs 24
however, the economics* are not there yet HTR and CCGT NG Electricity Production Price vs. Price of Natural Gas with and w/o carbon tax *High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactor Projected Markets and Preliminary Economics, INL/EXT-10-19037 rev. 1, Aug. 2011. HTR and CCNG Steam Production Price vs. Price of Natural Gas with and w/o carbon tax $/MWhe 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 ~$4/MMBtu CCGT No CO 2 Cost ~$8.5/MMBtu CCGT $50/MT CO 2 Cost HTGR ~$4/MMBtu CCGT, No CO 2 Emissions Cost ~$7/MMBtu CCGT, $50/MT CO 2 Emissions Cost 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 NG price $/MM Btu 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 NG price $/MM Btu Reality Check: Henry Hub Spot Price of NG =$2.79 on June 27, 2016 HTGR 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 $/1000lbs