slides - a new energy age for dod_james_howe

8/10/2019 Slides - A New Energy Age for DoD_James_Howe

1/33


2/33

2

Outline

Background

Historic Service Programs Provide Foundation

Proposed Solution

DoD Energy requirements

-- DoD Distributed Power Requirement

-- DoD Remote Power Missions

-- DoD Logistics Issues: Electricity, Fuel, and Water

-- DoD Power Projection Missions

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR) Support to Service Missions

- Army/Marines- Air Force

- Navy

Conclusions


3/33

3

Background DoD energy needs are increasing as available fossil fuels increase in cost

and decrease in availability

Hundreds of small nuclear reactors have been built, mostly for naval use andas neutron sources

National Security requirement for independent power supply for DoD bases

Multiple small reactors could either be distributed or clustered to solve

energy demand

Could be part of a Sandia National Laboratory micro grid concept Characteristics of smaller nuclear reactors:

Greater simplicity of design

Economy of mass production

Reduce cost of site

High level of passive/inherent safety

Congress is funding research:

Advanced gas cooled designs

Factory provided, assembled on-site


4/33

4

Background (Continued)

Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne, IL) has developed a liquid-

lead-cooled, fast-spectrum, solid-core reactor concept.

Requires a minimum of maintenance and can operate 30 years w/o

refueling

Passive safety systems

Cooled by natural convection

Office of the Secretary of the Army for Installations and Environment

Leverages Energy and Environment projects

Uses catalyst technology projects

Executed by Florida International University

USAF is considering building a nuclear power reactor at one or moreof its bases, to be privately owned and operated

Started by Kevin Billings, Assistant Secretary AF for energy,

environment, saftey and occupational health (MAR 08)

Senator Larry Craig (ID) sent letter to SAF asking if AF was interested

Senator Pete Domenici (NM) sent a similar letter


5/33

5

Three BranchesThree Reactor Programs

Naval Reactor efforts began in the late 1940s with Rickoverspursuit of a nuclear reactor for a submarines, culminating in the

launch of the USS Nautilus in 1954. Pressurized water reactor technologies were chosen based on

their compactness and relative simplicity.

The Air Force also had a desire for a nuclear-powered aircraft thatwould serve as a long-range bomber.

An aircraft reactor was far more challenging than a terrestrialreactor because of the importance of high-temperatures, lightweight, and simplicity of operation.

The Nuclear Aircraft Program led to revolutionary reactor designs,one of which was the liquid-fluoride reactor.

The Army Reactor Program began in1953 to enable nuclear power forremote sitesthey chose PWRtechnology because the Navy did.

Reactors for Ft. Belvoir, Ft. Greely,Camp Century, and other sites were

built.


6/33

6

Army Nuclear Power ProgramThe Army Nuclear Power Program (ANPP) was a program of the United States

Army to develop small pressurized water and boiling water nuclear power

reactors for use in remote sites.Eight reactors were built in all: (Of the 8 built, 6 produced operationally useful power for an

extended period) SM-1, 2 MWe. Fort Belvoir, VA, first criticality 1957 (several months before the Shippingport Reactor) and the first

U.S. nuclear power plant to be connected to an electrical grid.

SM-1A, 2 MWe, plus heating. Fort Greely, Alaska. First criticality 1962.

PM-2A, 2 MWe, plus heating. Camp Century, Greenland. First criticality 1961.

PM-1, 1.25 MWe, plus heating. Sundance, Wyoming. Owned by the Air Force, used to power a radar station. Firstcriticality 1962.

PM-3A, 1.75 MWe, plus heating. McMurdo Station, Antarctica. Owned by the Navy. First criticality 1962,

decommissioned 1972.

SL-1, BWR, 200kWe, plus heating. Idaho Reactor Testing Station. First criticality 1958. Site of the only fatal accident

at a US nuclear power reactor, on January 3 1961, which destroyed the reactor.

ML-1, first closed cycle gas turbine. Designed for 300 kW, but only achieved 140 kW. Operated for only a few

hundred hours of testing before being shut down in 1963.

MH-1A, 10 MWe, plus fresh water supply to the adjacent base. Mounted on the Sturgis, a barge converted from aLiberty ship, and moored in the Panama Canal Zone. Installed 1968, removed on cessation of US zone ownership in

1975 (the last of the eight to permanently cease operation).

Key to the codes:

First letter: S - stationary, M - mobile, P - portable.

Second letter: H - high power, M - medium power, L -

low power.

Digit: Sequence number.

Third letter: A indicates field installation.

MA-IA Reactor


7/33

7

Reactors can be very small and powerful, such asthe Nuclear Aircraft Concept

Convair B-36 X-6 Four nuclear-powered

turbojets 200 MW thermal reactor

Liquid-Fluoride

Reactor


8/33

8

Navy Nuclear Power Program

11 Nuclear Powered Carriers 69 Nuclear powered Submarines

More than 5500 reactor years without accident


9/33


10/33

10

DoD PowerRemote and Naval Ships

Army AFMarineCorps

Navy

DoD PowerRemote

and Naval Ships

Kwajalein Test Range Ft. Greely, AK

Global Power Projection

Lily Pad Strategy

Global Air and Missile Defense

Sites

Major Overseas Bases: 36

BMD Early Warning Radars Major Overseas Bases: 17

Global Power Projection

Lily Pad Strategy

Major Overseas Bases: 6 Global Power Projection

Lily Pad Strategy

Major Overseas Bases: 16 Global Power Projection

Sea Basing

Naval Ships

Carriers: 11

SSBN: 18

SSN: 53

CG(N)-X: 19?

Other Major Surface

Combatants

DoD CONUSBases

Power for each major base/ critical

installation independent of the US

Power Grid

USAF: 71

USA: 59

USN: 57

USMC: 15


11/33

Ambassador Woosley: DoD Needs DistributedPowerSmall is Beautiful (1)

Defense Infrastructure at Risk to

National Grid Vulnerabilities

Need Power for Remote Sites, Global Bases,

and Support to Expeditionary Forces

1. National Security and Homeland Security Issue

U.S. Overseas Deployments

> 700 bases in > 130 countries

> 250,000 personnel

> 44,000 buildings

Major Bases

Army36

Navy16

Air Force17

Marines15

Intelligence community


12/33

Joint Remote Site Power Production

All services have remote sites that require dependable 24/7/365 operation
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.smdc.army.mil/smdcphoto_gallery/Facilities/FtGreely/FtGreelyWideShot.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.smdc.army.mil/smdcphoto_gallery/Facilities/Facilities.html&usg=__UxRwNy0VHCtR-qo7mTX5RTZqUTs=&h=978&w=1500&sz=1240&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=OgCksPIAUFk96M:&tbnh=98&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dft.%2Bgreely%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBF_enUS307US307%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://mcnerney.us/kwaj/pictures/kwajalein-east-reef.jpg&imgrefurl=http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php%3Fp%3D10870210%26postcount%3D175&usg=__tdZBgUkIZ_iG1-J6MdNZmp7_cIA=&h=2291&w=2960&sz=2836&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=sxBshAfDwhwbSM:&tbnh=116&tbnw=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkwajalein%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBF_enUS307US307%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.norske.org/travel/thule/thule_winter1.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.norske.org/travel/thule/&usg=__gKrT-JWiW6K1BM1GcADP7gPGFGA=&h=633&w=882&sz=65&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=hFkBNvqeeh0E7M:&tbnh=105&tbnw=146&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dthule,%2Bgreenland%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBF_enUS307US307%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1


13/33

Energy is a Major Component of PowerProjection Logistics

How can we sustain forward deployed and power projection forces inthe face of uncertain energy supplies and asymmetric threats? Nuclear energy is a compact, cost-effective sustainable energy source

Combat LogisticsTooth to tail ratio > 10-1 Extended (and vulnerable) supply lines Prohibitive transportation costsFuel costs $100-600/gallon

Storage and distribution challengesLarge infrastructure costs No, or inadequate local sources Combat Losses

-- Men and material-- Impact on Combat operations

Fuel Consumption per soldier is rapidly increasing 2004 20 gallons/day 2040 80 gallons/day

Battlefield supply volume Bulk petroleum 40% Water 50%

Energy is the Enabler of Military Operations


14/33

Transportable Reactors could Provide Electricity, Fueland Water

The Past

ML-1 Reactor-1965 6 Containers required

The FutureLFTR -10-30 MWAir TransportableEmplace in 3-5 days??


15/33

DoD Power Projection Missions

Iraq Bases Afghanistan Bases
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/iraq-map-aor_040400.htm


16/33


17/33


18/33

18

Illustrative Long Range Strike CapabilitiesEnabled by Thorium Reactor Power Source

Hypervelocity Impact Imparts

High Energy

Hypervelocity Impact

(M5+)

(1) Long-range Offensive Missiles cost ~ $500k to $3M+ and Defensive Interceptors cost $1-3M+

Game Changing Technology Acro ss Conf l ict Spectrum

CostCostCost: EMG Radically changes cost of waging war Offensive: $10-30 k/Rd and ~ $6 to launch 3000-6000 km

Defensive: ~ $30 k/Interceptor Greater Standoffs = Reduced Ship Vulnerability Volume and Precision Fires (< 3m CEP)

Multiple Objectives Time Critical Strike (6-15 min) All Weather Availability (24/7/365) Variety of Payloads

WH: Penetrators/KEPscan destroy most targets of interest

Sensors: Air, Ground, Sea Scaleable Effects

Minimize Collateral Damage Deep Magazines (1000-3000+ rounds/gun)

Non-explosive Round/No Gun Propellant Simplified Logistics


19/33

LFTR can Power Advanced Air Force Concepts

Radars Long Endurance UAVs

Overseas Bases Power Space Based Systems- Communications

- Sensors

Th i R t C B C t Eff ti l
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://kalaniosullivan.com/OsanAB/Pics/us-osan-001.jpg&imgrefurl=http://kalaniosullivan.com/OsanAB/OsanSongtanb1.html&usg=__LipcEMJYdxX9VNrsUqHhgkYdtxQ=&h=320&w=600&sz=50&hl=en&start=1&um=1&tbnid=lrlypNOwu4SNKM:&tbnh=72&tbnw=135&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dosan%2Bafb%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1T4ADBF_enUS307US307%26sa%3DN%26um%3D1http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/AIR_UAV_RQ-4_Global_Hawk_lg.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/cat/aircraft/air-reconnaissance/page/2/&h=600&w=800&sz=64&tbnid=1DE_wN4TrQ6Z7M:&tbnh=107&tbnw=143&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dglobal%2Bhawk&usg=__DPWc33cqG9CFffiNju0saVLO3dU=&ei=NIIoSp6tOdCntgeH4oHqBQ&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=6&ct=image


20/33

20

Thorium Reactors Can Be Cost-EffectivelyUsed for All Navy Ships

Thor ium Reactors are expected to be smaller, l ighter, safer and less co st ly

Frigates30

Littoral Combat Ships - TBD

Aircraft Carriers - 12 Cruisers - 22 Destroyers53+

Amphibious Assault

Ships - 11 SSBN14

SSGN4

SSN - 53


21/33

21

Requirements to Construct Nuclear Powered Naval Ships

1) FY 2008 Defense Authorization Act Section 1012 of the 2008 Defense Authorization Act (H.R.

4986/P.L. 110-181 of January 28, 2008Nuclear Power Systems for Major Combatant Naval VesselsRequires that all new classes of submarines, aircraft carriers,

cruisers, large escorts for carrier strike groups,expeditionary strike groups, and vessels comprising a seabase have integrated nuclear power systems, unless theSecretary of Defense submits a notification to Congress thatthe inclusion of an integrated nuclear power system in a

given class of ship is not in the national interest.2) Rapidly emerging need for high MW Electric Power ships foradvanced weapons and sensors.

11/19/2014 21


22/33

Thorium Reactors Can Capitalize on Existing Engine Design/Technology


23/33

23

Thorium Reactors Can Capitalize on Existing Engine Design/Technology,

Significantly Reducing Engine Development Cost/Schedule

Existing turbojet/turbofan engine technology can be adapted

Small cruise missile class to very large ship class

Dual mode is commonplace

Technologies developed for early nuclear propulsion programs can be

applied

Billions have been spent on

optimizing jet enginetechnologies.

Available infrastructure is ready

to optimize closed-cycle jet

engine architecture

Key components: Single crystal turbine blade

manufacturing

Low-friction magnetic and

mechanical bearings

Computational fluid codes

to model engine dynamics

Aerogel insulation

11/19/2014 23


24/33

24

Ex: Pressurized-water Naval Nuclear Propulsion System

SSBN: 55

SSN: 42

CGN: 37

SSBN: 42

SSN: 33CGN: 42

11/19/2014 24

LFTR C ld C t 30 50% L Th


25/33

25

LFTR Could Cost 30-50% Less Than

Current Naval Reactors

No pressure vessel required

Liquid fuel requires no expensive fuel fabrication and qualification Smaller power conversion system

No steam generators required

Factory built-modular construction

Smaller containment vessel needed

Steam vs. fluids

More simple operation

No operational control rods

No re-fueling shut down

Smaller Crew

Lasts for Ship Lifetime

Preliminary LFTR design in work for a ship propulsion system

Neutronic codes for liquid fuels under developmentNeeded to design propulsion system

LFTR ship propulsion is expected to be smaller, lighter and cheaper than current nuclear

propulsion systems

Utilizes closed-cycle gas turbines which can take advantage of existing gas turbine engine

technology.

Recent Ship Propulsion Designs at NPGS have included thorium reactors


26/33

26

LFTR Supports Maritime Strategic Concept

Strategic Imperatives Limit regional conflict with forward deployed, decisive maritime power

Deter major power war

Win our nations wars

Contribute to homeland defense in depth

Foster and sustain cooperative relations with more international partners

Prevent or contain local disruptions before they impact the global system Expanded Core Capabilities

Forward Presence

Deterrence

Sea Control

Power Projection

Maritime Security Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief

11/19/2014 26

Li id Fl id Th i R t Si ifi tl E h


27/33

27

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors Significantly Enhancethe Following Capabilities:

Ship Higher sustained speeds provides real-time response

Transit Operations in Theatre

No requirement to re-fuel Transit Operations in Theatre

Power Advanced Radars (New Aegis radar requires ~ 30 MW power)

Electro-magnetic gunsNeed GW power levels- Self Defense- Strike 2020: 500+ km 2030: 3000+ km- Ballistic Missile Defense 2020: 500+ km 2030: 3000+ km

Directed Energy Weapons Other Sensors, e.g. Pulsed Sonars High Power Microwave Weapons

High Power Density Propulsion Frees weight/space for high value/high impact assets

Survivability No exhaust stackreduced IR/RCS signatures No fuel supply line Power self defense capabilities

11/19/2014 27Ful ly Integrated Propuls ion, Senso rs, Weapons

Li id Fl id Th i R t Si ifi tl E h


28/33

28

Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors Significantly Enhancethe Following Capabilities (Cont.):

Force EnhancementReduced energy independenceno reliance on fuel tankers

No need to provide protection to tankers, LOCs, or fuelsuppliers

No dependence on foreign oil

No reduced transit speed/time off station to re-fuel

Greater forward presence

Response to crises/conflicts

Un-paralleled flexibility moving between theatres

Surge ability

On-station time

Superiority on the sea

Reduced cost/ship = more ships

11/19/2014 28


29/33

Illustrative Example of Thorium Reactor Provides


30/33

30

Illustrative Example of Thorium Reactor ProvidesWeapon Power Source for All Naval Ships

> 30 MW power needed

2020: > 500 km2030: > 3000 km?

Directed Energy Weapon Advanced Radars

Electromagnetic Guns

11/19/2014 30

C f


31/33

31

A 100 MW LFTR Can Provide the Power Needed for ElectromagneticGuns for Both Advanced Weapons and Sensors (1)

Figure 5. Power Requirements as a

Function of Firing Rate.

EM Gun

20 kg Launch package

15 kg flight

2.5 km/s at muzzle

63 MJ Muzzle Energy

Range: ~ 500 km

Figure 2. Naval EM Gun System Architecture

(1) Data from Integration of

Electromagnetic Rail Gun into

Future Electric Warships., A.

Chaboka, et al.


32/33


33/33

Conclusions

Liquid fluoride thorium reactors can provide a substantial proportion offuture DoD energy requirements

Electricity

Fuel

Water

Major US Bases

Remote Sites

Forward Deployed Forces

Power Projection Forces

Naval Ship Propulsion

Power New Weapon & Sensors

slides - a new energy age for dod_james_howe

Documents