1 / 33

March 6, 2011 Presentation for APS-AAPT Workshop “Physics of Sustainable Energy” at UC-Berkeley

Topics in Nuclear Power. March 6, 2011 Presentation for APS-AAPT Workshop “Physics of Sustainable Energy” at UC-Berkeley Robert J. Budnitz Earth Sciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA 94720. 104 U.S. nuclear power plants. Next, look at the data.

flo
Download Presentation

March 6, 2011 Presentation for APS-AAPT Workshop “Physics of Sustainable Energy” at UC-Berkeley

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Topics in Nuclear Power March 6, 2011 Presentation for APS-AAPT Workshop “Physics of Sustainable Energy” at UC-Berkeley Robert J. Budnitz Earth Sciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley CA 94720

  2. 104 U.S. nuclear power plants

  3. Next, look at the data

  4. SignificantEvents at U.S. Nuclear Plants: Annual Industry Average,Fiscal Year 1988-2006 • Significant Events are those events that the NRC staff identifies for the • Performance Indicator Program as meeting one or more of the following criteria: • A Yellow or Red Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) finding or performance indicator • An event with a Conditional Core Damage Probability (CCDP) or increase in core damage probability (ΔCDP) of 1x10-5 or higher • An Abnormal Occurrence as defined by Management Directive 8.1, “Abnormal Occurrence Reporting Procedure” • An event rated two or higher on the International Nuclear Event Scale Source: NRC Information Digest, 1988 is the earliest year data is available. Updated: 11/07

  5. Budnitz note:in 2006, the figure was 0.32 per plantin 1985 it was 4.2in 1980 it was 7.3

  6. Safety – What accounts for these trends? • Learning from experience: industry-wide reporting system • Reporting everything to everybody, no fault • Analysis: major effort to analyze each event for its causes, implications • Maintenance: concentrating on the important things, design for easier maintenance • Operator errors: simulator training, procedures • Industry-wide peer-to-peer inspection visits, task forces • Design changes: eliminating design flaws, a “forgiving” design • NRC: Risk-informed enforcement actions (ignore minor events)

  7. Let’s look at industrial safety and costs

  8. U.S. Nuclear Industrial Safety Accident Rate One-Year Industry Values [Budnitz note: 1980 was 2.1, and 1990 was 1.1] ISAR = Number of accidents resulting in lost work, restricted work, or fatalities per 200,000 worker hours. Source: World Association of Nuclear Operators Updated: 4/08

  9. (Budnitz note: in 2006, the figure was 93 person-rem/plant)

  10. Costs are dropping too • The cost of nuclear-produced electricity is dominated by the capital cost of building the reactor plant. • For today’s reactors, that is all sunk cost. • Major change: The operating costs and fuel costs have been declining rapidly.

  11. U.S. Nuclear Refueling Outage Days Average Source: 1990-98 EUCG, 1999-2007 Energy Velocity / Nuclear Regulatory Commission Updated: 2/08

  12. U.S. Nuclear Industry Capacity Factors1971 - 2007 * Preliminary Source: Global Energy Decisions / Energy Information Administration Updated: 4/08

  13. U.S. Electricity Production Costs 1995-2007, In 2007 cents per kilowatt-hour Production Costs = Operations and Maintenance Costs + Fuel Costs Source: Global Energy Decisions Updated: 5/08

  14. Monthly Fuel Cost to U.S. Electric Utilities 1995 – 2007, In 2007 cents per kilowatt-hour Source: Global Energy Decisions Updated: 5/08

  15. Fuel as a Percentage of Electric Power Production Costs 2007 Conversion Fabrication Waste Fund Enrichment Uranium Source: Global Energy Decisions; Energy Resources International, Inc. Updated: 5/08

  16. Crucial question – capital cost Economies of Scale vs. Potential savings due to • factory fabrication • less equipment due to smaller size • smaller staffing • easier regulatory burden

  17. Regulatory issues • Many NRC regulations are tailored to the very large LWR plants. • Major NRC work is needed to develop (or adapt) the regulations so they are tailored to the smaller reactors. • This is true even if the smaller ones are LWRs, that use essentially the same technology. • For smaller reactors with different technology (gas coolant, fast spectrum), much larger issues loom. • Many other countries will follow NRC’s lead.

  18. Current issues with spent fuel • All US spent fuel is currently in temporary storage, mostly at the reactor sites. • Now in spent fuel pools --- current transition to dry cask storage is underway (or accomplished) everywhere. • It is safe and secure there, and will be for many decades. • Yucca Mtn. is “dead” for now. • Unless it is revived, getting to this stage for another deep repository is at least 20 years away.

  19. A few facts and constraints • The dry cask technology is not an acceptable long term solution – many decades, perhaps a century? But not 2 centuries. • Institutional issue of longevity of institutions. • Intergenerational equity – “the generation that made the waste should assure its safe permanent disposal.”

More Related