T F A MAPPING GLOBAL NUCLEAR EXPANSION R Sharon Squassoni D - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sharon Squassoni Senior Associate November 5, 2007

With Georgina Jones and Nima Gerami, research assistants

MAPPING GLOBAL NUCLEAR EXPANSION

D R A F T

• 16% global electricity demand
• 31 countries operating 439 reactors (371

GW)

• 11 countries with 50 million SWU

enrichment

• 5 countries separating plutonium

commercially

• 0 countries with geologic repositories for

nuclear waste

Nuclear Energy Today

D R A F T

I: Reactor Capacities, 2007*

(Gigawatts electric, GWe)

22 22 19 19 17 17 13 13 9 2 2 5 4 1 1 0.5 0.5 OECD EUROPE 130 UNITED STATES 99

JAPAN 48

*See separate Appendix for details, assumptions, and data for this and other maps.

D R A F T

II: States Enriching Uranium, 2007

D R A F T

III: States Reprocessing Spent Fuel, 2007

D R A F T

Nuclear Energy Enthusiasm

• Perceived as “clean and green”
• Greater energy security (?)
• But what about proliferation?

(as well as cost, safety, waste?)

• Since 2005, over 20 states have

announced new plans for nuclear power

D R A F T

• Nuclear energy increasingly attractive to “nuclear

neophytes” – those without nuclear power now.

• 13 states in Middle East want nuclear
• Has Iran’s nuclear program influenced?
• Energy security has geographic underpinnings
• To have any impact on climate change, it matters

where nuclear energy grows (need to offset greatest potential growth in carbon emissions as in India, China)

Does Geography Matter?

D R A F T

• When do reactors spur enrichment and reprocessing

also?

• Efforts to restrict technology transfer are foundering
• More states now interested in such capabilities
• Nuclear enthusiasm outstripping rules and

institutions for managing

• Perennial issues: developing scientific and

technological base and security & control of nuclear material

Proliferation and Geography

D R A F T

• Scenario I:

Meeting demand in 2030 (EIA)

• Scenario II:

Planning supply for 2030

• Scenario III:

Climate change “requirements” in 2050

• a. One nuclear wedge (Pacala, Socolow)
• b. MIT 1500 GW
• c. Stern Report (2-6 “wedges”)

Nuclear Expansion Scenarios*

* See following slides and separate Appendix for details of scenarios

D R A F T

• Energy Information Administration (EIA)

projections look at GDP growth, energy demand, end-use sector, electricity supply, with nuclear as share

• Limitations

– Nuclear energy projections done “off-line” – Regional estimates (with a few country-specific

• nes)

– Wildcards = Retirements, Western Europe

Scenario I: Meeting Demand in 2030

D R A F T

• This scenario takes at face value states’

announced plans for nuclear development. Wild optimism?

• Strong growth in Asia (India, China)
• New nuclear reactor states
• Possibly new enrichers, reprocessers?

Scenario II: Planning Supply for 2030

D R A F T

IV: Where Will Nuclear Energy Grow?

D R A F T

V: A Closer Look at “New” Nuclear States

Proposals as of 2007

D R A F T

Scenario III: Global Climate Change, 2050

From tripling to quadrupling capacities

• a. 1 Gigaton of carbon emissions reduction

(Pacala-Socolow “wedge”) = + 700 GWe for a total of 1070 GWe reactor capacity

• b. 1500 GWe = MIT study high scenario
• c. 2-6 Gigatons of carbon emissions reduction

(Stern Report) = 1500-4500 GWe

D R A F T

UNITED STATES 99 13 13 1 1 2 22 22 19 19

JAPAN 48

5 18 18 9 2 4 0.5 0.5 OECD EUROPE 130

VI: Reactor Capacities for all Scenarios*

(Gigawatts electric, GWe)

KEY: Current Capacity

• I. 2030 –

EIA Forecast

• II. 2030 –

Proposed Expansion

• II. 2030 –

Proposed New Capacity III.b. 2050 – MIT Expansion III.b. 2050 – MIT New Capacity *New nuclear capacities (red, green dots) not necessarily to scale; consult Appendix for data.

1 3 5 4 1 4 9 3 1 1 3 5 1 8 1 8 1 5 1 6 4 2 4 6 1 6 0.5 0.5

D R A F T

1 4 4 6 1 5 2 6 1 8 6 0.5 0.5

VII: A Closer Look at New Nuclear Reactors – Scenarios II and III (GWe)

1 4 3 5 3 1 1 5 8 1 4 1 9 3 1

KEY:

• II. 2030 – Proposed New Capacity

III.b. 2050 – MIT Expansion III.b. 2050 – MIT New Capacity

D R A F T

Enrichment Implications*

50 100 150 200 250

2007 Scenario I Scenario II Scenario III:

• a. Wedge

Scenario III:

• b. MIT

Scenario III:

• c. Stern

Scenario M illions SW U / Year

11 22 33 44 55

Number of Plants

40-50 72-108 52 150 200 225

*See separate Appendix for details. Numbers are rough approximation.

D R A F T

• 90% operating power reactors currently use LEU
• Assumptions about reactor technologies and the fuel

cycle (open or closed) matter a lot in projections

• Example:
• 1500 GWe

LWRs = 225 million SWU/year

• 1500 GWe

with MOX reactors (1 recycle) = 189 million SWU/year

• 1500 GWe

with fast, thermal reactors: 123 million SWU/year

Variables Affecting Enrichment Projections

D R A F T

VIII: Enrichment Capacities for all Scenarios

(million SWU/year)

KEY: Current Capacity

• I. 2030 - EIA Forecast
• II. 2030 – Proposed Expansion
• II. 2030 – Proposed New Capacity

III.b. 2050 - MIT Expansion III.b. 2050 - MIT New Capacity

6 1 6 8 6 9 1 1 0.5 0.5 USEC 8

EURODIF 10.8

TENEX 22

URENCO 8.1

1

CNNC JNFL

1

RESENDE 0.12

1 8 3 3

D R A F T

• Reactor expansion raises questions about how to

handle spent fuel. Basic options are storage vs. reprocessing; no way to predict

• National policies vs. international norms
• Existing storage capacities (S. Korea?)
• Fuel cycle approaches (once-through, one recycle, fast

reactors?)

• New technologies (reactors & recycle)
• Cost
• “GNEP Factor”

Spent Fuel: How to Handle?

D R A F T

Storage Capacities

• 1 GWe

LWR produces 20 MT spent uranium oxide fuel/yr

• Scenario II :

Scenario II : 700 GWe will require 14 Yuccas

(NRDC)*

• Scenario III a:

Scenario III a: 1000 GWe will require a Yucca every 3.5 years (or, 20 Yuccas; MIT)

• Scenario III b:

Scenario III b: 1500 GWe ~ 30 Yuccas

* Assuming Yucca can only hold 70,000 MT

D R A F T

8 countries now = 80% of global reactor capacity

• Of 8, half don’t reprocess: US, Canada, Ukraine and

South Korea …

• All but Canada are reconsidering

By 2050, the only countries with comparably-sized fuel cycles will be China and India, both of which will reprocess Other states won’t face a storage shortage

Spent Fuel Build-Up?

D R A F T

Scen Scenario IIIb: 1500 G ario IIIb: 1500 GWe* [DRAFT DATA] e* [DRAFT DATA]

• Once-through (no reprocessing)

~30,000 MTIHM/yr spent fuel = 30 Yuccas**

• Thermal reactors with one MOX recycle

~25,000 MTIHM/yr uranium oxide is reprocessed (plus separated uranium, high-level waste in glass, etc) = 22 Yuccas (?) and 15 La Hagues

• Balanced cycle with fast and thermal reactors

~16,000 MTIHM/yr uranium oxide and 4,700 MTIHM of FR fuel is reprocessed leaving pyroprocessing waste, etc =14 Yuccas (?) & 10 La-Hague-sized pyroprocessing plants

*est. burn-up = 50 GWd/MTIHM (millions tons initial heavy metal) ** Assuming Yucca can only hold 70,000 tons

Fuel Cycles Dictate Waste

D R A F T

IX: States Reprocessing?

D R A F T

• Expansion plans are unrealistic
• Proliferation concerns are real

– Reactors require infrastructure, expertise, some of which can be applied to a nuclear weapons program – Enrichment, reprocessing not yet off the table – Real expansion will entail massive flows of sensitive material

Summary

D R A F T

• Even if nuclear power expansion fizzles,

some states may go ahead with plans

• Few financial barriers to enrichment ($2 B

per plant; 5 years construction for URENCO)

• Cost & waste are still issues for

reprocessing.

• Second-tier nuclear suppliers --

China, India?

Summary

D R A F T

• 1. Retirements of reactors a wild card after 2030
• 2. Forecasts assume light water reactors. What

about a) PHWR exports from India, China, Canada?; and b) lower enrichment requirements if MOX fuel cycle or fast reactor with actinide recycling pursued.

• 3. Issue of electricity grids – developing nations

may purchase much smaller sized reactors than planned

• 4. Uranium enrichment -- not expensive ($1-2B) or

long (5 years) to build, but environmental hazards?; wide range of enrichment per 1 GW (1- 1.5M SWU)

• 5. Western European reactor plans quite variable

Additional Questions

D R A F T