The glg slide deck as 1700 edt monday 2 may 2011

The glg slide deck as 1700 edt monday 2 may 2011

• 1.
  The Future ofNuclear Power in the context of from whence it cometh Thursday May 11, 2011 11:00 AM EDT Thomas S. Drolet World wide cell: 1-828-493-1523 [email_address] President: Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc.
• 2.
  The Early DevelopmentOf Nuclear Power Plant Energy Most early atomic research focused on developing an effective weapon for use in World War II. The work was done under the code name Manhattan Project . Enrico Fermi led a group of scientists in initiating the first self- sustaining nuclear chain reaction. This historic event occurred on December 2, 1942, in Chicago under the local University football stadium.   The USA government decided to encourage the development of nuclear energy for electricity in 1946 through an Act of Congress creating the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) in 1946. The AEC authorized the construction of Experimental Breeder Reactor I at a site in Idaho. The reactor generated the first electricity from nuclear energy on December 20, 1951.
• 3.
  The Early DevelopmentOf Nuclear Power Plant Energy (cont) Admiral H. Rickover was designated the head of a quite secret team to develop Nuclear Powered submarines (he brought many private sector brains inside a Government group). This pressurized water, fairly highly enriched nuclear fueled, propulsion system became the early template for the first commercial reactors.   The first commercial electricity-generating plant powered by nuclear energy was located in Shippingport, Pennsylvania and first produced electricity in 1957. Private industry became more and more involved in developing light-water reactors after Shippingport became operational.   Federal nuclear energy programs shifted their focus to developing other reactor technologies (BWR, HTGCR, Pebble Bed etc).   The nuclear power industry in the U.S. grew rapidly in the 1960’s through the late 70’s via Utility adoption routes (mostly PWR and BWR design’s).
• 4.
  In the USA,Westinghouse designed the first fully commercial PWR of 250 MWe at Yankee Rowe starting up in 1960 and operated through 1992.   The boiling water reactor (BWR) was developed by the Argonne National Laboratory, and the first one, Dresden-1 of 250 MWe, designed by General Electric, was started up earlier in 1960.   By the end of the 1960s, orders were being placed for PWR and BWR reactor units of more than 1000 MWe.   Canadian reactor development started down a quite different track, using natural uranium fuel and heavy water as a moderator and coolant. The first unit started up in 1962. Today there are some 30 PHWR’s of the CANDU type in some 8 countries. The Early Development Of Nuclear Power Plant Energy (cont)
• 5.
  France started outwith a gas-graphite design similar to Magnox in the UK and the first reactor started up in 1956. France then settled on three successive generations of standardized PWR’s.   Soviet nuclear power plants went in 2 different directions:   1--boiling water graphite channel reactor ( RBMK) began operating near Leningrad in 1971.   2 -- pressurized water reactor (PWR) known as a VVER (Veda-Vodyanoi Energetichesky Reaktor -- Water Cooled Power Reactor) was built in 1000 MWe standardized size. The Early Development Of Nuclear Power Plant Energy (cont)
• 6.
  In the USA,UK, France and Russia a number of experimental fast neutron reactors produced electricity from 1959, the last of these closing in 2009. This left Russia's BN-600 as the only commercial fast reactor.   Around the world, with few exceptions, other countries have chosen light-water designs for their nuclear power programs, so that today 60% of the world capacity is PWR and 21% BWR.   From the late 1970s (after TMI) to about 2002 the nuclear power industry suffered some decline and stagnation. Few new reactors were ordered, the number coming on line from mid 1980s little more than matched retirements, though capacity increased by nearly one third and output increased 60% due to capacity plus improved load factors. The Early Development Of Nuclear Power Plant Energy (cont)
• 7.
  The share ofnuclear in world electricity from mid 1980s was fairly constant at 16-17%. Many reactor orders from the 1970s were cancelled. The uranium price dropped accordingly. Oil companies, which had entered the uranium field, then bailed out and there was a consolidation of uranium producers.   However, by the late 1990s the first of the third-generation reactors was commissioned - Kashiwazaki-Kariwa 6 - a 1350 MWe Advanced BWR, in Japan. This was a sign of the recovery to come. The Early Development Of Nuclear Power Plant Energy (cont)
• 8.
  1979, March 28. The worst accident in U.S. commercial reactor history occurs at the Three Mile Island nuclear power station near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. The accident is caused by a loss of coolant from the reactor core due to a combination of mechanical malfunction and human error.   1983, January 7 . The Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) establishes a program to site a repository for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste, including spent fuel from nuclear power plants. It also established fees for owners and generators of radioactive waste and spent fuels, who pay the costs of the program.   1985 The Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO) forms a national academy to accredit every nuclear power plant's training program.   The Early Development Of Nuclear Power Plant Energy (cont)
• 9.
  1986, April26. Operator error causes two explosions at the Chernobyl No. 4 nuclear power plant in the former Soviet Union. The reactor has an inadequate containment building, and large amounts of radiation escape.   1987, December 22. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) is amended. Congress directs DOE to study only the potential of the Yucca Mtn, Nevada, site for disposal of high-level radioactive waste The Early Development Of Nuclear Power Plant Energy (cont)
• 10.
  The Base LoadEffect Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 11.
  Peak Oil: Runningalmost Flat out Energy Prices Must Rise Peak Oil Production May Already be Here Science Vol. 331 March 25 2011, PP 1510 1511
• 12.
  Scientific Advances HaveChanged 1960s Mark 1 Nuclear Designs totally out of date In seismology particularly tsunami research In geological understanding of fault structures. In metallurgy and reactor construction techniques. In digital instrumentation and control systems. In fuel design and spent fuel handling and dry storage. In back up emergency cooling systems
• 13.
  Can Renewable EnergyReplace Nuclear in the next decade? (New York Times, March 26, 2011 )
• 14.
  A Significant Investmentin Gen 3+ Nuclear Energy in The Emerging World (2000 -‐2008)
• 15.
  Ten Needs of New Nuclear in the New Energy Future Increased Safety, convective cooling, backup shutdown systems Modular construction Multiple back-up cooling and emergency power supply systems Clean across the supply chain Cheaper to build and cheaper kw-hr operational costs. High availability (base load, fuel and grid) Long Lived infrastructure Predictable regulation and approval processes Waste Disposal System and potentially Fuel reprocessing New fuel cycle?
• 16.
  New Nuclear Technologies Generation 4 Nuclear (2030) Pebble Bed (Chinese test bed 2011) Travelling Wave (Gates, Areva 2030) CANDU (The Avro Arrow Phenomenon ?) Modular Systems (Babcock and Wilcox 2020) Passive Cooling (AP 1000 Today) Thorium, Beryllium/ Uranium, MOX (IBC R&D 2015 Helium cooling in place of water.
• 17.
  Six Safer Nuclear:AP1000 ESBWR Pebble Bed mPower Liquid Fluoride Thorium Travelling Wave
• 18.
  Canada’s 3 CANDUnuclear technology appears significantly safer. So why hasn’t Canada continued to develop it? Source—Toronto, Globe and Mail April 9, 2011
• 19.
  Traditional Global EnergyImperatives Cleaner, cheaper, more accessible energy. Increased electrification of economic activity, to 2050. Energy self-‐reliance / independence. Development of enhanced battery technology. Development of 2 nd generation “Smart” electrical grid.
• 20.
  The World’s NewEnergy Imperative: 2011 – 2050 - Development of: Conventional / Shale Gas and Oil, LNG and CBM + Combined cycle gas electric generation. Natural gas to diesel (GTL) infrastructure. Advanced battery technology: lithium, vanadium, manganese. Supplemental oil and coal resources. Materials R&D on bio diesel, solar, geothermal and wind. Superconductivity + Second Gen electrical grid build out.
• 21.
  Stepping on the(Natural) Gas
• 22.
  Shale Gas
• 23.
  The New EnergyFuture Safe and cheaper nuclear - New Nuclear Intermediate power from coal, shale gas, oil sands, shale oil and LNG. Renewable Energy Energy Efficiency Technologies Conservation Technologies Ironically the electric car forces increased global reliance on coal, (particularly in China) and Nuclear Energy. Centralized Power with better Transmission Systems Distributed Generation
• 24.
  The Need fora Move to Gen 4 Nuclear
• 25.
   
• 26.
   
• 27.
  World Nuclear EnergyGeneration (15%) Note: Twenty-one other countries account for another 399 billion KWh, representing 15% of total world nuclear generation . (i.e. UK, Sweden, Belgium, Taiwan, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Finland, India etc.   TOTAL: 31 Countries overall Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 28.
  Nuclear Power inthe USA From the US Energy Information Agency   There are 104 commercial nuclear reactors at 64 nuclear power plants in 31 States of the USA. Even though the installed capacity is only ~ 13 % of all electricity generating plants, Nuclear plants actually deliver 20 % of all electricity in the USA —(BASE LOAD). Between 1985 and 1996, 34 new reactors were placed in service. Nuclear generation has also increased as a result of higher utilization of existing capacity and from technical modifications to the nuclear plant Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 29.
  Three Mile IslandSchematics Three Mile Island Unit 2 and url of reasonably complete review of the Accident (Wikipedia) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Mile_Island_accident Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 30.
  Boiling Water ReactorSchematics Text about Boiling Water Reactor Design Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 31.
  Japan’s Nuclear EnergyPlants Text about Japan’s Nuclear Plants Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 32.
  The Most CriticalImperative: New Nuclear Reactors Types of Generation III and IV
• 33.
  Chernobyl Power SchematicsSchematic of Chernobyl and a url to Bernard Cohen’s (U of Pittsburg) Book (Chapter 7) on the details of the Accident   http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter7.html Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 34.
  General Electric MarkI BWR Reactor Source Washington Post April 2011 Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 35.
  Russian Power Reactorsin Operation Source Washington Post April 2011 Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 36.
  Status of FukushimaReactor Systems as of late April 2011 Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Source TEPCO
• 37.
  Status of FukushimaReactor Systems as of late April 2011 Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Source John Williams
• 38.
  Status of FukushimaReactor Systems as of late April 2011 Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Source John Williams
• 39.
  The Basics ofWhat Happened at Chernobyl Unit 4, 26 April 1986 The tragedy was a result of a combination of design flaws that made the reactor dangerous to operate and lapses in safety procedures.  The result was an accident which destroyed the reactor in a fatal release of heat, fire and steam in a matter of seconds.   The Chernobyl reactors were a special design using highly enriched uranium in a graphite moderator—and as we learned from studying the event—the accident could only have happened with this type of design.      The reactors were created to produce weapons grade plutonium for the Soviet military forces along with electricity for commercial use.    They were difficult to operate and required constant adjustment to remain stable.  The officer in charge was an electrical engineer who was not a specialist in reactor plants.   The sequence of events which caused the accident occurred when operators began an engineering procedure to test the main electrical generator, which was outside of the reactor building.        Delays in starting the test, and management pressure to meet the schedule, resulted in several crucial outcomes that combined to cause the accident.   (Source—ANS website) Please also see Bernard Cohen’s Excellent book (Chapter 7) at the url below for a detailed and accurate account of the accident. http://www.phyast.pitt.edu/~blc/book/chapter7.html Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011
• 40.
  Chernobyl Unit 4 Early May 1986 Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Chernobyl-4 reactor after the accident (center), its turbine building (lower left), and Chenobyl-3 (center right). (Source ANS website April 2011)
• 41.
  Fukushima Reactor UnitsStatus as of 27 April 2011 Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 04/27/2011 07:00 UTC Unit 1 2 3 4 Power (MWe /MWth) 460/1380 784/2381 784/2381 784/2381 Type of Reactor BWR-3 BWR-4 BWR-4 BWR-4 Status at time of EQ In service – auto shutdown In service – auto shutdown In service – auto shutdown Outage Core and fuel integrity Damaged Severe damage Damaged No fuel in the Reactor RPV & RCS integrity RPV temperature decreasing RPV temperature stable RPV temperature stable Not applicable due to outage plant status Containment integrity No information Damage suspected Damage suspected AC Power AC power available - power to instrumentation – Lighting to Central Control Room AC power available – power to instrumentation – Lighting to Central Control Room AC power available – power to instrumentation – Lighting to Central Control Room AC power available – power to instrumentation – Lighting to Central Control Room Building Severe damage Slight damage Severe damage Severe damage Water level of RPV Around half of Fuel is uncovered Around half of Fuel is uncovered Around half of Fuel is uncovered Not applicable due to outage plant status Pressure of RPV Slowly increasing Stable Stable CV Pressure Drywell Stable Stable Stable Water injection to RPV Injection of freshwater – via mobile electric pump with off-site power Injection of freshwater – via mobile electric pump with off-site power Injection of freshwater – via mobile electric pump with off-site power Water injection to CV No information No information No information Spent Fuel Pool Status Fresh water injection by concrete pump truck Freshwater injection to the Fuel Pool Cooling Line Freshwater injection via Fuel Pool Cooling Line and Periodic spraying Fresh water injection by concrete pump truck
• 42.
  Fuel Waste Disposal: Yucca Mountain Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 The NWPA’s 1987 amendment designated Yucca Mountain, by law, as the only site approved for consideration as the nation’s nuclear waste repository, and it appears that only Congress has the authority to change the law. The act also requires that the licensing process for Yucca be completed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission before any decision can be made concerning its fate. The President and Secretary have not considered this law and have attempted to withdraw the application from the NRC before it can deliver its final report.. President Obama’s executive memorandum of March 9, 2009, stated, “The public must be able to trust the science and scientific process informing public policy decisions. Political officials should not suppress or alter scientific or technological findings and conclusions . . . .”The Department of Energy’s license application is based on 30-plus years of scientific studies. The NRC’s independent review would answer once and for all whether the site is scientifically suitable to store nuclear waste, yet The Administration want to withdraw this application and thereby suppress the results of the review.
• 43.
  Thorium as aNuclear Fuel Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Estimated world thorium resources   (Reasonably assured and inferred resources recoverable at up to $80/kg Th) Country Tonnes % of total Australia 489,000 19 USA 400,000 15 Turkey 344,000 13 India 319,000 12 Venezuela 300,000 12 Brazil 302,000 12 Norway 132,000 5 Egypt 100,000 4 Russia 75,000 3 Greenland 54,000 2 Canada 44,000 2 Sou Afr 18,000 1 Other 33,000 1 World total  2,610,000  Self regulating when it is ON Passively safe when it is OFF Inherently safe in case of an accident
• 44.
  Simple Basics ofa Thorium Molten Salt Reactor Drolet & Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Molten Salt Reactor (MSR) Molten Salt Reactors (MSR’s) are liquid-fueled reactors that can be used for production of electricity. Electricity production and waste burn-up are envisioned as the primary missions for the MSR. Fissile, fertile, and fission isotopes are dissolved in a high-temperature molten fluoride salt with a very high boiling point (1,400 C) that is both the reactor fuel and the coolant. The near-atmospheric-pressure molten fuel salt flows through the reactor core. Fission occurs within the flowing fuel salt that is heated to ~700oC, which then flows into a primary heat exchanger where the heat is transferred to a secondary molten salt coolant. The fuel salt then flows back to the reactor core. The clean salt in the secondary heat transport system transfers the heat from the primary heat exchanger to a high-temperature cycle that converts the heat to electricity.
• 45.
   
• 46.
  Title Drolet &Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Text Here
• 47.
  Title Drolet &Associates Energy Services, Inc. © 2011 Text Here