NRC Regulatory History of Non-Light Water Reactors (1950-2019)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

NRC Regulatory History of Non-Light Water Reactors (1950-2019) BNL-211739-2019-INRE NRC Regulatory History of Non-Light Water Reactors (1950-2019) Manuscript Completed: June 10, 2019 Prepared by: Pranab Samanta, David Diamond, and William Horak Nuclear Science and Technology Department Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973-5000 Prepared for: Imtiaz Madni and George Tartal Office of New Reactors U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ABSTRACT This report describes the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) history with the licensing of non-light water reactors (non-LWRs). The focus is on regulatory policy and licensing issues that have arisen in the past so that NRC staff will be in a better position to deal with these matters in the future. It is not an objective to discuss in any detail the technology of non-LWR designs. Documenting the historical policy issues and licensing approaches is particularly important to NRC staff unfamiliar with non- LWRs and is an important incentive for the report. Hence, the report is written as a tutorial rather than as an historical archive. The subject is approached chronologically going from the early days of the Atomic Energy Commission to the formation of the NRC, then into the era when the regulatory structure newly developed for LWRs provided guidance for other types of reactors, followed by the era when policy was made specifically for advanced reactors including non-LWRs. This background provides the transition to current planning for future non-LWR licensing and policy─also described herein. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACRONYMS ...................................................................................................................vi 1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Background ............................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Objective ................................................................................................... 1-1 1.3 Outline of Report ....................................................................................... 1-2 1.4 References ................................................................................................ 1-2 2 EARLY NON-LWR HISTORY ............................................................................... 2-1 2.1 AEC Period (1946-1974) ........................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Early Non-LWR Licensing at NRC ............................................................ 2-5 2.3 References ................................................................................................ 2-6 3 NON-LWR REGULATORY AND LICENSING ISSUES ........................................ 3-1 3.1 Gas Cooled Reactors ................................................................................ 3-1 Introduction ............................................................................................... 3-1 Licensing of High Temperature Gas Cooled Reactors .............................. 3-2 Operating Experience and Lessons Learned ............................................ 3-7 Regulatory and Licensing Issues ............................................................... 11 3.2 Liquid Metal Cooled Reactors .................................................................... 14 Introduction ............................................................................................. 3-14 Licensing of Liquid Metal Reactors ......................................................... 3-14 Operating Experience and Lessons Learned .......................................... 3-19 Regulatory and Licensing Issues ............................................................ 3-22 3.3 Heavy Water Reactors ............................................................................ 3-23 Introduction ............................................................................................. 3-23 Regulatory and Licensing Issues ............................................................ 3-24 3.4 Liquid-Fuel Reactors ............................................................................... 3-27 Introduction ............................................................................................. 3-27 Licensing of Liquid-Fuel Reactors ........................................................... 3-27 Regulatory and Licensing Issues ............................................................ 3-29 3.5 References .............................................................................................. 3-29 4 TRANSITION TO THE PRESENT AND BEYOND ................................................ 4-1 4.1 Advanced Reactor Policy .......................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Principal Design Criteria ............................................................................ 4-5 Background ............................................................................................... 4-5 Design Criteria for Non-LWRs ................................................................... 4-5 Development of RG 1.232 ......................................................................... 4-6 Applicability, Intended Use, and Key Assumptions ................................... 4-7 4.3 Additional NRC Statements on Advanced Reactor Policy......................... 4-8 4.4 Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) Interactions with NRC .............. 4-10 4.5 Planning for the Future............................................................................ 4-12 NRC’s Vision and Strategy for Regulating Non-Light Water Reactors .... 4-12 Regulatory Review Roadmap for Non-LWRs .......................................... 4-14 Licensing Modernization Project ............................................................. 4-16 International Activities ............................................................................. 4-22 4.6 References .............................................................................................. 4-23 iv LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2-1 President Truman Signing the AEA ............................................................ 2-1 Figure 2-2 Artist Rendering of CRBR Plant .................................................................. 2-5 Figure 2-3 Timeline of Events in Nuclear Regulation and for Non-LWRs .................... 2-7 Figure 3-1 FSV Refueling Floor .................................................................................... 3-3 Figure 3-2 TRISO Fuel Particle .................................................................................... 3-8 Figure 3-3 EBR-II Control Room ................................................................................ 3-15 Figure 3-4 PRISM Plant ............................................................................................. 3-18 Figure 3-5 Darlington CANDU Plant ........................................................................... 3-26 Figure 3-6 SHINE Isotope Generator ......................................................................... 3-28 Figure 4-1 NGNP Reactor and Power Conversion Vessels ....................................... 4-11 Figure 4-2 NRC Non-LWR Readiness Roadmap [4-39] ............................................. 4-13 Figure 4-3 NRC Licensing-Related processes ........................................................... 4-15 Figure 4-4 NRC Approach to RIPB Decision-Making ................................................. 4-17 Figure 4-5 Proposed Traveling Wave Reactor ........................................................... 4-18 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Non-LWR Reactors Supported by the AEC ................................................. 2-3 Table 3.1 Gas Cooled Reactors Around the World ..................................................... 3-1 Table 3.2 Liquid Metal Cooled Reactors Around the World ....................................... 3-14 Table 4.1 Example Criteria Presented in RG 1.232 .................................................... 4-7 v ACRONYMS ACRS Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards AEA Atomic Energy Act AEC U.S. Atomic Energy Commission AECLT Atomic Energy Canada Limited Technologies, Inc. ANS American Nuclear Society ARDC Advanced Reactor Design Criteria ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers BDBE Beyond Design Basis Event CFR Code of Federal Regulations CRBR Clinch River Breeder Reactor DBA Design Basis Accident DC Design Criteria DG Draft Regulatory Guidance DOE U.S. Department of Energy EBR Experimental Breeder Reactor EC Event Categories ERA Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 ERDA Energy Research and Development Administration EP Emergency Planning EPZ Emergency Planning Zone F-C Frequency-Consequence FFTF Fast Flux Test Facility FSV Fort St. Vrain GDC General Design Criteria GEM Gas Expansion Module HTGR High Temperature Gas Reactor HTR High Temperature Reactor IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency IAP Implementation Action Plan INL Idaho National Laboratory ISG Interim Staff Guidance LBE Licensing Basis Events LMP Licensing Modernization Project LMR Liquid Metal Reactor LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident LWR Light Water Reactor MHTGR Modular High-Temperature Gas Cooled Reactor ML ADAMS Accession No. MST Mechanistic Source Term NEA Nuclear Energy Agency NEI Nuclear Energy Institute NGNP Next Generation Nuclear Plant NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission vi NST Non-Safety-Related with No Special Treatment PBAPS Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station PDC Principle Design Criteria PRA Probabilistic Risk Assessment PRDC Power
Recommended publications
  • Accident and Safety Analysis of the Ks-150 Reactor
    ZJl-120 1972 J.HMWM ACCIDENT AND SAFETY ANALYSIS OF THE KS-150 REACTOR SKODA WORKS Niriiir Powtr CoMtrvdiofl DtpartMtnt, Information Contra . PLŽEM - CZECHOSLOVAKIA We regret that some of the pages in the microfiche copy of this report may not be up to the proper legibility standards, even though the best possible copy was used for preparing the master fiche. £ 1ÍQ "far. liniové.:- : С I D E II T л i: D ti A P В T Y ANALYSIS OF TUK К G - i. 5 O REACTOR O!. ,л.и V/ORKS .fiai' Power CŮHÍJÍ/Í .ir.txori Гера^аито, Information Centre Notation 3 1. Introduction: 4 Й» Tfe* state-of-art and the development trends in the safety of power reactors 8 2 л feclear reactor as a source of potential danger 9 2.2 A brief review of nuclear reactor safety 11 •'o? Development of safety philosophy 14 Z Л Зй?е<^у devices of nuclear reactors 18 3e Thff A~l nuclear power statioa 24 ЗЛ The main data sheet 24 3.2 Power statiac maia equipment and its thermal schematic chart 26 3e3 The control system 39 3 4 The system of safety 43 4. The method of the XS~150 reactor safety analysis 50 4»! Comparison of the KS=>150 reactor with other gas cooled reactors» Requirements laid on realtor safety 50 4-B2 The method of analysis 54 4.3 Extreme initiating events 57 i Л Mathematical models 58 5. The KS-15G reactor basic dynamical characteristics 61 5.1 The effect of intrinsic feedbacks 62 5»2 The effect of the control system 63 5 Л Summary 65 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Atomová Energie
    Atomová Energie (autor : Matyáš Kosík) Obsah : Úvod CO je RADIOAKTIVITA ??? Využití radioaktivity a radioaktivních prvkú Historie jaderného výzkumu a výzkumu radioaktivity Princip jaderných reakcí + Princip Atomových elektráren -Jaderné ŠTEPENÍ a jaderná SYNTÉZA - Typy reaktorú a jejich vlastnosti Výhody jaderných elektráren Na co dávat pozor (na lidi…) - Havárie v černobylu Záver – PROČ se lidé bojí jaderných elektráren (a proč si myslím, že to je nesmysl) Budoucnost (232 Th…) Mýty a odpovedi Shrnutí Zdroje aneb na co a kam se podívat 1.Úvod. Rozhodl jsem se psát tuto práci, protože si myslím, že o jaderné energii koluje dost pověr polopravd a omylů.Např. lidi si myslí, že reaktory jsou nebezpečné, ale to nebezpečné na nich je hlavně možnost lidského selhání. Ta se ovšem může snížit v tom případě, pokud u reaktorů budou pracovat kvalifikovaní a opatrní lidé. Uvést to vše na pravou míru je velice zajímavé téma na seminární práci. V této práci se například dozvíte: kdo první spustil řízenou řetězovou reakci, co se stalo 26. dubna 1986, jaké jsou různé typy reaktorů , jak pracují jaderné reaktory na 235-U, 238-U i 239-Pu či o přeměnách atomu na jiný, což vyvrátilo základ chemie a mnoho dalšího. 2.CO je Radioaktivita ??? Radioaktivita je způsobená tím, že pro některé izotopy různých prvků není jejich (energetický)stav výhodný. Můžou použít různé typy radioaktivního rozpadu, aby v jednom či více krocích dosáhly stability- 3 3 např. Tritium 1H (nejtězší vodík) se v jednom kroku rozpadá beta- rozpadem na helium 2He, 238 které je stabilní. Ale
    [Show full text]
  • The Jules Horowitz Reactor Project, a Driver for Revival of the Research Reactor Community
    THE JULES HOROWITZ REACTOR PROJECT, A DRIVER FOR REVIVAL OF THE RESEARCH REACTOR COMMUNITY P. PERE, C. CAVAILLER, C. PASCAL AREVA TA CEA Cadarache - Etablissement d'AREVA TA - Chantier RJH - MOE - BV2 - BP n° 9 – 13115 Saint Paul lez Durance - France CS 50497 - 1100, rue JR Gauthier de la Lauzière, 13593 Aix en Provence cedex 3 – France ABSTRACT The first concrete of the nuclear island for the Jules Horowitz Reactor (JHR) was poured at the end of July 2009 and construction is ongoing. The JHR is the largest new platform for irradiation experiments supporting Generation II and III reactors, Generation IV technologies, and radioisotope production. This facility, composed of a unique grouping of workshops, hot cells and hot laboratories together with a first -rate MTR research reactor, will ensure that the process, from preparations for irradiation experiments through post-irradiation non-destructive examination, is completed expediently, efficiently and, of course, safely. In addition to the performance requirements to be met in terms of neutron fluxes on the samples (5x1014 n.cm-2/sec-1 E> 1 MeV in core and 3,6x1014 n.cm-2/sec-1 E<0.625 eV in the reflector) and the JHR’s considerable irradiation capabilities (more than 20 experiments and one-tenth of irradiation area for simultaneous radioisotope production), the JHR is the first MTR to be built since the end of the 1960s, making this an especially challenging project. The presentation will provide an overview of the reactor, hot cells and laboratories and an outline of the key milestones in the project schedule, including initial criticality in early 2014 and radioisotope production in 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • French Nuclear Company Orano Upgraded to 'BB+' on Improved Liquidity and Capital Structure; Outlook Stable
    Research Update: French Nuclear Company Orano Upgraded To 'BB+' On Improved Liquidity And Capital Structure; Outlook Stable Primary Credit Analyst: Christophe Boulier, Paris (39) 02-72111-226; [email protected] Secondary Contact: Andrey Nikolaev, CFA, Paris (33) 1-4420-7329; [email protected] Table Of Contents Overview Rating Action Rationale Outlook Ratings Score Snapshot Issue Ratings--Recovery Analysis Related Criteria Ratings List WWW.STANDARDANDPOORS.COM/RATINGSDIRECT APRIL 5, 2018 1 Research Update: French Nuclear Company Orano Upgraded To 'BB+' On Improved Liquidity And Capital Structure; Outlook Stable Overview • Orano has reported EBITDA of close to €1 billion for 2017, despite challenging industry conditions, and its recent restructuring and capital increases have improved its liquidity and capital structure. • We think Orano will continue to focus on cost-cutting and generate moderately positive free operating cash flow, enabling it to reduce net debt in 2018-2020. • Consequently, we are upgrading Orano to 'BB+' from 'BB'. • The stable outlook reflects our view that Orano will be able to reduce adjusted debt to EBITDA to below 5.5x in 2019-2020 despite challenging industry conditions, supported by its sizeable, long-term order backlog. Rating Action On April 5, 2018, S&P Global Ratings raised its long-term issuer credit rating on France-based nuclear services group Orano to 'BB+' from 'BB'. The outlook is stable. We also raised our ratings on Orano's senior unsecured bonds to 'BB+' from 'BB'. Although we expect substantial recovery (70%-90%; rounded estimate 85%) on the bonds in the event of a default, the recovery rating is capped at '3' due to the bonds' unsecured nature and issuance by a company rated in the 'BB' category.
    [Show full text]
  • Edf Group Presentation
    EDF GROUP PRESENTATION Decommissioning & Waste Treatment Lokala säkerhetsnämnden 9/12/2016 AGENDA 1. EDF GROUP, THE WORLD’S LEADING ELECTRICITY COMPANY 2. OUR AMBITION IN THE NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING & WASTE TREATMENT MARKet EDF 2016 I P.2 EDF GROUP, THE WORLD’S LEADING ELECTRICITY COMPANY All electricity-related activities 38.5 MILLION CUSTOMERS — Generation — Transmission & Distribution 158,200 EMPLOYEES — Trading and Sales & Marketing — Energy services €75.0 BILLION SALES EDF ranks: €17.6 BILLION EBITDA among the top 100 largest companies in the world (Fortune Global 500 2014) €12.7 BILLION NET INVESTMENTS EDF is a leader in low-carbon generation: ELECTRICITY GENERATION 102 g/kWh, of which 87% 623.5 TWH carbon-free generation — World’s No. 1 nuclear operator — European No. 1 in generation from renewables — European No. 3 in energy services EDF 2016 I P.3 EDF GROUP IS THE WORLD’S LEADING NUCLEAR FLEET OWNER AND OPERATOR WITH 73 OPERATING UNITS . 72.9 GW installed capacity, 54% of the Group’s net generation capacity . 477.7 TWh generated, 77% of the Group’s output . 58 reactors operated in France, 15 in the UK 5 NEW NUCLEAR PROJECTS . 3 EPR under construction: - 1 in Flamanville (France) - 2 in Taishan (China) . 2 EPR in project phase EDF has a long track record of safe reliable nuclear generation and has a bright future ahead EDF 2016 I P.4 AGENDA 1. EDF GROUP, THE WORLD’S LEADING ELECTRICITY COMPANY 2. OUR AMBITION IN THE NUCLEAR DECOMMISSIONING & WASTE TREATMENT MARKET EDF 2016 I P.5 DECOMMISSIONNING AND WASTE MANAGEMENT ARE KEY
    [Show full text]
  • Study of Acoustic Cavitation Near Metal Surfaces Contaminated by Uranium Ran Ji
    Study of acoustic cavitation near metal surfaces contaminated by uranium Ran Ji To cite this version: Ran Ji. Study of acoustic cavitation near metal surfaces contaminated by uranium. Other. Université Montpellier, 2018. English. NNT : 2018MONTS131. tel-02282007 HAL Id: tel-02282007 https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-02282007 Submitted on 9 Sep 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. THÈ SE POUR OBTENIR LE GRADE DE DOCTEUR DE L’UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTPELLIER En Chimie Sé parative - Maté riaux et Procé dé s É cole doctorale Sciences Chimiques Balard (ED 459) Unité de recherche Institut de Chimie Sé parative de Marcoule (UMR 5257) Study of Acoustic Cavitation near Metal Surfaces Contaminated by Uranium Pré senté e par Ran JI Le 13 novembre 2018 Sous la direction de Sergueï NIKITENKO Rapport de gestion Devant le jury composé de [Jean-Franç ois DUFÊ CHE, Prof, Université Montpellier] [Pré sident] [Jean-Yves HIHN, Prof, Université de Franche-Comté ] [Rapporteur] 2015 [Laurie BARTHE, MCF, INP Toulouse] [Rapporteur] [Sergueï NIKITENKO, DR, CNRS Montpellier] [Directeur de Thè se] [Claire LE NAOUR, CR, Université Paris Saclay] [Examinateur] [Micheline DRAYE, Prof, Université Savoie Mont Blanc] [Examinateur] [Rachel PFLIEGER, CR, CEA Marcoule] [Encadrant] [Matthieu VIROT, CR, CEA Marcoule] [Encadrant] [Pascal PILUSO, CR, CEA Cadarache] [Invité ] “The unity of inner knowledge and action” [Wang Yangming] Acknowledgements Acknowledgements The doctoral study of the past three years has greatly enriched my experience in academic and personal life.
    [Show full text]
  • The EPR™ Reactor
    The EPR™ reactor the reference for New Build - © Photo credits: AREVA - EDF - TNPJVC - Tracy FAVEYRIAL - Elodie FERRARE - René QUATRAIN - Charlène MOREAU - Image et Process - Image - Charlène MOREAU QUATRAIN - Elodie FERRARE René FAVEYRIAL - Tracy - EDF TNPJVC AREVA credits: - © Photo April 2014 - design and production: April 2014 - design and production: The value of experience With 4 EPR™ reactors being built in 3 different countries, AREVA can leverage an unparalleled experience in licensing and construction to deliver high-performance new-generation projects to nuclear utilities all over the world. Olkiluoto 3, Best practices from continuous Finland project experience The most advanced new-generation Licensing experience with different regulators: project in the The only reactor with 5 separate licensing processes world underway worldwide • Construction licenses granted in Finland, France and China • Full Design Acceptance Confirmation awarded in the United Kingdom • Licensing review underway in the United States Flamanville 3, The only Gen3+ reactor design submitted to the European France “post-Fukushima” stress tests The first reactor in the new EDF’s EPR™ fleet Project management excellence • The largest in-house nuclear Engineering Procurement Construction (EPC) team: - More than 1,000 project management skilled people - 6,000+ Engineering and Project experienced workforce • Most Taishan Project Directors have worked on Taishan 1 and 2, Olkiluoto 3 or Flamanville 3 projects China EPR™ projects on track to be delivered Company-wide
    [Show full text]
  • Fuel Cycle Flexibility in CANDU P.G
    IAEA-SM-353-5P Fuel Cycle Flexibility in CANDU P.G. Boczar XA9949933 Director, Fuel and Fuel Cycle Division, AECL Chalk River Laboratories, Chalk River, Ontario, Canada No single fuel-cycle path is appropriate for all countries. Many local and global factors will affect the best strategy for an individual country. Fuel-cycle flexibility is an important factor in an ever-changing, and unpredictable world. CANDU is an evolutionary reactor, offering a custom fuel cycle to fit local requirements. Its unsurpassed fuel-cycle flexibility can accommodate the widest range of fuel-cycle options in existing CANDU stations. In the short term, the CANFLEX® bundle is nearing power reactor implementation. The demonstration irradiation of 26 bundles in the Pt. Lepreau power station in New Brunswick, Canada, started this September, and a water-CHF test will take place later this year that will confirm the improvement in thermalhydraulic performance. CANFLEX provides enhanced operating and safety performance through a reduction in peak linear element ratings, and a significant increase in critical channel power. CANFLEX will be the near-term carrier of advanced fuel cycles. While natural uranium fuel provides outstanding advantages, the use of slightly enriched uranium (SEU) in CANDU offers even lower fuel cycle costs and other potential benefits, such as uprating capability through flattening the radial channel power distribution. Recycled uranium (RU) from reprocessing spent PWR fuel is a subset of SEU that has significant economic promise. The use of SEU/RU is the first logical step from natural uranium in CANDU. For countries having LWR reactors, the ability to use low-fissile material in CANDU reactors offers a range of unique synergistic fuel cycle opportunities.
    [Show full text]
  • Learning from Fukushima: Nuclear Power in East Asia
    LEARNING FROM FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR POWER IN EAST ASIA LEARNING FROM FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR POWER IN EAST ASIA EDITED BY PETER VAN NESS AND MEL GURTOV WITH CONTRIBUTIONS FROM ANDREW BLAKERS, MELY CABALLERO-ANTHONY, GLORIA KUANG-JUNG HSU, AMY KING, DOUG KOPLOW, ANDERS P. MØLLER, TIMOTHY A. MOUSSEAU, M. V. RAMANA, LAUREN RICHARDSON, KALMAN A. ROBERTSON, TILMAN A. RUFF, CHRISTINA STUART, TATSUJIRO SUZUKI, AND JULIUS CESAR I. TRAJANO Published by ANU Press The Australian National University Acton ACT 2601, Australia Email: [email protected] This title is also available online at press.anu.edu.au National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication entry Title: Learning from Fukushima : nuclear power in East Asia / Peter Van Ness, Mel Gurtov, editors. ISBN: 9781760461393 (paperback) 9781760461409 (ebook) Subjects: Nuclear power plants--East Asia. Nuclear power plants--Risk assessment--East Asia. Nuclear power plants--Health aspects--East Asia. Nuclear power plants--East Asia--Evaluation. Other Creators/Contributors: Van Ness, Peter, editor. Gurtov, Melvin, editor. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover design and layout by ANU Press. Cover image: ‘Fukushima apple tree’ by Kristian Laemmle-Ruff. Near Fukushima City, 60 km from the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant, February 2014. The number in the artwork is the radioactivity level measured in the orchard—2.166 microsieverts per hour, around 20 times normal background radiation. This edition © 2017 ANU Press Contents Figures . vii Tables . ix Acronyms and abbreviations .
    [Show full text]
  • Green Hydrogen the Next Transformational Driver of the Utilities Industry
    EQUITY RESEARCH | September 22, 2020 | 9:41PM BST The following is a redacted version of the original report. See inside for details. Green Hydrogen The next transformational driver of the Utilities industry In our Carbonomics report we analysed the major role of clean hydrogen in the transition towards Net Zero. Here we focus on Green hydrogen (“e-Hydrogen”), which is produced when renewable energy powers the electrolysis of water. Green hydrogen looks poised to become a once-in-a-generation opportunity: we estimate it could give rise to a €10 trn addressable market globally by 2050 for the Utilities industry alone. e-Hydrogen could become pivotal to the Utilities (and Energy) industry, with the potential by 2050 to: (i) turn into the largest electricity customer, and double power demand in Europe; (ii) double our already top-of-the-street 2050 renewables capex EU Green Deal Bull Case estimates (tripling annual wind/solar additions); (iii) imply a profound reconfiguration of the gas grid; (iv) solve the issue of seasonal power storage; and (v) provide a second life to conventional thermal power producers thanks to the conversion of gas plants into hydrogen turbines. Alberto Gandolfi Ajay Patel Michele Della Vigna, CFA Mafalda Pombeiro Mathieu Pidoux +44 20 7552-2539 +44 20 7552-1168 +44 20 7552-9383 +44 20 7552-9425 +44 20 7051-4752 alberto.gandolfi@gs.com [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Goldman Sachs International Goldman Sachs International Goldman Sachs International Goldman Sachs International Goldman Sachs International Goldman Sachs does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Design of Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (Lmfbr) Core Under Dynamic Loading
    Transactions, SMiRT-22 San Francisco, California, USA - August 18-23, 2013 Division III DESIGN OF LIQUID METAL FAST BREEDER REACTOR (LMFBR) CORE UNDER DYNAMIC LOADING Nadim Moussallam1, Guilhem Deuilhé2, Benoit Bosco3, Daniel Broc4, David Gentet5 1 Engineer, AREVA Engineering & Projects, Lyon (France) - [email protected] 2 Engineer, AREVA Engineering & Projects, Lyon (France) 3 Engineer, AREVA Engineering & Projects, Lyon (France) 4 R&D Engineer, CEA/DEN/DANS/DM2S/SEMT, F-91191 Gif-sur-Yvette, France 5 R&D Doctor-Engineer, CEA/DEN/DER/SESI/LE2S, F-13108 Saint-Paul les Durance, France ABSTRACT The present paper (a) describes the main structural characteristics of a Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactors (LMFBR) core, (b) exposes the design challenges posed to such structure by dynamic loadings, (c) details the different modeling strategies that could be used to represent the leading physical phenomena for the dynamic response of the core, and (d) illustrates the application of these modeling strategies to improve the design of the ASTRID (Advanced Sodium Technological Reactor for Industrial Demonstration) core against dynamic loadings. INTRODUCTION LMFBR belong to the 4th generation of nuclear reactors. This type of reactor is expected to significantly increase the amount of energy that could be extracted from both natural uranium and existing plutonium reserves. It does also have the potential for reducing the inventory of highly activated long duration nuclear wastes. Several experimental LMFBR have been built around the world, some of them are in operation today and some others are planned or under construction. In France, the ASTRID project aims at completing the detailed design of a LMFBR, with sodium as a primary coolant.
    [Show full text]
  • NPR81: South Korea's Shifting and Controversial Interest in Spent Fuel
    JUNGMIN KANG & H.A. FEIVESON Viewpoint South Korea’s Shifting and Controversial Interest in Spent Fuel Reprocessing JUNGMIN KANG & H.A. FEIVESON1 Dr. Jungmin Kang was a Visiting Research Fellow at the Center for Energy and Environmental Studies (CEES), Princeton University in 1999-2000. He is the author of forthcoming articles in Science & Global Security and Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology. Dr. H.A. Feiveson is a Senior Research Scientist at CEES and a Co- director of Princeton’s research Program on Nuclear Policy Alternatives. He is the Editor of Science and Global Security, editor and co-author of The Nuclear Turning Point: A Blueprint for Deep Cuts and De-alerting of Nuclear Weapons (Brookings Institution, 1999), and co-author of Ending the Threat of Nuclear Attack (Stanford University Center for International Security and Arms Control, 1997). rom the beginning of its nuclear power program could reduce dependence on imported uranium. During in the 1970s, the Republic of Korea (South Ko- the 1990s, the South Korean government remained con- Frea) has been intermittently interested in the cerned about energy security but also began to see re- reprocessing of nuclear-power spent fuel. Such repro- processing as a way to address South Korea’s spent fuel cessing would typically separate the spent fuel into three disposal problem. Throughout this entire period, the constituent components: the unfissioned uranium re- United States consistently and effectively opposed all maining in the spent fuel, the plutonium produced dur- reprocessing initiatives on nonproliferation grounds. We ing reactor operation, and the highly radioactive fission review South Korea’s evolving interest in spent fuel re- products and transuranics other than plutonium.
    [Show full text]