A Bird in the Hand

W. Bennett Lewis Memorial Lecture

byDan Meneley, Engineer Emeritus, AECL

May 24, 2010

5

CANDUACR-1000

SCWR

“ . . . . and two in the bush.”

CANDU6CANDU

6CANDU6CANDU

6

It is apparent that the CANDU 6 design suffers from no safety disadvantage relative to “best of the breed” LWR designs, with regard to power pulse protection

Long prompt neutron lifetime gives at least a qualitative safety advantage to CANDU, with respect to fuel breakup threshold

Long prompt neutron lifetime and limited coolant loss rate are effective in providing time for safe action by engineered shutdown systems

6

Why are we doing all of this? What do we hope to accomplish? How should we go about getting it done?

Extract from NAE testimonial to W.B. Lewis:

“Early on he recognized the desirability of substituting clean energy forms---his clean energy was nuclear power---for carbon-based fuels to reduce dependence on depletable resources and to cut back on the atmospheric burden of deleterious products of combustion, including carbon dioxide.”

Floyd L. Culler, US National Academy of Engineering, Vol. 5, (1992)

7

“One day we will run out of oil, it is not today or tomorrow, but one day we will run out of oil and we have to leave oil before oil leaves us, and we have to prepare ourselves for that day.

“The earlier we start, the better, because all of our economic and social system is based on oil, so to change from that will take a lot of time and a lot of money and we should take this issue very seriously”.

8

“The main driver of demand for coal and gas is the inexorable growth in energy needs for power generation.

World electricity demand is projected to grow at an annual rate of 2.5% to 2030. Over 80% of the growth takes place in non-OECD countries.

Globally, additions to power-generation capacity total 4,800 gigawatts by 2030 – almost five times the existing capacity of the United States. The largest additions (around 28% of the total) occur in China.

Coal remains the backbone fuel of the power sector, its share of the global generation mix rising by three percentage points to 44% in 2030.

Nuclear power grows in all major regions bar Europe, but its share in total generation falls.”

9

“Continuing on today’s energy path, without any change in government policy, would mean rapidly increasing dependence on fossil fuels, with alarming consequences for climate change and energy security.”

10

Over past four decades, the number of exploration successes steadily declined.

Average new field sizes grew smaller, too.

Offshore oil and gas became last frontier in ever deeper water depths.

But, as water depths increased, fields tended to peak fast and rapidly decline.

Final frontiers are ultra-deepwater/ultra-deep vertical depths, or unconventional oil and gas, which is costly and energy/water intensive.

11

M. Simmons, GASAON Energy Insurance Symposium Jan 14, 2010, Houston, TX

“Power generation accounts for more than two-thirds of the savings (of which 40% results from lower electricity demand).

There is a big shift in the mix of fuels and technologies: Coal-based generation is reduced by half,

compared with the Reference Scenario in 2030, while:

nuclear power and [other] renewable energy sources make much bigger contributions.”

12

“To sum up, the alternatives to fossil fuels that could promise the magnitudes of energy required to meet our nation’s need are very, very few.

It is not as though plentiful alternatives exist, and one can be weighed against another … “

  “The blunt fact is that there are the fossil fuels and there is

nuclear.”   “Failure to recognize this, while focusing on options that do not

and cannot have the magnitudes [of supply] required, will inevitably lead to increasingly dangerous energy shortages. Who then will answer? Will [it be] the environmental activist, who blocks real options, and then puts forth options that cannot meet the need?”

13

Printed in THE REPUBLIC News and Issues Magazine, June-September 2005.

14

Jan B. van Erp, Agustin Alonso, Daniel A. Meneley, JozefMisak , George S. Stanford

15

16

Bruce B

Bruce ARadwaste Mgmnt

D2O upgraders

Bruce A steam line to Bruce Energy Centre

Oil-fired steam plant

Training CentreDouglas Point

prototype

18

Oxide FabricationPlant

UraniumThorium

FreshFuel

CANDUCANDU

CANDUCANDU

CANDUCANDU

CANDUCANDU

Enriched U

Used PWR Fuel DUPIC ProcessingPlant

Waste

ReprocessingPlant

Pu

FBRFBR

REPROC. +FAB.PLANT

THIS ENERGY SUPPLY IS THIS ENERGY SUPPLY IS SUSTAINABLE FOR SUSTAINABLE FOR

THOUSANDS OF YEARSTHOUSANDS OF YEARS

U, Pu, fission products

Old UsedFuelUsed Fuel

Used Fuel Storage

Waste

Disposal

19

OXYGEN

PROCESS STEAM Cogeneration Plant(Nuclear)

ELECTRICITY

HYDROGEN

FARM GROWNCARBOHYDRATES

CELLULOSE

WATER

RESIDUAL &WASTE OILS

PEAT/LIGNITE/COAL

CARBON DIOXIDE

FERMENTATIONDISTILLATION

WATERELECTROLYSIS

ALCOHOLREFINING

GASIFICATION

METHANOLSYNTHESIS

DEUTERIUM

SYNTHETICGAS

POTABLEWATER

FUEL METHANOL

AGRO/AQUAHEATING

FUEL ETHANOL

RO - PROCESSDESALINATION

CATALYTICEXCHANGE

HYDRO-CRACKING

SWEET CRUDE OIL

20

The plant must have a suitable site and associated facilities.

The plant must be capable of reliable and safe operation for at least a half-century. Otherwise, the user will not purchase it.

The plant must be cost-competitive with existing mature units. Otherwise, it will not be purchased.

The plant must have a lifetime fuel supply, or at least a well-founded expectation of such.

The plant must have a full complement of trained staff and a plan for continued staff replacement over a period of 50 years or more (several generations of engineers and other staff)

The plant must have an achievable plan for waste storage. Society must accept the technical conclusion that a

suitable method for disposal of long-lived radioactive materials exists, and work steadily toward that goal

21

A new power plant is an infrastructure project Intended to serve the needs of all citizens Similar to roads, water supplies, airports, armies

Private sector funding will not work, alone Very large scale, therefore substantial risk factor Profound public interest, extended in time, uncertain

Oil field development is subsidized, for example Liberal lease terms, tax relief, etc. Roughly equivalent to public/private cost sharing

22

Expects high reliability and very low risk Time horizon is usually quite short No motivation to share “public” risks

Looks for low capital cost, familiar technology No incentive to innovate (increases cost and risk) Sensitive to potential regulatory escalation

Demands complete design on project start date This implies a plant with “operating pedigree”

23

Inclination to mistrust established institutions Instant communication of news, especially if bad Heavy reliance on institutions but little trust in them

Shift in standards of personal performance Take authority for self , pass responsibility to others Lowering respect for truth-telling

Concentration of national wealth Rich getting richer, poor becoming poorer Emphasize short term gain, forget long term pain

24

x We now have everything we need to provide later generations with energy as and when they need it

x Plug-in hybrid technology, plus hydrogen and synthetic oil production can put nuclear energy “on wheels” to help solve our transportation fuel supply needs, now and forever

x All energy sources should be exploited up to their economic optimum – but not beyond

x Nuclear energy can and will provide a solid large-scale “supply foundation” to support alternative technologies

25