experience of snf management cost … on...experience of snf management cost estimation o.godun head...

EXPERIENCE OF SNF MANAGEMENT COST ESTIMATION

O.Godun

Head of Safety Analysis and Nuclear Fuel Management Department

Scientific and Technical Center

NNEGC Energoatom Ukraine

5 – 8 November 2019

[email protected]

CONTENT

1. NUCLEAR GENERATION STRUCTURE

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE BACK END SCENARIOS IMPLEMENTED

3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY (ASSUMPTIONS AND COST ESTIMATION)

4. COST. FACTORS AFFECTING COSTS IN THE SHORT TO LONG TERM

Geographical Locations of Ukrainian NPPs

СВЯП-2 ЧАЕС

ЦСВЯП

3



PLACE OF NPP IN THE ENERGY SECTOR OF UKRAINE(for end of 2019 )

The nuclear fuel assemblies (FAs) are from two fuel suppliers

used in Ukrainian: VVER-440 and VVER-1000 fuel design of

TVEL (RF) named TVS-A and VVER-1000 design of

Westinghouse (USA) named RWFA.

VVER 1000 TVS-A(TVEL)

VVER 1000 RWFA

(West.)

VVER-440

(TVEL)

Mass of UO2, t 0.495 0.545 0,126Average maximum enrichmentof fuel loads, %

4.32 3.9 – 4.0 4.35

Average maximum enrichmentof FA, %

4.38 4.2 4.2

Average time of operation inactive core, eff.days

320 320 310

Maximum burnup, MWd/kg 55.0 60.0 50.9Quantity of reloaded FAs 42 42 72

TVEL

Westinghouse

Operation of FAs in the active core is on average four years.

The total quantity of FAs which are annually unloaded from the

active cores of VVER-1000 fleet is 546 and 160 for two VVER-440.

The maximum fresh fuel enrichment is 4.38% for VVER-1000 and

4.2% for VVER-440.

The maximum burnup value 50 - 60 MWd/kg.After unloading SNF located in reactor pool (for 3-10

years) for decreasing of radioactivity and energy flux and toprovide for safe transportation. All design SNF classified asenergy resource.

TVS-A is the reference nuclear fuel design

supplied by VVER reactors technology holder

country.

For enhancement of Ukraine energy

security the Agreement between Ukrainian

and USA Governments for realization of

Nuclear Fuel Qualification Project has been

started on 5 July of 2000.

First 42 nuclear assemblies of

Westinghouse’s design are loaded in the

active core of VVER-1000 in March 2010.

Full WRFA loading in active core is realized

in 2018.

TVS-A used in 7 VVER-1000

WRFA used in 6 VVER-1000

The Westinghouse FAs for VVER-440

under consideration


6

In 1993 a Contracts between Russian Federation and Ukraine have been signed for VVER-440 and VVER-1000 SNFreprocessing of nuclear fuel of the Russian design (e.g. contract include various services such transport, storage prior reprocessing and ect.).

In 2000 the Parliament of Ukraine approve the Law “About ratification of SNF and RAW safe management Convention”. To achieve of Convention goals the next main state principals are defined:• SNF long term storage at Ukraine territory and step-by-step decreased by SNF reprocessing; • finance of SNF storage infrastructure;• distribution of rights and responsibilities at all stages of SNF management between subjects of legal relations in this

area; • develop of international cooperation and integration of international experience.

The VVER-440 SNF shipped to the RT-1 "Mayak Plant" (Russian Federation) for PUREX reprocessing which is under operation. According to SNF management’s Contract with Russian Federation the vitrified RAW (HLW) will be returned to Ukraine. Contract solution exclude of recovered U and Pu for return to Ukraine.

The SNF of VVER-1000 for three from four NPPs (South-Ukrainian NPP, Rovno NPP and Khmelnitsky NPP) is shipped to Russian Federation for reprocessing. The reprocessing facility is not yet commissioned. The end date for VVER-1000 SNFshipping to Russian Federation for the reprocessing is due at 2020, since centralized dry storage for SNF is planned to be completed.According to the Contract with Russian Federation for VVER-1000 SNF management all recovered U and Pu need to be returned to Ukraine. Storage facility recovered U and Pu is required.

2. BACK END SCENARIOS

7

The Dry Storage Facility on Zaporizhzhya NPP

The casks is designed for long-term safe storage (not less then 50 years) of spent nuclear fuel

VVER-1000.

Container consists of a metal basket with SNF placed inside the concrete construction. Storage is an

open platform on which an interval of 4.5 m apart containers located. Loading of SFA baskets is held

on central reactor hall and include welding, sealing and inspection of welds. The installation of SNF

baskets in to container is held on transport corridors of reactor unit.

Date of start of pilot operation - 24.08.2001 (EA License number 000014 on 07.16.2001).

Date of start of commercial operation - 10.08.2004 (EA License number 000196 on 10.08.2004)

• Total capacity of Dry Storage - 9120 spent fuel assemblies.

• Number of containers - 380.

• Number of containers of the first stage - 100.

• Date of completing the first stage - 30.01.2012.

• Number of containers of the second stage - 100.

• Starting date of loading the second stage - 02.02.2012 (based on document OD 000196/43 of

29.12.2011).

• SFA capacity of container - 24.Project term spent fuel storage - 50 years.

According to Section. 3.1 Licenses EO 000196 as of 10.15.2015 the design life time is limited to

10.19.2025.

The 137 containers is fully loaded (capacity 3282 SNF).


8

CONSTRUCTION OF THE CENTRALIZED SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL STORAGE FACILITY (CSFSF) FOR VVER REACTORS OF

UKRAINIAN NPP

Implementation period: – until 2065– start-up complex – 2020

Launching of 1÷4 start-up complexes will include :– Establishment of all required infrastructure at the CSFSF site– Supply of 94 SNF storage modules (Contract with Holtec International)– Equipment will be supplied by the technology owner - Holtec International

Project goal:Improvement of the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) management system of Ukrainian NPPs so as to reinforce Ukraine’senergy security through discontinued SNF reprocessing

▪ Project location: Chornobyl Exclusion Zone (Kyiv region) as per the Law of Ukraine on CSFSF (№4384 of09.02.2012)

CSFSF design capacity:✓ 12 010 spent FAs from VVER-1000;✓ 4 519 spent FAs from VVER-440

CSFSF 1÷4 start-up complex capacity:✓ 2 511 spent FAs from VVER-1000;✓ 1 105 spent FAs from VVER-440

It will take 45-50 years before the CSFSF design capacity is used up with loaded spent nuclear fuelThe design operational life is at least 100 years

▪ CSFSF design engineering was performed by the Ukrainian design engineering organization – Kyiv Research-and-Development and Design Engineering Institute “Energoproekt”

▪ CSFSF capital construction cost (for 458 SNF storage modules) – UAH 37,2 bln (1,5 bln $).▪ Funding sources: loans and SE NNEGC “Energoatom” internal funds▪ Indirect return on the investment in CSFSF construction is expected in three to four years from the start ofoperation


9

HI-STORM

HI-TRAC

MPCHI-STAR

Holtec International technology isbased on the system composed of4 casks:✓ Multipurpose two-walled canister

(MPC)✓ Storage overpack (HI-STORM)✓ Transport overpack (HI-STAR)✓ Transfer cask (HI-TRAC)

Holtec International technology envisages storage of SNF in inert gas filled casks (“dry” storage)with passive cooling and comprises following handling operations:

✓ SNF loading into МРС and MPC sealing in an NPP reactor hall✓ Loading of MPC containing SNF, using a transfer cask, into a transport overpack in the NPP

transportation corridor✓ Transportation of the SNF from the NPP to the CSFSF site✓ Unloading of the MPC with SNF from the transport overpack into the storage overpack✓ Installing HI-STORM at the storage site of CSFSF

2. BACK END SCENARIOSCONSTRUCTION OF THE CENTRALIZED SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL STORAGE FACILITY (CSFSF) FOR VVER REACTORS OF

UKRAINIAN NPP

CONSTRUCTION OF THE CENTRALIZED SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL STORAGE FACILITY (CSFSF) FOR VVER REACTORS OF

UKRAINIAN NPP


11

RAW LONG-TERM STORAGE

Name – VEKTOR. Location – Chernobyl NPP Exclusion Zone. Purpose – storage and disposal of solid low and intermediate RAW (Chernobyl NPP, existing NPP). Complex combines three facilities for solid radioactive waste management, closed in a single technological cycle.

Facility 1: temporary storage of Low- and Intermediate- level long-lived waste in the liquid and solid waste storagebuilding. Commissioned in 2010. Design life time – 30 years.

Facility 2: plant for sorting solid radioactive waste of allcategories and reprocessing of Low and Intermediate levelwasteEfficiency – 20 m3 /day. Design life time – 30 years. Capacity –3500 m3

Facility 3: near-surface storage of LLW |ILWDesign life time – 300 years. Capacity – 55000 m3

Ready of F2-F3 is 80 – 90 %


ZNPP SU NPP KhNPP RNPP

FP FP FP FP

SF storage facility at ZNPP

On-site fuel pools(FP)

Long-term storage(“wait and see”)

CSNFDSF: Storage period – 100 years12 010 SFAs WWER-10004 519 SFAs WWER-440

SF reprocessing

Decision-making:

SF final disposal?

2 511 SFAs WWER-10001 105 SFAs WWER-440

Start-up complex:

Storage period50 years

9 120 SFAs Annual loading capacity:504 SFAs WWER-1000 and 192 SFAs WWER-440

SE NNEGC “Energoatom”

Technological cooling and reprocessing

of SF at enterprises of the

Russian Federation

12

NFC LONG TERM SCENARIOS 3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY

DRIVERS FOR SELECTION OF SCENARIOS

- national strategic for long term nuclear energy deployment (the economic of reprocessing is attractive for large NPP fleet)

- economic of NFC

- national uranium resource availability for NPP long term operation

- current SNF and fission products storage infrastructure

- attractiveness of U and Pu recycling at national economic scale (MOX or not MOX )

- energy security and security of supply


Based on requirements of Direction of Council 2011/70/EURATOM 19 July 2011

Open NFC Particle Closed NFC Closed NFC

VVER/PWR III+

1.SNF accumulation (hypothetical)

2.CDSF+ZNPP_DSF, SNF

transportation and

reprocessing to RF (2020)


transportation and

reprocessing to RF (2020),

ZNPP_DSF SNF reprocessing

(after 50 years)


transportation and

reprocessing to RF (2020),

ZNPP_DSF SNF in GD (after 50

years)

5.CDSF+DSF_ZNPP SNF in GD

(after 50 years)

HWR + (VVER/PWR III+)

1. ReU in CANDU,

reprocessing of SNF in RF

(2020) and DSF_ZNPP (after

50 years)

2. ReU in HWR, MOX in

VVER/PWR III+

FR

1. U in VVER/PWR III+, MOX in

FR

14

3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY NFC LONG TERM SCENARIOS

15

Key Indicators

# KI Unit Status

1 Average energy per unit mass of natural

uranium

MWy/tHМ A higher value corresponds to a

better fulfilment of the criterion

2 The consumption of natural uranium tHM/MWy A lower value corresponds to

a better fulfillment of the

criterion

3 The amount of spent fuel accumulated

per year per unit of energy

tHM/MWy Similar 2

4 The volume of SNF accumulation tHM Similar 2

5 Accumulation of accumulation of

reprocessing U

tHM Similar 2

6 Accumulation of reprocessing Pu tHM Similar 2

7 Accumulation of HLW after SNF

reprocessing

tHM Similar 2

8 Accumulation of МА kg Similar 2

9 Total enrichment capacity on year SWU/y/MW Similar 2

10 Total reprocessing capacity on year tHM/y/MW Similar 2

11 LCOE $/kWh Similar 2

Key Indicators (KI) was identified based on INPRO collaboration projects GAINS and SYNERGIES. The main

requirements for KI :

• Quantities not qualities for expert opinion exclusion;

• The comparison NFC assessment allow based on limits number of initial data;

• To include of the indicators of NFC sustainability;

• Take into account the international NFC international collaboration

3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY

NFC elements ONFC Partially closed

NFC with МОХ

Partially closed NFC

with ReU

Uranium (2400 t), mln $ 233,00 199,80 199,80

Conversion, mln $ 23, 31 19, 98 19, 98

Enrichment, mln $ 225,85 193, 58 193, 58

Fabrication UOX, mln $ 50,57 43,34 43,34

Fabrication МOX, mln $ - 54, 18 -

Fabrication REUSE, mln $ - - 33,60

Long term storage UOX, mln $ 50,57 43, 34 43,34

Long term storage МOX, , mln $ - 10, 84 -

Long term storage ReU, mln $ - - 50,40

Long term storage U, mln $ - 60, 80 -

Long term storage UPu, mln $ - 5,26

Reprocessing UOX, tHM - 216,72 216,72

Geological disposal UOX, mln $ 151,70 - -

Geological disposal MOX, mln $ - 108,36 -

Geological disposal МА, mln $ - 2,46 2,46

Geological disposal FPr, mln $ 111,71 111,71

Geological disposal ReU, mln $ - - 100, 80

Cost of UOX for МОХ, mln $ - 450.80 -

Total cist, mln $ 735,00 1 065, 12 1 020, 99

Energy production, kWh 91,98 ×109 91,98 ×109 91,98 ×109

LCOE, $/kWh 0.008 0.0116 0.0110

Cost

Uranium 100 $/kgConversion 10 $/kgEnrichment 130 $/SWUFabrication UOX 300 $/kgFabrication MOX 1500 $/kgFabrication ReU 200 $/kgLong term storage UOX,MOX, ReU

300 $/kg

Geological disposalUOX, MOX, ReU

600 $/kg

Reprocessing (UOX) 1000 $/kgLong term storage Pu 2000 $/kgLong term storage U 300 $/kgGeological disposalMac, FPr

10 000 $/kg

16


# KI KI Unit 1ONFC

2 CDSF+ZNPP_D

SF, SNF

transportation

and

reprocessing

to RF (2020)

3 CDSF+ZNPP_D

SF, SNF

transportation

and

reprocessing

in RF (2020),

ZNPP_DSF SNF

reprocessing

(after 50

years)

4CDSF+ZNPP_DS

F, SNF

transportation

and

reprocessing

to RF (2020),

ZNPP_DSF SNF

in GD (after 50

years)

5 CDSF+DSF_Z

NPP SNF in

GD (after 50

years)

6ReU in

CANDU,

reprocessing

of SNF in RF

(2020) and

DSF_ZNPP

(after 50

years)

7ReU in HWR,

MOX in

VVER/PWR III+

8FR

1 Average energy production by

mass of U

MWy/тHM 7,08 7,07 7,08 7,08 7,06 8,03 8,23 6,99

2 Average U consumption тHM/MWy 0,14 0,14 0,14 0,14 0,14 0,12 0,12 0,14

3 Average SNF accumulation by

year

тHM/MWy 0,022 0,019 0,016 0,016 0,011 0,017 0,017 0,005

4 SNF stocks тHM 27 506 24 020 20 034 20 034 14 182 20 499 20 888 6118

5 Accumulating of reprocessed U тHM 0 3296 6964 3296 3296 0 0 20359

6 Accumulating of reprocessed Pu тHM 0 42,75 89,72 42,75 42,75 217,38 210,32 153,87

7 Accumulating of FPr тHM 0 181,66 426,60 181,66 181,66 956,4 992,54 1164,7

8 Accumulating of MA kg 0 4,14 9,62 4,00 4,00 21,12 21,92 25,74

9 Enrichment capacity by MW by

year

SWU/year/M

Wy

0,117 0,117 0,117 0,117 0,117 0,103 0,100 0,005

10 Reprocessing capacity by MW by

year

tHM/year/M

Wy

0 0,0028 0,0060 0,0028 0,0028 0,0154 0,0239 0,0179

11 LCOE $/MWy 22,85 24,62662 24,88299 24,59675 25,37279 29,72447 29,29206 25,04600

17


18

KI Scenario 1 Scenario 2 … Scenario j

1 P1,1 P1,2 P1,j

2 P2,1 P2,2 P2,j

…

i Pi,1 Pi,2 Pi,j

Pi,j – parameter i of scenario j

KI Scenario 1 Scenario 2 … Scenario j

1 I1,1 I1,2 … I1,j

2 I2,1 I2,2 … I2,j

… … … …

i Ii,1 Ii,2 … Ii,j

𝑅𝑗 =

𝑖=1

𝑛

𝐼𝑖,𝑗

RANKING ALGORITHM3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY

NFC scenario 1

ONFC

2 CDSF+ZNPP_D

SFSNF transportation

and reprocessing in RF (2020)

3 CDSF+ZNPP_D

SF, SNF transportation

and reprocessing to RF (2020),

ZNPP_DSF SNF reprocessing

(after 50 years)

4

CDSF+ZNPP_D

SF, SNF

transportation

and

reprocessing

to RF (2020),

ZNPP_DSF SNF

in GD (after 50

years)

5

CDSF+DSF_ZNP

P SNF in GD

(after 50

years)

6

ReU in

CANDU,

reprocessin

g of SNF in

RF (2020)

and

DSF_ZNPP

(after 50

years)

7

ReU in HWR, MOX in

VVER/PWR III+

8

(FR)

Score 6,092 5,470 4,889 5,755 6,045 3,038 2,985 3,020

19

RANKING RESULTS 3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY

Electricity production NPP installed capacities Construction of new NPPs

Construction of new NPPs

SF accumulation

Stages of CSFSF commissioning20

RESULTS OF NFC MODELLING BY MESSAGE 3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY

3. SNF LONG TERM STRATEGY Flexibility Analysis

DRY STORAGE FACILITY ON ZAPORIZHZHYA NPP

Construction:

First stage – 51, 423 mln.$ (finished 30.01.2012)

Second stage - 1,850 mln.$

Cask – 0,410 mln $

O&M 1,4 mln.$

Cost of SNF storage1

𝑀𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 + 𝐶𝑎𝑠𝑘𝑠 + O&M = 65 $/𝑘𝑔 НМ

CENTRALIZED SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL DRY

STORAGE FACILITY

Cost of construction – 1,589 bln $

Cost of cask – 2,123 mln.$

O&M 1,5 mln.$

Cost of SNF storage1

𝑀𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 + 𝐶𝑎𝑠𝑘𝑠 + O&M = 435 $/𝑘𝑔 HM

4. COST

DECOMMISSIONING OF DRY STORAGE FACILITY ON ZAPORIZHZHYA NPP

Stage Cost1 Designing

• Safety analysis report

• Procedures documentation

• Licensing

4 mln $

2 Dismantling

• Decontamination

• RAW management (not disposal)

• Physical protection

• Staff

4 mln $

3 RAW management

• casks and transportation

0,8 mln $

Total 8,8 mln $

4. COST

4. COSTFACTORS AFFECTING COSTS IN THE SHORT TO LONG TERM

1. Technical (FAs geometry, enrichment, burn up, national safety requirements)

2. Time of SNF storage (casks material, quality of casks manufacture, licensing, etc)

3. The flexibility of storage technology

4. The storage technology transmission from holder to user (SNF management’s cost increasing at short term with decreasing at long term by casks manufacturing)

Conclusion

1. Open NFC with GD is preferable economically. The main problems of NFC is high reprocessing cost

2. The structure of NFC stage’s cost is commercial information of technology holders. Closed for user

3. Diversification is factor affecting on cost’s decreasing (more supplier – less price)

4. The approximate economic assessment of NFC or SNF management can be made based on open information (IAEA, OECD, DOE, etc) . Results is not quite different with commercial

Thank you for the attention!

26

experience of snf management cost … on...experience of snf management cost estimation o.godun head...

Documents