university of california, berkeley - nuclear energy in...

Nuclear Energy in the United States: 50 Years after Atoms for Peace

Jor-Shan Choi

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory P.O. Box 808, Livermore, California 94551

USA

8th Nuclear Energy Symposium Tokyo, Japan

March 15-16, 2004

This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by the University of California, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract No. W-7405-Eng-48.

UCRL-PRES-202767

Choi/LLNL/March 2004 2

Atoms for Peace – December 8, 1953

“…the United States pledges before you – and therefore before the whole world – it’s determination to help solve the fearful atomic dilemma – to devote its entire heart and mind to find a way by which the miraculous inventiveness of man not be dedicated to his death, but consecrated to his life.”

Excerpt from speech given to the United Nations by Dwight D. Eisenhower, President of the United States, on December 8, 1953


As of January 31, 2004*, the world has:

•  440 nuclear power plants in operation

•  A total net installed capacity of 362 GWe

•  32 nuclear power plants under construction

•  Generated 2574 TWh of electricity

•  Provided ~ 16% of total electricity production

Nuclear power – the current situation

Nuclear Power generates 39% or more electricity in 10 countries

* Taken from Power Reactor Information system, IAEA


l  More than 250 MT of separated civil plutonium (Pu) by the end of this decade

l  A large inventory of separated weapons-grade (WG) Pu from dismantled weapons, 100 MT of which have been declared excess by the U.S. and Russia

l  Large quantities of highly enriched uranium (HEU)

l  More than 250 research reactors in over 60 countries, many still use HEU as fuel

l  A global accumulation of over 230,000 MT of spent fuel by 2010, an amount which can fill more than 3 Yucca Mountain sized repositories

l  Many countries have access to nuclear technology

Nuclear legacy – materials and technologies


Separated Plutonium

l  Global stock of separated civil plutonium will continue to grow*

l  U.S. and Russia each declared 50 MT of WG Pu excess, and each agreed to disposition 34 MT in nuclear reactors

* Plutonium 2000 Conference, Brussels, Belgium


Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) Country Estimated HEU

Inventory1 (MT)

Declared HEU (MT)

HEU Production End1 (year)

United States 750 174 1988 Russia 1050 500 1987

United Kingdom 21.9 1.62 1963 France 25 5.02 1996 China 20 None 1987 ?? India unknown None ongoing

Pakistan unknown None ongoing Israel Unknown None ongoing Total ~1870 ~680

1. UCRL-JC-151485, LLNL May 2003 2. Infcirc 549, Sept. 2003


Global Research Reactors**, Types, Power Levels (>5MW), Enrichments (>90%)

Russia IR-8 H2O 8 90

BR-10 FR* 8 90

WWR-M H2O 18 90

IVV-2 H2O 15 90

MIR-M1 H2O 100 90

IRT-T H2O 6 90

SM-3 H2O 100 90

BOR-60 FR 60 90

South Africa SAFARI-1 H2O 20 93

United States ATR H2O 250 93

MIT R-II H2O 4.9 93

NBSR D2O 20 93

HFIR H2O 85 93

U. M. H2O 10 93

Fast Burst FR* 10 93

* FR – fast reactor

Country Reactor Type Power MW

Enrich- ment %

Belgium BR-2 H2O 100 93

Canada MNR H2O 5 93

China HFETR H2O 125 90

MJTR H2O 5 90

France HFR D2O 58.3 93

ORPHEE H2O 14 93

Germany FRJ-2 H2O 23 93

BER-2 H2O 10 93

Greece GRR-1 H2O 5 93

Israel IRR-1 H2O 5 93

Japan KUR H2O 5 93

Kazakhstan EWG 1 H2O 60 90

Netherlands HFR H2O 45 93

Romania Triga-II H2O 14 93

** UCRL-JC-151485, LLNL, May 2003.


Country Location Rock Type Waste Form Site Belgium Mol Clay SNF1/HLW2 S7

Canada Lac du Bonnet Granite SNF G8

Finland Olkiluoto Granite SNF G/S

France Tournemire Shale SNF/HLW G Germany Konrad

Gorleben Shale

Domal Salt ILW3/LLW4

SNF/HLW S S

Japan Tono Sandstone SNF/HLW G

Sweden ASPO Granite SNF G Switzerland Grimsel

Mont Terri Granite Shale

ILW HLW

G G

US Carlsbad Yucca Mountain

Bedded Salt Tuffs

TRU5

SNF/DHLW6

S S

1 – Spent Nuclear Fuel 2 – High Level Waste 3 – Intermediate Level Waste 4 – Low Level Waste 5 – Transuranic Waste 6 – Defense HLW 7 – Specific Site 8 – Generic Site

Global underground Waste Facilities*

* UCRL-JC-151485, LLNL, May 2003.


A small, but crucial set of countries has acquired by covert means enrichment or reprocessing technologies for weapons under the guise of peaceful uses


As of December 2003*, the U.S. has: •  104 nuclear power units in operation •  Generated 780 TWh of electricity •  Provided ~20% of total electricity production •  14 units approved for license-extension*

•  16 units pending for approval and 20 units planned to apply* •  Increased plant availability (capacity factors) •  Significantly reduced the nuclear generation cost •  Improved the economic competitiveness of new plants

Nuclear power – in the U.S.

* Taken from DOE/NE-0118, December 2003.


Nuclear power capacity in the U.S. Nuclear capacity factor has greatly improved:


U. S. nuclear power production cost Nuclear production cost has become very competitive:


Competitiveness of new nuclear plant*

" For new nuclear plant to be economically competitive with combined-cycle natural-gas plants, the capital costs must be reduced, or natural gas price be increased, or both �

ALWR capital cost, $/KWe

Electricity generation cost, $/MWhr

Natural gas price to CCGT, $/MMBTU

1,000 41.5 3.8 1,100 44.5 4.2 1,200 47.5 4.8 1,300 50.5 5.1 1,400 53.5 5.5 1,500 55.5 5.8 1,600 58.5 6.2

* Taken from “Atoms for Peace after 50 years: The new challenges and opportunities,” CGSR, LLNL, December 2003.


Comparison of electricity generating costs


U.S. nuclear power at a pivotal point •  There has been no new nuclear power plant ordered since

1978, and no plant ordered after 1973 was completed How to reverse the trend?

•  Despite the Nuclear Waste Policy Act (NWPA) of 1982 (amended in 1987), there is still no licensed repository How to maintain the momentum for progress?

•  Student enrollment in nuclear engineering programs has experienced a steady decline over the last decade How to attract the next generations of nuclear personnel?

•  Concerns for nuclear security and proliferation have been intensified after the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001 How to deal with the nuclear legacy?


USDOE/nuclear power industry strategic plan*

•  Early site permit (ESP) demonstration

•  Combined construction and operating license demonstration

•  New reactor technology (LWRs) development

•  Plant construction studies and methodologies

•  Economic business case study

•  Issuance of ESP for multiple nuclear plant sites

•  Issuance of licenses for construction/operation

•  Industry decision for at least one new plant order by 2005

•  Construction and commercial operation of at least one new plant during the 2010 timeframe

R&D Focus Areas Planned Outcomes

Goal: To deploy new nuclear generating capacity

* USDOE/nuclear power industry strategic plan for LWR research and development, 1st Edition, Feb. 2004.


U.S. nuclear waste repository program •  USDOE will submit a license application for a permanent

repository for spent fuel at Yucca Mountain to USNRC at the end of 2004

•  If everything goes as planned, there would be a licensed repository operated at Yucca Mountain in early next decade

•  In the mean time, spent nuclear fuels are stored (wet and/or dry) at reactor sites under the custodianship of the nuclear utilities

USDOE has operated the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, NM receiving Defense TRU wastes for final disposal


U n d e r g r a d u a t e E n r o l l m e n t i n N u c l e a r E n g i n e e r i n g P r o g r a m s

0

2 0

4 0

6 0

8 0

1 0 0

1 2 0

1 4 0

1 6 0

M I T B e r k e l e y M i c h i g a n T e x a s A & M I l l i n o i s - U C

S o u r c e : U n i v e r s i t y R e c o r d s

C l i n t o n 1 9 9 3 S t a t e o f t h e U n i o n A d d r e s s *

2 0 0 1 N a t i o n a l E n e r g y P o l i c y

1 9 9 7 - 9 8 L i c e n s e R e n e w a l s a n d P l a n t S a l e s

Energy Bill?!

Student interest closely track national policy and commercial success*

* Taken from presentation on “Nuclear energy in the US in the coming decades,” by Prof. Per Peterson of UC Berkeley at Woodrow Wilson Center, December 2003.


To attract next-generation nuclear personnel

•  The USDOE Nuclear Near-Term Deployment (NTD): - Nuclear Power 2010

- Nuclear Power Optimization Program (NEPO)

•  The USDOE Longer-Term R&D Program: - Nuclear Energy Research Initiative (NERI) - Generation-IV Nuclear Technology Development (GEN-IV & GIF) - Advance Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI)

•  Other R&D programs: - Space nuclear power reactor (no refueling, long life fuel)

- Nuclear hydrogen generation (high-temperature reactor/materials)

There must be a growing/sustaining interest in revitalizing the nuclear energy option supported by near-term and longer-term R&D programs:


Dealing with the nuclear legacy •  Secure the existing weapons-usable materials

•  Eliminate the rationale for acquiring enrichment and reprocessing technologies

•  Reduce the “non-proliferation and waste” burden for countries wanting only nuclear electricity generation

�


•  Separated plutonium (civil or weapons-grade) can be consumed in existing nuclear reactors (cooperation needed from countries with Pu utilization programs)

•  HEU inventory can be reduced by blending it with depleted or natural uranium to make low enriched uranium (LEU) and use LEU as fuel in nuclear reactors (coordinated with market demands)

•  The U.S. has the Reduced Enrichment of Research and Test Reactor (RERTR) Program converting the research reactor HEU core to LEU, and taking back spent HEU fuel from US-origin research reactors (should continue beyond May 2006)

•  The U.S. also supports a take back program for spent fuel from Russia-origin research reactors

Securing weapons-usable materials


Eliminate rationale for enrichment/reprocessing “….The world must create a safe, orderly system to field civilian nuclear plants without adding to the danger of weapons proliferation. The world's leading nuclear exporters should ensure that states have reliable access at reasonable cost to fuel for civilian reactors, so long as those states renounce enrichment and reprocessing. Enrichment and reprocessing are not necessary for nations seeking to harness nuclear energy for peaceful purposes.” President G. W. Bush’s speech given at Ft. Lesley J. McNair, National Defense University, on February 11, 2004.

�


MemberCountry 1

Member Country 2

MemberCountry 3

MemberCountry 4

Natural U

Conversion

Enrichment

LEU fuelFabrication

U fuelFabrication

Spent Fuel Storage

RepositoryFuel reprocessing

DUPIC fuelFabrication

MOX fuelFabrication

PWRSpent fuel

Spent fuel

HLW

Fresh fuel transport

Fast Rx fuelFabrication

Spent fuel

TRU

U

Spent fuel transport

….

Repro. UDepleted U

Pufissile materials

Forming a global network of nuclear fuel cycle facilities*

Reducing non-proliferation and waste burden

* UCRL-JC-151485, LLNL, May 2003.


A Global Network of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities •  Is not necessarily a regional nuclear fuel cycle center

•  Does not need to be within a national boundary

•  Could be formed by framework of contractual agreements among companies (and countries in which companies are operating)

•  Is intended to provide a cradle-to-grave fuel cycle services to countries wanting only nuclear electricity generation

•  Nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the network must comply with international safety standards and safeguards requirements

Most fuel-cycle services are provided today except for spent fuel storage and waste disposal. Bilateral/multilateral cooperation are needed to complete the network


Summary •  50 years after Atoms for Peace, the world has benefited

substantially from nuclear power, however, it also leaves a taunting nuclear legacy

•  Nuclear Power in the U.S. is at a pivotal point: o  For existing plants, improve availability and reduce cost o  For new plant, increase industrial incentives for new plant order o  Have a licensed waste repository in early next decade o  Commit R&D programs to attract next-generation nuclear personnel o  Deal with existing nuclear legacy

•  Secure the existing weapons-usable materials •  Eliminate the rationale for countries acquiring enrichment and

reprocessing technologies, •  Reduce the “non-proliferation and waste” burden for countries

wanting only nuclear electricity generation

university of california, berkeley - nuclear energy in...

Documents