Understanding the rudiments of Nuclear Power and what it means for - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Sedick Davis (Pr Eng)

General Manager: Master Nuclear Specialist (Eskom)

April 2017

“Understanding the rudiments

• f Nuclear Power and what it

means for our country through Koeberg Power Station. By Extrapolation, what new nuclear plants will mean.“

Agenda

Koeberg Power Station Operational record 2 Koeberg Power Station Engineered Safety Features 3 Basic operation of a nuclear power plant 1 Costs and Economic Impact 4

2

Commentary on the optimal energy mix 5 Conclusion 6

Basic operation of a nuclear power plant

Nuclear power plants are also part of the thermal power generation technology as they use thermal energy to generate electricity.

Energy conversion stages in generating electricity from nuclear: > nuclear to heat energy

through the fission > heat to kinetic/mechanical energy in the turbines > kinetic to electrical energy in the generator

Nuclear Fuel Cycle – front end

Uranium Ore Yellow Cake - U3O8 UF6 Fuel Pellet UO2 Fuel Assembly

Conversion Pelletizing Fabrication

Fuel Rod

Milling Mining Enrichment

Nuclear Fuel Cycle – back end

3 categories of solid waste from a nuclear power plant:

• 1. Low level waste

> Typically contaminated materials (e.g. gloves used during maintenance, etc.) > Compacted onto steel drums > Final disposal on a licensed site near Vaalputs in the Northern Cape

• 3. High level waste/used nuclear fuel

> Kept in storage pools or used fuel casks > Various options for final disposal (conditioned for underground geologically stable disposal; reprocessing/recycling with limited waste generated) > RSA’s used fuel is currently kept at Koeberg power station until a centralised fuel storage facility is built.

• 2. Intermediate level waste

> Highly contaminated process materials (e.g. filters,

equipment components, etc.) > Compacted on concrete solid drums > Final disposal on a licensed site near Vaalputs in the Northern Cape

5

Comparison for Source of Energy Equivalents

6

Koeberg Power Station - Overview

2 unit Pressurised Water Reactor design (PWR) generating a total of 1860 MWe (contributing about 4.4 % of total generation mix) Unit 1 commercial operation in 1984, and Unit 2 in 1985; Initial Safety Case design for 40 years, but extendable to 60-80 years International peer reviews every 2-3 years (World Association of Nuclear Operators - WANO) 10-yearly re-assessment against modern safety standards, leading to safety-related modifications and upgrades

South Africa has one nuclear power station, located about 30 km from Cape Town, owned and operated by Eskom since 1984

Koeberg Power Station Operational record

• Base load generating plants like Koeberg Power Station which run reliably

24 hours a day, is the gatekeeper to quality of supply and energy self-sufficiency. OPERATIONAL RECORD :- Unit 1 - 454 days (2001) Unit 2 – 485 (2017)

• On Monday, 29 August 2016 both units have simultaneously been on-line for 261

continuous days operation, which is also a new record.

• Koeberg Power Station was connected to the national grid on 4 April 1984

(celebration 33 years of operation in 2017).

• 18th NOSCAR achieved in 2017.
• WANO 2nd Quartile performance in WANO Peer review 2017.
• Koeberg Operator Training Programmes - the only power plant outside of the US

to achieve INPO accreditation for Operator Training Programmes.

8

Koeberg Power Station Engineered Safety Features

Costs and Economic Impact

• The Western Cape in particular depends on Koeberg Power Station for approximately

50% of its electricity demand.

• The net current effect to our country is a low cost of production with a very high

gearing on the job economy as well as the economy in general.

• In its 2017, KPMG study, titled “Economic Impact Assessment of Koeberg Power

Station”. KPMG underscored employment-creation, contributions to the GDP and providing low cost, clean and reliable energy as vital contributions the power station makes in South Africa.

• Koeberg Power Station has contributed to job creation, infrastructure development,

community development and transformation.

• The jobs at Koeberg Power station are, inter alia, both the product of an investment in

Maths, Science and Technology, but also sustain the continuing development in these areas of study.

• Koeberg Power Station is run by South Africans from all walks of life, races and socio-

economic backgrounds, which creates the desired socio-economic dividend for our country.

10

Costs and Economic Impact

11

Nuclear Power Plants in Operation - by country

(sources: IAEA website 20/09/2016; International Energy Agency 2016 )

12

Operational Reactors Operational Reactors

Nuclear Power Plants under Construction– by

country (source IAEA website 20/09/2016)

13

Under Construction Reactors Under Construction Reactors Under Construction Reactors Under Construction Reactors

Nuclear Power Plants Global Outlook

14

Under Construction Reactors Under Construction Reactors

• All of the world’s major economies, except Germany keep the nuclear option open and

plants are under construction in France, China, Russia, Abu Dhabi, South Korea, USA and Brazil amongst others.

• Turkey, Belarus, Poland, Bangladesh amongst others or taking steps to establish nuclear

plants.

• On our continent, the economic giants of Nigeria and Egypt have established policy and

structures to do the same. So too Kenya, Morocco, Niger, Ghana.

• Saudi Arabia is one of the world’s oil giants but also has a strong interest in a nuclear

energy powered future.

The simple reason is that they, like us, need an energy mix that gives self-sufficiency in a way that is not only affordable, but in fact

• profitable. In more ways than just producing electricity.

Based on the current forecast, country peak demand nearly doubles in 2050

Country peak demand of 37 000 MW in 2016 nearly doubles to 70 000 MW in 2050

15

Based on Eskom modelling there is a significant need for new baseload in South Africa

16

• South Africa is losing baseload, however

Eskom needs to replace at least some of this with baseload capacity again

• Based on Eskom modelling there is a

significant need for new baseload

• In addition, an excessive penetration of

renewable energy will contribute to significant operational issues and additional cost

• Power Quality criteria requires us to

replace with similar flexible base load

Exiting baseload Available coal-fire baseload until 2050 Comments

Impact of Generation Technology on Network Costs (excluding the actual generation charge)

Finland, France, Germany, S Korea, UK & USA

Conclusion

• Governments of most major and emerging economies have or want Nuclear

Energy because it strengthens base load generation and is profitable.

• All protagonists aim for an optimal mix that co-exists with continued growth and

development in renewable forms of energy.

• No credible engineering argument could rely on a supply system without reliable

base load and dispatchable capability. In future generations this is conceivable as storage and smart grids become feasible. Currently the technology is not matured enough or sufficiently cost effective to displace other forms of baseload.

• The South African nuclear experience is a positive one of safe, clean, reliable and

affordable generation.

• The broader economic impact of nuclear in developing quality jobs, supporting the

economy and developing skills in Mathematics, Science and Technology is substantial.

18