Download - Greening Iew 2007
Spent Nuclear Fuel Spent Nuclear Fuel Disposition and The Disposition and The Market Viability of Market Viability of
Nuclear EnergyNuclear EnergyLorna A. GreeningLorna A. Greening
International Energy WorkshopInternational Energy WorkshopStanford UniversityStanford University
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Caveats and AcknowledgementsCaveats and Acknowledgements The conclusions and opinions presented The conclusions and opinions presented
are my own.are my own. All errors of commission or omission are All errors of commission or omission are
mine, and the usual caveats apply.mine, and the usual caveats apply. I owe a tremendous debt to over 200 I owe a tremendous debt to over 200
individuals who provided data and individuals who provided data and expertise in specialized areas of energy expertise in specialized areas of energy technology, supply, and consumption over technology, supply, and consumption over a two year period. Without this “grass a two year period. Without this “grass roots” community contribution, effort and roots” community contribution, effort and support, this work would not have been support, this work would not have been possible.possible.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Today’s DiscussionToday’s Discussion Framing of the issues and the questions.Framing of the issues and the questions.
What technologies could replace existing nuclear capacity, What technologies could replace existing nuclear capacity, and be used to meet growing electricity demand? And at and be used to meet growing electricity demand? And at what cost?what cost?
Will the resource base be sufficient to support the Will the resource base be sufficient to support the replacement capacity required? replacement capacity required?
Is there a strategy for nuclear capacity development that Is there a strategy for nuclear capacity development that minimizes spent nuclear fuel (including the ‘legacy’) to minimizes spent nuclear fuel (including the ‘legacy’) to levels within the current statutory limit of 63,000 metric levels within the current statutory limit of 63,000 metric tons for Yucca Mountain?tons for Yucca Mountain?
Discussion of the means of analysis:Discussion of the means of analysis: Overview of LA-US MARKAL;Overview of LA-US MARKAL; Depiction of the nuclear fuel cycle.Depiction of the nuclear fuel cycle.
Some results.Some results. Factors that could alter this forecast.Factors that could alter this forecast. Some general conclusions from this analysis.Some general conclusions from this analysis.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Issues for US Nuclear Electricity Issues for US Nuclear Electricity GenerationGeneration
In 2001, approximately 20.5% of the electricity generated in the In 2001, approximately 20.5% of the electricity generated in the US was provided by nuclear generation.US was provided by nuclear generation.
Economics, reliability and safety have improved substantially over Economics, reliability and safety have improved substantially over the last 20 years for nuclear electricity generation facilities.the last 20 years for nuclear electricity generation facilities.
Much new technology exists and EPAct 2005 provides financial Much new technology exists and EPAct 2005 provides financial guarantees, but new nuclear generation capacity is not being built. guarantees, but new nuclear generation capacity is not being built.
Currently, well over 31,000 metric tons of “legacy” spent nuclear Currently, well over 31,000 metric tons of “legacy” spent nuclear fuel resides in cooling or interim dry storage. By the expiration of fuel resides in cooling or interim dry storage. By the expiration of the majority of nuclear licenses in 2020, 1.5 Yucca Mountains will the majority of nuclear licenses in 2020, 1.5 Yucca Mountains will be required to store the waste for 10,000 years.be required to store the waste for 10,000 years.
Replacement of the existing nuclear technology with other sources Replacement of the existing nuclear technology with other sources will require substantial investments in new generation capacity, will require substantial investments in new generation capacity, and should result in increases in prices of competing fuels.and should result in increases in prices of competing fuels.
The spent nuclear fuel will still to be be dealt with, and a The spent nuclear fuel will still to be be dealt with, and a potentially useful energy resource will be lost. potentially useful energy resource will be lost.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Comparison of Nuclear in LA US MARKAL Comparison of Nuclear in LA US MARKAL with Other Frameworkswith Other Frameworks
US MARKAL contains all of the steps in the nuclear fuel US MARKAL contains all of the steps in the nuclear fuel cycle including waste disposal. This is more complete than cycle including waste disposal. This is more complete than NEMS (EIA), or any model of this type since Joskow and NEMS (EIA), or any model of this type since Joskow and Baughman, 1976.Baughman, 1976.
Depiction of reprocessing, and permanent disposal capture Depiction of reprocessing, and permanent disposal capture differences in radiotoxicity and heat of materials. This differences in radiotoxicity and heat of materials. This allows the determination of the benefits (e.g., reduced allows the determination of the benefits (e.g., reduced emissions, energy security) of reprocessing, waste emissions, energy security) of reprocessing, waste partitioning and transmutation, and reduced volume and partitioning and transmutation, and reduced volume and radiotoxicity disposal strategies for spent nuclear fuel.radiotoxicity disposal strategies for spent nuclear fuel.
Longer forecast horizon than other models allows the Longer forecast horizon than other models allows the evaluation of “new generation” nuclear technologies and evaluation of “new generation” nuclear technologies and the development of interim strategies for waste disposal in the development of interim strategies for waste disposal in the face of legal caps on permanent disposal depositories.the face of legal caps on permanent disposal depositories.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Attributes of Model of LA-MARKALAttributes of Model of LA-MARKAL All sources of energy represented.All sources of energy represented. Expanded technology choice set of over 4000 technologies.Expanded technology choice set of over 4000 technologies. Nine different emissions types (CONine different emissions types (CO22, SO, SO22, NO, NOxx, N, N22O, CO, VOC, O, CO, VOC,
CHCH44, particulates, and mercury) tracked through the economy, , particulates, and mercury) tracked through the economy, along with depiction of regulations, and mitigation techniques.along with depiction of regulations, and mitigation techniques.
Inclusion of demand response to prices and incomes Inclusion of demand response to prices and incomes incorporates a response that results in a lower total cost of incorporates a response that results in a lower total cost of satisfying energy demand.satisfying energy demand.
Electricity and steam: Representation of centrally dispatched, Electricity and steam: Representation of centrally dispatched, distributed generation, and combined heat and power distributed generation, and combined heat and power (including consumption of direct heat and steam).(including consumption of direct heat and steam).
See article in IAEE Newsletter, Fourth Quarter 2003 (pages12-See article in IAEE Newsletter, Fourth Quarter 2003 (pages12-19), www.iaee.org. Table 1 provides a summary comparison 19), www.iaee.org. Table 1 provides a summary comparison with NEMS (EIA).with NEMS (EIA).
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Electricity: Central GenerationElectricity: Central Generation Over 90 centrally dispatched electricity generation Over 90 centrally dispatched electricity generation
technologies are characterized.technologies are characterized. Fuel/technology types represented include:Fuel/technology types represented include:
Fossil (oil, natural gas, coal, MSW) steam.Fossil (oil, natural gas, coal, MSW) steam. Combined cycle (natural gas, coal, biomass).Combined cycle (natural gas, coal, biomass). Conventional and advanced turbines (fossil and methanol).Conventional and advanced turbines (fossil and methanol). Renewables including solar, wind, biomass, and waste.Renewables including solar, wind, biomass, and waste. Nuclear (light water reactors and MOX), and “next generation” including HTGR, Nuclear (light water reactors and MOX), and “next generation” including HTGR,
HTGR-MOX, HTGR-TRU, Fast-spectrum TRU, CR-1, and MOX burners, and HTGR-MOX, HTGR-TRU, Fast-spectrum TRU, CR-1, and MOX burners, and Accelerator-driven TRU and MA burners.Accelerator-driven TRU and MA burners.
Carbon sequestration is depicted where appropriate.Carbon sequestration is depicted where appropriate. Varying annual and daily load profiles are segmented Varying annual and daily load profiles are segmented
by time of day and load-type with competition among by time of day and load-type with competition among appropriate technology types (e.g., base-load may be appropriate technology types (e.g., base-load may be satisfied by nuclear or steam and CC).satisfied by nuclear or steam and CC).
Connection to end-use sector specific grids for Connection to end-use sector specific grids for CHP/distributed generation resulting in competition CHP/distributed generation resulting in competition between sources of electricity.between sources of electricity.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Nuclear Technologies and Materials FlowsNuclear Technologies and Materials Flows
High Heat Release(HHR) FP
Transuranics(TRU)
Minor Actinides(MA)
US SurplusWeapons Grade Pu
Reactor Grade Pu(3 vectors)
Natural U as UF6
US SurplusHEU
LEU from RussianSurplus HEU
RecoveredIrradiated LEU
Depleted U
Natural UMining / Milling(3 cost steps)
ImportsUF6 to UO2
UO2 to UF6 GaseousDiffusion
Gas Centrifuge
Laser Isotope
UOX Fabrication
MOX Fabrication
Other Fuel Forms:Metal, (An)N, (An)C, .. Present-day LWR
(B ~ 38 MWd/kg)ALWR-UOX
(B ~ 55 MWd/kg)ALWR-MOX
(B ~ 49 MWd/kg)
Thermal GCR
Fast ReactorConceptsOn-site wet
On-site dry
Off-site interimSF storage
PUREX
UREX/UREX+
TRUEX orsimilar
Aqueous separationof Cs, Sr, I, Tc
Pyrometallurgicalseparations
HEU downblending(UNH process)
HLWvitrification
SF conditioning /encapsulation
Separated actinide and FP storage
Materials credit atend of forecast
Yucca Mountain
ResourcesMaterials Conversion Enrichment Fabrication
Irradiation
SF Storage
Reprocessing
Waste Management
Planned / Possible
ImplementedTransport costsassessed but not shown.
Gray boxes represent level of resolution of previous MARKAL model.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Disposal Costing Model Based Upon Disposal Costing Model Based Upon Repository Heat Load LimitationsRepository Heat Load Limitations
Unit repository disposal costs for spent fuel, less Unit repository disposal costs for spent fuel, less transportation-related charges, are currently estimated by transportation-related charges, are currently estimated by OMB as ca. $440/kgIHM.OMB as ca. $440/kgIHM.
Disposal costs include vitrification – the glassification of Disposal costs include vitrification – the glassification of high-level radioactive waste (HLW) in an inert matrix – as well high-level radioactive waste (HLW) in an inert matrix – as well as emplacement of this waste in Yucca Mountain.as emplacement of this waste in Yucca Mountain.
The capacity of Yucca Mountain is governed not by the mass The capacity of Yucca Mountain is governed not by the mass of material emplaced, but rather by theof material emplaced, but rather by the total decay heat total decay heat productionproduction of that material.of that material.
Comparing the heat production for high level waste of Comparing the heat production for high level waste of various compositions to that of spent nuclear fuel, one can various compositions to that of spent nuclear fuel, one can estimate an ‘effective’ repository capacity and thus arrive at estimate an ‘effective’ repository capacity and thus arrive at a cost estimate.a cost estimate.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Disposal Cost as a Function of Waste Disposal Cost as a Function of Waste ContentContent
The ‘equivalent’ heat load-based repository utilization of The ‘equivalent’ heat load-based repository utilization of HLW is the amount [in kg] of the ca. 63000 tonIHM Yucca HLW is the amount [in kg] of the ca. 63000 tonIHM Yucca Mountain capacity used by HLW of a given composition Mountain capacity used by HLW of a given composition originating from 1 kgHM.originating from 1 kgHM.
This figure, as well as the derived volume of HLW glass, This figure, as well as the derived volume of HLW glass, allows the disposal cost to be formulated based upon:allows the disposal cost to be formulated based upon: $300,000/m$300,000/m33 HLW unit vitrification cost (Source: HLW unit vitrification cost (Source:
Hanford HLW vitrification program),Hanford HLW vitrification program), $332 per ‘equivalent’ kg HLW repository disposal $332 per ‘equivalent’ kg HLW repository disposal
cost, representing $440/kg less the YM cost cost, representing $440/kg less the YM cost component relating to waste package fabrication.component relating to waste package fabrication.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Example Disposal Cost ComparisonExample Disposal Cost ComparisonWaste
Composition Unit vitrification cost [$/ kg waste]
Unit disposal cost [$/ kg waste]
Total [$/ kglHM]
‘Effective’ repository capacity [kglHM]
All Spent Fuel N/ A 440 440 63000 Transuranics (TRU and FP)
3231 6436 498 63000
TRU, Low Heat Rel. FPs (LHRFP)
922 4087 238 107700
Minor Actinides (MA), LHRFP
757 3484 161 158100
MA, all FP 3686 7052 451 70600 LHRFP 480 897 50 636300
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Example of Reprocessing: Existing U38Example of Reprocessing: Existing U38
TRUEX Reprocessing
PUREXReprocessing
UREX Reprocessing
U38 Reactor
1.001
1.001
1.001
Pyro-metallurgical separation of
HLW from UREX
Pyro-metallurgical separation of
HLW from UREX
Stockpiles of recovered
Transuranics,Plutonium,
Recycled Uranium,High Heat Release Fission Products,
and Minor Actinides
YUCCA MOUNTAIN
0.057
0.059
0.07
0.059
0.07
0.93
Stockpiles of recovered
Transuranics,Plutonium,
Recycled Uranium,High Heat Release Fission Products,
and Minor Actinides
0.943
0.943
0.0571
0.00460.0502
0.0181
To fabrication
To fabrication
Mass (kgIHM) of SNFgoing to YUCCAMountain
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Resource Impacts of Selected Resource Impacts of Selected Nuclear TechnologiesNuclear Technologies
00
00[19.7 tonne DU for [19.7 tonne DU for CR 1 near-breeder]CR 1 near-breeder]
232232[0 for TRU burner][0 for TRU burner]
[20.5 tonne depleted [20.5 tonne depleted uranium (DU)]uranium (DU)]
234 to 198234 to 198
Uranium Resource Uranium Resource Consumption Consumption
[ton U[ton Unatnat / GW-yr (e)] / GW-yr (e)]
-1140-11407.6 to 4.57.6 to 4.5[150 to 250 MWd/kg][150 to 250 MWd/kg]
Accelerator Accelerator Driven SystemDriven System
0 0 [CR 1][CR 1]-450 -450 [CR 0.5][CR 0.5]
21.6 to 4.821.6 to 4.8[CR 1 to CR 0.5][CR 1 to CR 0.5]
Fast Spectrum Fast Spectrum ReactorReactor
167 167 [U fuelled][U fuelled]-759 -759 [TRU burner][TRU burner]
6.4 to 1.76.4 to 1.7[120 to 470 MWd/kg][120 to 470 MWd/kg]
HTGR (Thermal HTGR (Thermal Spectrum)Spectrum)
-389-38922.222.2[49 MWd/kg][49 MWd/kg]
MOX Fuelled MOX Fuelled LWRLWR
343 to 257343 to 25729.8 to 19.829.8 to 19.8[38 to 55 MWd/kg][38 to 55 MWd/kg]
LWR – Uranium LWR – Uranium FuelFuel
Net Transuranic Net Transuranic Production Production
[kg TRU / GWhe][kg TRU / GWhe]
SNF Production SNF Production [tonne SNF / GW-yr [tonne SNF / GW-yr
(e)](e)]
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Further Gains from ‘Advanced Further Gains from ‘Advanced Nuclear Technologies’Nuclear Technologies’
Technology Efficiency of generation
Coolant Outlet Temperature (oC)
LWR: 38 MWd /kg (present)
33% 200-300
LWR: 49 to 55 MWd/kg
34% 200-300
HTGR: 121 to 470 MWd/kg
48% 800-900
Fast-spectrum: 127 to 185 MWd/kg
42% 500-1000
Accelerator-driven: 150 to 250 MWd/kg
40%a 500-800
a. Less ~10% of net electric power required to drive the accelerator.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Construction Costs are UncertainConstruction Costs are Uncertain
Highest Highest EstimateEstimate
OECDOECDLowest Lowest EstimateEstimate
4700470088
2100210044
1450145033
FRFR
2300230088
2130213044
1000100033
HTGRHTGR
400040001212
1700170044
1000100033
LWRLWROvernight Costs [$ / kWe]; Overnight Costs [$ / kWe]; Construction Time [yr]Construction Time [yr]
Of the major generation technologies in use today, construction costs for Of the major generation technologies in use today, construction costs for new nuclear facilities are the most difficult to quantify. In a survey of new nuclear facilities are the most difficult to quantify. In a survey of nuclear industry executives, the perceived risk associated with nuclear industry executives, the perceived risk associated with construction costs and times was rated as ‘very high’ – far higher than construction costs and times was rated as ‘very high’ – far higher than plant O&M, fuel cycle costs, or disaster preparedness:plant O&M, fuel cycle costs, or disaster preparedness:
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Forecast of Electricity Demand Forecast of Electricity Demand (by Generation Fuel)(by Generation Fuel)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090 2095 2100Year
Coal Petroleum Natural Gas Nuclear Power Renewable Sources
Bill
ion
kWh
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Forecast of Nuclear Capacity by TypeForecast of Nuclear Capacity by TypeG
W
0
50
100
150
200
250
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090 2095 2100
Existing U38
HTGRS/ConventionalFuel
Advanced ‘PWRS’
Transmutation/Accelerators
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Comparison of Our Capacity Forecast with Comparison of Our Capacity Forecast with EIA Advanced Nuclear, AEO 2006EIA Advanced Nuclear, AEO 2006
GW0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
EIA
Current Fleet
Advanced PWRs
HTGRs – Driver /Transmuter Fuel
HTGRs – UOX Fuel
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
CommentaryCommentaryFor this scenario, repository capacity is constrained and, after the For this scenario, repository capacity is constrained and, after the repository opens in 2018, the duration of SF interim storage is repository opens in 2018, the duration of SF interim storage is limited.limited.
Therefore, two paths for nuclear power are available:Therefore, two paths for nuclear power are available:1) adopt technologies that close the fuel cycle, or1) adopt technologies that close the fuel cycle, or2) phase out nuclear power.2) phase out nuclear power.
Under these constraints, the model chose HTGRs with two fuel Under these constraints, the model chose HTGRs with two fuel forms:forms: - low enriched uranium oxide fuel (about 75% of HTGR thermal - low enriched uranium oxide fuel (about 75% of HTGR thermal energy production);energy production); - so-called “deep burn” driver and transmutation fuel consisting of - so-called “deep burn” driver and transmutation fuel consisting of transuranic oxides (25% of thermal energy production)transuranic oxides (25% of thermal energy production)11..
1. See C. Rodriguez et. al., “Deep Burn Transmutation of Nuclear Waste,” in Proceedings of the Conference on High Temperature Reactors, Petten, NL, April 22-24, 2002. Available: http://www.iaea.org/inis/aws/htgr/fulltext/htr2002_207.pdf
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Factors That Could Affect Outcome: Factors That Could Affect Outcome: Political/Regulatory FactorsPolitical/Regulatory Factors
Risk Factor(+ = Factor increases likelihood of outcome relative to reference case)(- = Factor decreases likelihood)(o = Factor does not strongly affect likelihood)
Nuclear Phaseout
Constrained Repository
Unconstrained Repository
Constrained Repository, Advanced Fuel Cycle
Unconstrained Repository,
Advanced Fuel Cycle
Delay in Opening of Yucca Mountain
+ o - + -
Regulatory Delays in Licensing of Interim Storage or Expanded Cooling Storage
+ + - + -
Opposition to Licensing or Operation of Reprocessing Facilities
+ + + - -
More Stringent Repository Performance Criteria
+ o - + +
More Efficient NRC Site and Facility Licensing
- o + + +
Implementation of Carbon Taxes or Emission Permits
- o + + +
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
ConclusionsConclusions Inclusion of the issue of spent nuclear fuel results Inclusion of the issue of spent nuclear fuel results
in a different technology mix.in a different technology mix. Limited permanent disposal capacity requires the Limited permanent disposal capacity requires the
use of reprocessing and transmutation-oriented use of reprocessing and transmutation-oriented nuclear generation technologies.nuclear generation technologies.
HTGR technologies provide greater flexibility by HTGR technologies provide greater flexibility by accepting a greater range of outputs from accepting a greater range of outputs from reprocessing.reprocessing.
HTGR generation is conservatively priced at 21% HTGR generation is conservatively priced at 21% more in over-night costs than LWRs; but HTGRs more in over-night costs than LWRs; but HTGRs provide the potential for recycling of transuranics provide the potential for recycling of transuranics from previously generated SNF.from previously generated SNF.
Advanced nuclear generation technologies provide Advanced nuclear generation technologies provide a sustainable power source through reduction of a sustainable power source through reduction of the quantities of spent nuclear fuel.the quantities of spent nuclear fuel.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
BackupBackup
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Embedded Assumptions in Linear Embedded Assumptions in Linear ProgrammingProgramming
A linear program is a linear program . . .is a linear program!!A linear program is a linear program . . .is a linear program!! Embedded economic paradigm in a cost minimization framework. Embedded economic paradigm in a cost minimization framework. The economic paradigm includes:The economic paradigm includes:
Homogeneous, linear cost functions.Homogeneous, linear cost functions. Assumption of perfect competition, i.e., large number of Assumption of perfect competition, i.e., large number of
economic agents and everybody is a “price taker.”economic agents and everybody is a “price taker.” Ease of entry and exit.Ease of entry and exit. All markets are in equilibrium, i.e., market clearing assumed, All markets are in equilibrium, i.e., market clearing assumed,
with perfect foresight.with perfect foresight. Factors that drive energy use or consumption are “energy only.” Factors that drive energy use or consumption are “energy only.” Bias introduced through choice of decision variables (e.g., Bias introduced through choice of decision variables (e.g.,
technologies) for inclusion in the model.technologies) for inclusion in the model.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Electricity: Distributed Electricity: Distributed Generation/CHPGeneration/CHP
Each end-use sector has a sector-specific electricity Each end-use sector has a sector-specific electricity and steam grid which is connected to the main grid and steam grid which is connected to the main grid with the option of selling (i.e., inter-sector trade).with the option of selling (i.e., inter-sector trade).
Each sector or end-use has over 40 CHP/DG Each sector or end-use has over 40 CHP/DG technologies using natural gas or renewables or technologies using natural gas or renewables or other fossil fuels.other fossil fuels. Industrial CHP: “pass-out” turbines (flexible heat/power ratios), Industrial CHP: “pass-out” turbines (flexible heat/power ratios),
wind, and fuel cells. wind, and fuel cells. Commercial and residential: microturbines, fuel cells, Commercial and residential: microturbines, fuel cells,
reciprocating engines, and photovoltaic.reciprocating engines, and photovoltaic. Transport: structured for the addition of “mobile” generation Transport: structured for the addition of “mobile” generation
sources.sources. DG and CHP are depicted as the “marginal” DG and CHP are depicted as the “marginal”
producer in the base case, i.e., these technologies producer in the base case, i.e., these technologies compete in a market niche with central generation compete in a market niche with central generation and more efficient end-use technologies.and more efficient end-use technologies.
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Distributed Electricity Generation (DG) Distributed Electricity Generation (DG) versus versus Central Electricity Generation (CG)Central Electricity Generation (CG)
Dispatched Central
Generation
Small Distributed Generators
Distributed Generation
Clearinghouse
Local-Use Distributed Generation
To Grid To GridTransmission Losses
Transmission Losses
Central Generation
Consumption
Distributed Generation
Consumption from Grid
Total Consumption
from Grid
Total Consumption
from DG
Total Electricity Consumption
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Factors That Could Affect Outcome: Factors That Could Affect Outcome: Market FactorsMarket Factors
Risk Factor(+ = Factor increases likelihood of outcome relative to reference case)(- = Factor decreases likelihood)(o = Factor does not strongly affect likelihood)
Nuclear Phaseout
Constrained Repository
Unconstrained Repository
Constrained Repository, Advanced Fuel Cycle
Unconstrained Repository, Advanced Fuel Cycle
Increased Fossil Fuel Price Volatility
- o + + +
Scarcity of Uranium Resource
+ - - o -
Delay in Availability of Advanced Technologies
o o o - -
Increased Disposal Cost Volatility
+ - - + +
Aggregate Electricity Demand Growth Greater than Expected
- o + + +
Aggressive Growth in Demand for Hydrogen
o o o + +
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007 Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Factors That Could Affect Outcome: Factors That Could Affect Outcome: Security FactorsSecurity Factors
Risk Factor(+ = Factor increases likelihood of outcome relative to reference case)(- = Factor decreases likelihood)(o = Factor does not strongly affect likelihood)
Nuclear Phaseout
Constrained Repository
Unconstrained Repository
Constrained Repository, Advanced Fuel Cycle
Unconstrained Repository, Advanced Fuel Cycle
Nuclear Materials Dispersed at Generation and Interim Storage Facilities
+ o - + +
Transportation of SNF + o - - -
Security of Separated Actinides + + + - -
Propagation / Dispersion of Advanced Reprocessing or Enrichment Technologies
+ + + - -
Repository Becomes a ‘Plutonium Mine’
o - - + +