Nuclear Energy for Remote Applications 23 October, 2014 Michael - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
nuclear energy for remote applications
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Nuclear Energy for Remote Applications 23 October, 2014 Michael - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jun 24, 2023 12 likes •195 views

Nuclear Energy for Remote Applications 23 October, 2014 Michael Kuca (University of Alaska) Vishal Patel (Texas A&M) Alana Vilagi (University of Alaska) 1 Objectives Consider GenIII+/GenIV nuclear power plants for remote

slide-1
SLIDE 1

23 October, 2014 Michael Kuca (University of Alaska) Vishal Patel (Texas A&M) Alana Vilagi (University of Alaska)

Nuclear Energy for Remote Applications

1

slide-2
SLIDE 2

►

Consider GenIII+/GenIV nuclear power plants for remote applications

►

ACEP – INL/CSNR collaboration:

POLAR design team

Taylor Duffin (University of Utah) Michael Kuca (University of Alaska) Haley McIntyre (University of Alaska) Christopher Morrison (Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute) Vishal Patel (Texas A&M) Alana Vilagi (University of Alaska)

►

Opportunities and Obstacles to deployment

Objectives

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

►

AK utilities: $0.20 to $1.30 per kWh

►

Remote fuel price:$5 to $10 per gallon

Fuel Supply Chain; Consumer Costs

3

ISER (2010) Alaska Dispatch (2012)

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Technology: Big Picture

5

INL (2013)

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Gen III+ iPWR

  • Integrates steam generator

into pressure vessel

  • Passive designs remove

decay heat

  • US Modular design

compliments macro-grid

Technology: Small and Mini

7

Gen IV reactors

  • Alternative cooling designs
  • Factory sealed, no refueling
  • Individual units compliment

micro-grid

Examples (MWe)

Sodium Toshiba 4S – 10 Pb-Bi G4M – 25 LFR SSTAR - 20

Examples (MWe)

NuScale - 45 mPower - 225 CAREM – 25 KLT-40S - 10

slide-6
SLIDE 6

►

CSNR: mini reactors for space exploration

  • Some aspects apply to northern deployment

►

Design a mini Gen IV mobile reactor

  • Parameters
  • Safe
  • Transportable
  • Passive cooling, Non-pressurized vessel
  • Less than 10 MWe
  • Long life

CSNR ACEP Collaboration

8

slide-7
SLIDE 7
  • 15MWth/5MWe
  • PbBi cooled, natural circulation
  • Core Outlet Temp 550 °C
  • Open air Brayton Cycle 500 °C
  • Ship weight 100 ton

POLAR

Passively Operated Lead Arctic Reactor

9

slide-8
SLIDE 8

POLAR Lifetimes at 5 MWe

10

Case Approximate Lifetime (years) W-Cermet Fuel Loading 1 6 W-Cermet Fuel Loading 2 10 SiC Fuel 15 UZr Fuel 20

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Process Heat Applications

11

Application Temperature Range (Celsius) Fish Processing 30-50 Greenhouse 45-50 District Heating 30-80 Desalination 30-130 Biomass to Biofuels 200-500 Oil Production 500-600 Coal to liquid fuels 800-900 Hydrogen Production 800-1000

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Process Heat Applications

12

0°C 1000°C

slide-11
SLIDE 11

►

Deterministic focus on Light Water Reactors

  • Staffing: 4 operators per shift for total 40-80
  • Core Damage Frequency

►

Possible Strategies for Gen IV

  • New Regulations – time consuming
  • Exemptions – complex
  • Risk-Informed Performance-Based Licensing

Licensing Issues for SMRs

13

slide-12
SLIDE 12

►

Preferred licensing strategy for the Next Generation Nuclear Plant project

►

Review process that emphasizes outcomes rather than prescriptive methods for achieving them, providing more flexibility in design

Risk-Informed Performance- Based Licensing

14

slide-13
SLIDE 13

NRC Licensing Timeline

15

slide-14
SLIDE 14

►

Gave Legislature authority to designate land in state for nuclear facility based on economics

  • Health and public safety NRC jurisdiction

►

The Department of Environmental Conservation shall adopt regulations governing the issuance of nuclear facility siting permits

  • Authorization program has not been created

►

Require municipal approval

Alaska Sustainable Energy Act 2010

16

slide-15
SLIDE 15
  • Remote nuclear power plants may be viable in 2020s
  • Continue UA R&D Partnerships
  • Lack of super utility; promote stakeholder alliance

– Military, Civilian, Industry – Communicate with state and federal legislators

  • Licensing challenges are not insurmountable

– Early site permitting – Siting facilitated through legislature

  • Initial capital investments

– First of a kind funding – Master Limited Partnership

Conclusions

17

slide-16
SLIDE 16

References

18

Abdulla, A., Azevedo, I. L., & Morgan, M. (2013). Expert assessments of the cost of light water small modular reactors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 110, 9686-9691. Buongiorno, J. (2001). Conceptual design of a lead-bismuth cooled fast reactor with in-vessel direct-contact steam

  • generation. Cambridge, MA: Doctoral Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Dostal, V., Hejzlar, P., Driscoll, M. (2006). Supercritical cabon dioxide power cycle: comparison to other advanced power cycles. Nuclear Technology, 154, 283-301. Ingersoll, et. al. (2004). Status of Preconceptual Design of the Advanced High-Temperature Reactor (AHTR). ORNL. International Atomic Energy Agency (2007). Status of Small Reactor Designs Without On-Site Refueling. IAEA-TECDOC-1536. Makhijani, A., & Boyd, M. (2010). Small modular reactors: No solution for the Cost, Safety, and Waste Problems of Nuclear Power. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Energy and Environmental Research and Physicians for Social Responsibility. Nuclear Energy Institute. (2010). NRC annual fee assessment for small reactors. Washington, D.C.: NEI. Nuclear Energy Agency. (2007). Handbook on lead-bismuth eutectic alloy and lead properties, materials compatibility, thermal-hydraulics and technologies., Danvers, MA.: OCED/NEA

slide-17
SLIDE 17

References

19

Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2012). Report to Congress Advanced Reactor Licensing. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (2013). Summary Feedback on Four Key Licensing Issues Next Generation Nuclear

  • Plant. Office of New Reactors.

Ramana Rao, M.V., Sadasivudu, D. (1974). Pressure drop studies in helical coils. Indian J. Technology, 12, 473. Sabharawall, et. al. (2011). Feasibility study of secondary heat exchanger concepts of the advanced high temperature

  • reactor. INL/EXT-11-23076

Solan, D., Black, G., Louis, M., Peterson, S., & Carter, L. (2010). Economic and employment impacts of small modular nuclear reactors. Idaho Falls, ID: Energy Policy Institute, Center for Advanced Energy Studies. Stewart, J., Lamont, A., Rothwell, G., Smith, C., Greenspan, E., Brown, N., & Barak, A. (2002). An economic analysis of Generation IV small modular reactors. Livermore, California: U.S. Department of Energy, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. The Economic Modeling Working Group of the Generation IV International Forum. (2007). Cost estimating guidelines for generation IV nuclear energy systems. Washington, D.C.: OCED Nuclear Energy Agency. Venneri, et. al. (2014). Design of a Tungsten CERMET LEU-NTR. ANS-NETS. Waltar, A., Todd, D., Tsvetkov, P. (2012). Fast Spectrum Reactors. 978-1-4419-9571-1.

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Questions?

20