Nuclear Energy: Future Directions?!
Nuclear Energy: Future Directions?! Per F. Peterson" Professor! Department of Nuclear Engineering! University of California, Berkeley"
October, 2010!
UC Berkeley!
U.C. Berkeley and Nuclear Science!
Seaborgium! Berkelium! Americium! Lawrencium! Neptunium and Plutonium! Uranium! Californium!
UC Berkeley!
California Electricity Consumption 2004!
UC Berkeley!
Implications of Binding Energy: Fission!
U + n" Cs+ Rb + 2n
235 92
137 55
97 37
energy balance! Q = 235(7.8MeV) "137(8.5MeV) " 97(8.9MeV)
= "200MeV
Lise Meitner!
Otto Hahn!
December, 1938 - Meitner and Hahn hypothesize that the strange chemistry of! the elements that are formed by neutron irradiation of uranium can be explained! by assuming fission of uranium has occurred.! UC Berkeley!
Energy from Nuclear Fission!
•! Fission Fuel Energy Density: 8.2 x 1013 J/kg! •! Fuel Consumed by 1000-MWe Plant: 3.2 kg/day! •! Waste:!
UC Berkeley!
Energy from Nuclear Fusion!
•! Fusion Fuel Energy Density: 3.4 x 1014 J/kg! •! Fuel Consumed by 1000-MWe Plant: 0.6 kg/day! •! Waste:!
UC Berkeley!
Energy from Fossil Fuels!
•! •! •!
Fossil Fuel (Coal) Energy Density: 2.9 x 107 J/kg! Fuel Consumed by 1000-MWe Plant: 7,300,000 kg/day! Waste:!
2006 Global Coal Consumption: 6.7 billion tons! UC Berkeley!
Nuclear power has changed since the 1980’s!
* 2005 Preliminary Source: Global Energy Decisions / Energy Information Administration Updated: 4/06
UC Berkeley!
Context: Recent Events! •! Important recent events!
–! Global coal consumption reaches 6.7 billion tons per year in 2006! –! In 2004, average production cost of nuclear electricity reaches 1.7 cents/ kWhr, average capacity factor 90.7%, 70% fraction of all non-fossil energy produced in United States ! –! As of June 2006, 42 U.S. plants had received 20-year license renewals, 8 were under review, and 23 were planned for submission by 2010 (70% of U.S. plants total). Nuclear Regulatory Commission announces plans to hire 300 engineers (October 2005)! –! Announcements for new Combined Construction and Operating Licenses (as of October 2008):! »! COL applications for 20 plants already submitted! »! Total existing or expected COL applications: 21 plant sites, 31 plants! –! ITER Starts construction, 2008! –! National Ignition Facility comes to full power, March 2009!
UC Berkeley!
Nuclear has low life-cycle CO2 emissions!
If we assume that nuclear electricity is used for uranium enrichment, rather than coal electricity, nuclear life-cycle emissions drop further!
UC Berkeley!
Life-cycle impacts of energy production include effects on workers and on public health!
Coal mine worker, China, 2004! UC Berkeley!
U.S. coal mining provides a comparison for worker safety!
(Chernobyl worker fatalities: 31 workers)! UC Berkeley!
Worker safety in the nuclear industry much higher than other energy sectors! Nuclear Energy x 10*!
Nuclear in! 1980!
*INPO,
National Institute of for Occupational Health and Safety!
Nuclear News, May, 2001!
UC Berkeley!
Recent study shows healthy worker effect! •! Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health recently completed health study for nuclear workers (Nov., 2004)
–! Study involved 53,698 nuclear power plant employees –! Compared to the general population, mortality rates were: »! 35 percent lower for all cancers »! 66 percent lower for all non-cancers »! 60 percent lower for all-causes of mortality. –! For the 53,698 employees studied, there were 1,190 actual deaths when, compared to the general population, more than 2,900 deaths would have been expected based on factors including age and gender –! No statistically detectable correlation was found between worker doses and cancer
UC Berkeley!
Nuclear Economics and Life Cycle Assessment!
UC Berkeley!
Uranium, the fuel for fission energy, is abundant in the environment, as are the fuels for fusion!
Natural uranium (99.3% 238U, 0.7%235U) concentrations in U.S. soils, from USGS aerial surveys (1970 to 1980) using gamma-ray spectrometry to record the radioactivity of the isotope bismuth-214 in upper 50 cm of soil.! National average: 1.8 parts per million by weight ! ! != 6 tons/mile2 in top yard of soil!
UC Berkeley!
Resource inputs will affect future capital costs and competition! •! Nuclear: 1970’s vintage PWR, 90% capacity factor, 60 year life [1]! –! 40 MT steel / MW(average)! –! 90 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
•! Wind: 1990’s vintage, 6.4 m/s average" wind speed, 25% cap. factor, 15 year life [2]! –! 460 MT steel / MW (average)! –! 870 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
•! Coal: 78% cap. factor, 30 year life [2]! –! 98 MT steel / MW(average)! –! 160 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
•! Natural Gas Combined Cycle: 75%" cap. factor, 30 year life [3]! –! 3.3 MT steel / MW(average)! –! 27 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
Concrete + steel are >95% of construction inputs, and become more expensive in a carbon-constrained economy!
1. R.H. Bryan and I.T. Dudley, “Estimated Quantities of Materials Contained in a 1000-MW(e)! PWR Power Plant,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TM-4515, June (1974)! 2. S. Pacca and A. Horvath, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 3194-3200 (2002).! 3. P.J. Meier, “Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Systems and Applications for! Climate Change Policy Analysis,” U. WisconsinReport UWFDM-1181, August, 2002.!
UC Berkeley!
Material inputs are a small fraction of the construction cost of a nuclear power plant! Commodity Aluminum (metric tons) (2) Brass (metric tons) (2) Bronze (metric tons) (3) Carbon steel (metric tons) (2) Concrete (m^3) (3) Copper (metric tons) (2) Galvanized iron (metric tons) (2) Iconel (metric tons) (2) Insulation (thermal) (m. tons) (3) Lead (metric tons) (2) Nickel (metric tons) (2) Paint (gal) (3) Total commodities cost
Quan. (1)
Price 3/20/08
18 10 25 32731 75026 694 1257 124 922 46 1 17500
$2,794 $4,950 $4,950 $601 $98 $7,634 $721 $7,000 $1,000 $2,640 $28,446 $20
Cost ($/kW) $0.05 $0.05 $0.12 $19.67 $7.36 $5.30 $0.91 $0.87 $0.92 $0.12 $0.03 $0.35 $35.75
Nuclear energy costs are not sensitive to construction material costs, just as nuclear energy costs are not sensitive to uranium costs…! (1) R.H. Bryan and I.T. Dudley, “Estimated Quantities of Materials Contained in a 1000-MW(e)PWR Power Plant,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TM-4515, June (1974)! 2. Prices for 3/20/08 downloaded from http://www.metalprices.com/FreeSite/metals/cu/cu.asp! 3. Assumed price!
UC Berkeley!
MIT 2010 Study evaluated cost of electricity from new nuclear, coal and natural gas plants!
"The Future of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: An Interdisciplinary Study," Summary Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010. !
UC Berkeley!
New nuclear infrastructure will be more highly optimized! 1978: Plastic models on roll-around carts!
2000: 4-D computer aided design! and virtual walk-throughs!
McGuire Nuclear Station Reactor Building Models.!
In October 2008 Westinghouse and Shaw announced the construction of an AP-1000 module factory at Lake Charles, LA; Areva a collaboration with Northrop Grumman at Newport News shipyard!
!
1000 MW Reactor (Lianyungang Unit 1)
UC Berkeley!
“Modular” design no longer requires “cookie cutter” construction!
Modern cruise-ship construction! using 3-D computer aided design! and automated manufacturing!
1990’s ABWR onsite modular assembly reduced! construction time to 52 months!
New nuclear construction approach: Factory modular fabrication!
UC Berkeley!
Steel-plate sandwich wall construction facilitates modular, rapid fabrication! •! Steel plate used as:! –! Form! –! Reinforcement!
•! Modular, prefabricated components! •! Rapid construction! –! Eliminates set up and tear down of plywood framing!
AP-1000 Structural Submodule!
UC Berkeley!
Steel plate reinforcement creates a more ductile reinforced structure! •! Steel plate contains failed concrete, which retains significant compressive strength! •! Adopted by AP-1000 to upgrade containment for aircraft crash, " 2-month construction schedule savings!
–! Westinghouse has built a module fabrication factory in China capable of supplying 2 AP-1000’s per year, and will open a U.S. plant at Lake Charles, LA!
•! Steel plate construction has been adopted for new plants in Korea, with estimated 10-month construction schedule savings !
UC Berkeley!
The first AP-1000 under construction in Sanmen, China!
~ 20 m!
770-ton AP-1000 auxiliary building module, assembled from factory prefabricated plate components, being set in place onto foundation, Sanmen, China, July 2009!
UC Berkeley!
New licensing and construction plans call for a high degree of design standardization!
USNRC Construction License Review Plans! UC Berkeley!
Future Nuclear Energy Systems!
UC Berkeley!
The Generations of Nuclear Energy!
Source: DOE Generation IV Project! UC Berkeley!
Gen III+: The AP-1000!
UC Berkeley!
High-temperature Gen IV reactors can achieve higher efficiency/power density!
PBMR! 165 MWe!
HTR-300! 274 MWe!
GT-MHR! 286 MWe!
PB-AHTR! 410 MWe!
UC Berkeley!
The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor! •! Being constructed in South Africa!
•! Helium-cooled modular reactor uses “pebble fuel”! •! Power output options:!
–! 200 MWe gas Brayton cycle! –! 136 MWe gas Brayton and" 286 MWt process" steam production! –! 500 MWt high-" temperature process heat! –! 250 MWc hydrogen!
•! Can be used to produce" low-carbon transportation" fuels! UC Berkeley!
Advanced High-Temperature Reactors (AHTRs) combine two older technologies! Coated particle fuel!
max.! PB-AHTR! temp!
1600°C!
Fuel failure fraction vs. temperature!
Liquid fluoride salt coolants!
Excellent heat transfer! Transparent, clean fluoride salt! Boiling point ~1400ºC! Reacts very slowly in air! No energy source to pressurize" containment!
UC Berkeley!
The PB-AHTR power conversion system design is derived from the PBMR/Mitsubishi design!
Generators Compressors Turbines Recuperator Primary Pumps Reactor
Intercoolers Precoolers Helium heaters Intermediate drain tank Intermediate pumps Intermediate heat exchangers
168-MWe PBMR/Mitsubishi! helium cooled HTR!
410-MWe PB-AHTR! liquid cooled HTR! To scale!
UC Berkeley!
The Modular PB-AHTR is a compact pool-type reactor with passive decay heat removal!
UC Berkeley!
The Modular PB-AHTR uses seismic base isolation!
Hearst Mining Building, UCB!
Grade level!
•! •!
Structure isolated with resonant period of 3.6 seconds! Isolators filter out higher frequency seismic energy!
UC Berkeley!
The current Modular PB-AHTR plant design is compact compared to LWRs and MHRs!
Reactor Type
1970’s PWR ABWR ESBWR EPR GT-MHR PBMR Modular PB-AHTR †
Reactor Power (MWe) 1000 1380 1550† 1600 286 170 410
Reactor and Auxiliaries Volume (m3/MWe) 129 211 132† 228 388 1015 105
Turbine Building Volume (m3/MWe) 161 252 166 107 0 0 115
Ancillary Total Structures Building Volume Volume 3 (m /MWe) (m3/MWe) 46 336 23 486 45 343 87 422 24 412 270 1285 40 260
The ESBWR power and reactor building volume are updated values based on the Design Certification application arrangement drawings.
UC Berkeley!
Conclusions! •! Recent activity in nuclear energy has been substantial!
–! Nuclear energy construction and operation use very small quantities of natural resources! »! Resource scarcity is unlikely to emerge as a future constraint! –! Construction of first new U.S. nuclear plants likely to start in 2012! –! New research to demonstrate high-efficiency electricity and hydrogen production! –! New conceptual designs with very low capital costs!
UC Berkeley!
October, 2010!
UC Berkeley!
U.C. Berkeley and Nuclear Science!
Seaborgium! Berkelium! Americium! Lawrencium! Neptunium and Plutonium! Uranium! Californium!
UC Berkeley!
California Electricity Consumption 2004!
UC Berkeley!
Implications of Binding Energy: Fission!
U + n" Cs+ Rb + 2n
235 92
137 55
97 37
energy balance! Q = 235(7.8MeV) "137(8.5MeV) " 97(8.9MeV)
= "200MeV
Lise Meitner!
Otto Hahn!
December, 1938 - Meitner and Hahn hypothesize that the strange chemistry of! the elements that are formed by neutron irradiation of uranium can be explained! by assuming fission of uranium has occurred.! UC Berkeley!
Energy from Nuclear Fission!
•! Fission Fuel Energy Density: 8.2 x 1013 J/kg! •! Fuel Consumed by 1000-MWe Plant: 3.2 kg/day! •! Waste:!
UC Berkeley!
Energy from Nuclear Fusion!
•! Fusion Fuel Energy Density: 3.4 x 1014 J/kg! •! Fuel Consumed by 1000-MWe Plant: 0.6 kg/day! •! Waste:!
UC Berkeley!
Energy from Fossil Fuels!
•! •! •!
Fossil Fuel (Coal) Energy Density: 2.9 x 107 J/kg! Fuel Consumed by 1000-MWe Plant: 7,300,000 kg/day! Waste:!
2006 Global Coal Consumption: 6.7 billion tons! UC Berkeley!
Nuclear power has changed since the 1980’s!
* 2005 Preliminary Source: Global Energy Decisions / Energy Information Administration Updated: 4/06
UC Berkeley!
Context: Recent Events! •! Important recent events!
–! Global coal consumption reaches 6.7 billion tons per year in 2006! –! In 2004, average production cost of nuclear electricity reaches 1.7 cents/ kWhr, average capacity factor 90.7%, 70% fraction of all non-fossil energy produced in United States ! –! As of June 2006, 42 U.S. plants had received 20-year license renewals, 8 were under review, and 23 were planned for submission by 2010 (70% of U.S. plants total). Nuclear Regulatory Commission announces plans to hire 300 engineers (October 2005)! –! Announcements for new Combined Construction and Operating Licenses (as of October 2008):! »! COL applications for 20 plants already submitted! »! Total existing or expected COL applications: 21 plant sites, 31 plants! –! ITER Starts construction, 2008! –! National Ignition Facility comes to full power, March 2009!
UC Berkeley!
Nuclear has low life-cycle CO2 emissions!
If we assume that nuclear electricity is used for uranium enrichment, rather than coal electricity, nuclear life-cycle emissions drop further!
UC Berkeley!
Life-cycle impacts of energy production include effects on workers and on public health!
Coal mine worker, China, 2004! UC Berkeley!
U.S. coal mining provides a comparison for worker safety!
(Chernobyl worker fatalities: 31 workers)! UC Berkeley!
Worker safety in the nuclear industry much higher than other energy sectors! Nuclear Energy x 10*!
Nuclear in! 1980!
*INPO,
National Institute of for Occupational Health and Safety!
Nuclear News, May, 2001!
UC Berkeley!
Recent study shows healthy worker effect! •! Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health recently completed health study for nuclear workers (Nov., 2004)
–! Study involved 53,698 nuclear power plant employees –! Compared to the general population, mortality rates were: »! 35 percent lower for all cancers »! 66 percent lower for all non-cancers »! 60 percent lower for all-causes of mortality. –! For the 53,698 employees studied, there were 1,190 actual deaths when, compared to the general population, more than 2,900 deaths would have been expected based on factors including age and gender –! No statistically detectable correlation was found between worker doses and cancer
UC Berkeley!
Nuclear Economics and Life Cycle Assessment!
UC Berkeley!
Uranium, the fuel for fission energy, is abundant in the environment, as are the fuels for fusion!
Natural uranium (99.3% 238U, 0.7%235U) concentrations in U.S. soils, from USGS aerial surveys (1970 to 1980) using gamma-ray spectrometry to record the radioactivity of the isotope bismuth-214 in upper 50 cm of soil.! National average: 1.8 parts per million by weight ! ! != 6 tons/mile2 in top yard of soil!
UC Berkeley!
Resource inputs will affect future capital costs and competition! •! Nuclear: 1970’s vintage PWR, 90% capacity factor, 60 year life [1]! –! 40 MT steel / MW(average)! –! 90 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
•! Wind: 1990’s vintage, 6.4 m/s average" wind speed, 25% cap. factor, 15 year life [2]! –! 460 MT steel / MW (average)! –! 870 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
•! Coal: 78% cap. factor, 30 year life [2]! –! 98 MT steel / MW(average)! –! 160 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
•! Natural Gas Combined Cycle: 75%" cap. factor, 30 year life [3]! –! 3.3 MT steel / MW(average)! –! 27 m3 concrete / MW(average)!
Concrete + steel are >95% of construction inputs, and become more expensive in a carbon-constrained economy!
1. R.H. Bryan and I.T. Dudley, “Estimated Quantities of Materials Contained in a 1000-MW(e)! PWR Power Plant,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TM-4515, June (1974)! 2. S. Pacca and A. Horvath, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 3194-3200 (2002).! 3. P.J. Meier, “Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Systems and Applications for! Climate Change Policy Analysis,” U. WisconsinReport UWFDM-1181, August, 2002.!
UC Berkeley!
Material inputs are a small fraction of the construction cost of a nuclear power plant! Commodity Aluminum (metric tons) (2) Brass (metric tons) (2) Bronze (metric tons) (3) Carbon steel (metric tons) (2) Concrete (m^3) (3) Copper (metric tons) (2) Galvanized iron (metric tons) (2) Iconel (metric tons) (2) Insulation (thermal) (m. tons) (3) Lead (metric tons) (2) Nickel (metric tons) (2) Paint (gal) (3) Total commodities cost
Quan. (1)
Price 3/20/08
18 10 25 32731 75026 694 1257 124 922 46 1 17500
$2,794 $4,950 $4,950 $601 $98 $7,634 $721 $7,000 $1,000 $2,640 $28,446 $20
Cost ($/kW) $0.05 $0.05 $0.12 $19.67 $7.36 $5.30 $0.91 $0.87 $0.92 $0.12 $0.03 $0.35 $35.75
Nuclear energy costs are not sensitive to construction material costs, just as nuclear energy costs are not sensitive to uranium costs…! (1) R.H. Bryan and I.T. Dudley, “Estimated Quantities of Materials Contained in a 1000-MW(e)PWR Power Plant,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TM-4515, June (1974)! 2. Prices for 3/20/08 downloaded from http://www.metalprices.com/FreeSite/metals/cu/cu.asp! 3. Assumed price!
UC Berkeley!
MIT 2010 Study evaluated cost of electricity from new nuclear, coal and natural gas plants!
"The Future of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: An Interdisciplinary Study," Summary Report, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2010. !
UC Berkeley!
New nuclear infrastructure will be more highly optimized! 1978: Plastic models on roll-around carts!
2000: 4-D computer aided design! and virtual walk-throughs!
McGuire Nuclear Station Reactor Building Models.!
In October 2008 Westinghouse and Shaw announced the construction of an AP-1000 module factory at Lake Charles, LA; Areva a collaboration with Northrop Grumman at Newport News shipyard!
!
1000 MW Reactor (Lianyungang Unit 1)
UC Berkeley!
“Modular” design no longer requires “cookie cutter” construction!
Modern cruise-ship construction! using 3-D computer aided design! and automated manufacturing!
1990’s ABWR onsite modular assembly reduced! construction time to 52 months!
New nuclear construction approach: Factory modular fabrication!
UC Berkeley!
Steel-plate sandwich wall construction facilitates modular, rapid fabrication! •! Steel plate used as:! –! Form! –! Reinforcement!
•! Modular, prefabricated components! •! Rapid construction! –! Eliminates set up and tear down of plywood framing!
AP-1000 Structural Submodule!
UC Berkeley!
Steel plate reinforcement creates a more ductile reinforced structure! •! Steel plate contains failed concrete, which retains significant compressive strength! •! Adopted by AP-1000 to upgrade containment for aircraft crash, " 2-month construction schedule savings!
–! Westinghouse has built a module fabrication factory in China capable of supplying 2 AP-1000’s per year, and will open a U.S. plant at Lake Charles, LA!
•! Steel plate construction has been adopted for new plants in Korea, with estimated 10-month construction schedule savings !
UC Berkeley!
The first AP-1000 under construction in Sanmen, China!
~ 20 m!
770-ton AP-1000 auxiliary building module, assembled from factory prefabricated plate components, being set in place onto foundation, Sanmen, China, July 2009!
UC Berkeley!
New licensing and construction plans call for a high degree of design standardization!
USNRC Construction License Review Plans! UC Berkeley!
Future Nuclear Energy Systems!
UC Berkeley!
The Generations of Nuclear Energy!
Source: DOE Generation IV Project! UC Berkeley!
Gen III+: The AP-1000!
UC Berkeley!
High-temperature Gen IV reactors can achieve higher efficiency/power density!
PBMR! 165 MWe!
HTR-300! 274 MWe!
GT-MHR! 286 MWe!
PB-AHTR! 410 MWe!
UC Berkeley!
The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor! •! Being constructed in South Africa!
•! Helium-cooled modular reactor uses “pebble fuel”! •! Power output options:!
–! 200 MWe gas Brayton cycle! –! 136 MWe gas Brayton and" 286 MWt process" steam production! –! 500 MWt high-" temperature process heat! –! 250 MWc hydrogen!
•! Can be used to produce" low-carbon transportation" fuels! UC Berkeley!
Advanced High-Temperature Reactors (AHTRs) combine two older technologies! Coated particle fuel!
max.! PB-AHTR! temp!
1600°C!
Fuel failure fraction vs. temperature!
Liquid fluoride salt coolants!
Excellent heat transfer! Transparent, clean fluoride salt! Boiling point ~1400ºC! Reacts very slowly in air! No energy source to pressurize" containment!
UC Berkeley!
The PB-AHTR power conversion system design is derived from the PBMR/Mitsubishi design!
Generators Compressors Turbines Recuperator Primary Pumps Reactor
Intercoolers Precoolers Helium heaters Intermediate drain tank Intermediate pumps Intermediate heat exchangers
168-MWe PBMR/Mitsubishi! helium cooled HTR!
410-MWe PB-AHTR! liquid cooled HTR! To scale!
UC Berkeley!
The Modular PB-AHTR is a compact pool-type reactor with passive decay heat removal!
UC Berkeley!
The Modular PB-AHTR uses seismic base isolation!
Hearst Mining Building, UCB!
Grade level!
•! •!
Structure isolated with resonant period of 3.6 seconds! Isolators filter out higher frequency seismic energy!
UC Berkeley!
The current Modular PB-AHTR plant design is compact compared to LWRs and MHRs!
Reactor Type
1970’s PWR ABWR ESBWR EPR GT-MHR PBMR Modular PB-AHTR †
Reactor Power (MWe) 1000 1380 1550† 1600 286 170 410
Reactor and Auxiliaries Volume (m3/MWe) 129 211 132† 228 388 1015 105
Turbine Building Volume (m3/MWe) 161 252 166 107 0 0 115
Ancillary Total Structures Building Volume Volume 3 (m /MWe) (m3/MWe) 46 336 23 486 45 343 87 422 24 412 270 1285 40 260
The ESBWR power and reactor building volume are updated values based on the Design Certification application arrangement drawings.
UC Berkeley!
Conclusions! •! Recent activity in nuclear energy has been substantial!
–! Nuclear energy construction and operation use very small quantities of natural resources! »! Resource scarcity is unlikely to emerge as a future constraint! –! Construction of first new U.S. nuclear plants likely to start in 2012! –! New research to demonstrate high-efficiency electricity and hydrogen production! –! New conceptual designs with very low capital costs!
UC Berkeley!
