Cooling Water Options for the New Generation of Nuclear Power Stations in the UK
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Cooling Water Options for the New Generation of Nuclear Power Stations in the UK SC070015/SR3 The Environment Agency is the leading public body protecting and improving the environment in England and Wales. It’s our job to make sure that air, land and water are looked after by everyone in today’s society, so that tomorrow’s generations inherit a cleaner, healthier world. Our work includes tackling flooding and pollution incidents, reducing industry’s impacts on the environment, cleaning up rivers, coastal waters and contaminated land, and improving wildlife habitats. This report is the result of research commissioned and funded by the Environment Agency. Published by: Author(s): Environment Agency, Rio House, Waterside Drive, Turnpenny, A.W.H., Coughlan, J., Ng, B., Crews, P., Aztec West, Almondsbury, Bristol, BS32 4UD Bamber, R.N., Rowles, P. Tel: 01454 624400 Fax: 01454 624409 www.environment-agency.gov.uk Dissemination Status: Released to all regions ISBN: 978-1-84911-192-8 Publicly available © Environment Agency June 2010 Keywords: Nuclear, cooling water, entrainment, impingement, All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced thermal with prior permission of the Environment Agency. Research Contractor: The views and statements expressed in this report are Jacobs Engineering Ltd those of the author alone. The views or statements Kenneth Dibben House expressed in this publication do not necessarily Enterprise Road represent the views of the Environment Agency and the Chilworth Science Park Environment Agency cannot accept any responsibility for Southampton such views or statements. SO16 7NS UK This report is printed on Cyclus Print, a 100% recycled stock, which is 100% post consumer waste and is totally Tel.: +44(0)2380 893 513 chlorine free. Water used is treated and in most cases Fax: +44(0)2380 243 274 returned to source in better condition than removed. Environment Agency’s Project Manager: Further copies of this report are available from our Claire Cailes, Richard Fairclough House, Knutsford publications catalogue: http://publications.environment- Road, Warrington, UK. agency.gov.uk or our National Customer Contact Centre: T: 08708 506506 Science Project Number: E: [email protected]. SC070015/SR3 Product Code: SCHO0610BSOT-E-P Cooling Water Options for the New Generation of Nuclear Power Stations in the UK ii Evidence at the Environment Agency Evidence underpins the work of the Environment Agency. It provides an up-to-date understanding of the world about us, helps us to develop tools and techniques to monitor and manage our environment as efficiently and effectively as possible. It also helps us to understand how the environment is changing and to identify what the future pressures may be. The work of the Environment Agency’s Evidence Directorate is a key ingredient in the partnership between research, policy and operations that enables the Environment Agency to protect and restore our environment. The Research & Innovation programme focuses on four main areas of activity: • Setting the agenda, by informing our evidence-based policies, advisory and regulatory roles; • Maintaining scientific credibility, by ensuring that our programmes and projects are fit for purpose and executed according to international standards; • Carrying out research, either by contracting it out to research organisations and consultancies or by doing it ourselves; • Delivering information, advice, tools and techniques, by making appropriate products available to our policy and operations staff. Miranda Kavanagh Director of Evidence Cooling Water Options for the New Generation of Nuclear Power Stations in the UK iii Executive summary The consideration of new nuclear power stations is split into two phases. The first phase addresses generic design matters (namely, acceptability of candidate nuclear power station designs) and the second deals with site-specific applications for permits under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010. The Environment Agency, Health and Safety Executive's Nuclear Installations Inspectorate and the Office for Civil Nuclear Security are currently assessing candidate designs of new nuclear power stations. The Environment Agency is exploring the environmental effects of candidate designs based on a generic site description. A statement about the acceptability of that design for a generic site in England and Wales will be provided. Cooling water is required to remove “waste heat” from power stations regardless of whether the stations are nuclear or conventional. A nuclear power station has a typical thermal efficiency of 25-33% (compared to around 40% for a modern coal-fired station) and hence a 1,000 megawatt electric (MWe) nuclear station would typically generate up to 2,000 megawatts of low-grade waste heat. The reasons for this apparent wastage are explained. The report also explores cooling water options for new reactors and evaluates their potential environmental impacts in terms of effects on biota, and thermal, chemical and radionuclide pollution. The findings are focused on, but not confined to, nuclear plants and will have general applicability to other large (above 1,000 MWe) thermal power station projects. This report is based on publicly available information and publications and the experience of the authors. It provides an overview of power station cooling water systems in use in the UK and abroad. Details of cooling water options for new nuclear power stations in the UK are given. Cooling water system design (direct and indirect cooling water systems, intake and outfall designs), how the design affects the performance of the cooling option and issues such as temperature differentials between water intake and discharge are discussed. An overview of environmental issues associated with cooling water systems of nuclear and other large power stations is presented. Issues arising from water abstraction and discharges are discussed. These include fish and invertebrate intake and impingement on filter screens, effects of passage of planktonic and small life-stages through the cooling system, thermal, chemical, radionuclide pollution, and effects of cooling tower emissions to air. The report also discusses different mitigation measures (such as intake location, intake screen designs to minimise impacts of entrapment, entrainment and impingement, plume abatement techniques to minimise effects of plume formation). Implications of combining conventional liquid discharges within the cooling water discharge are also considered. Environmental issues with specific cooling water options are identified and explained. The report evaluates cooling water options in terms of environmental concerns (including water demand and energy efficiency) and assesses the best options for use in different types of water environments (coastal, estuarine and fresh waters). Effects of climate change on the choice of cooling water options are also briefly considered. It is likely that new UK nuclear stations will be built on coasts or estuaries. A key question at the outset of the study was whether direct cooling (also known as “once- through”) can still be considered Best Available Technology (BAT) for large coastal and estuarine power stations, as set out in the European Commission’s BAT reference Cooling Water Options for the New Generation of Nuclear Power Stations in the UK iv document on industrial cooling systems (BREF-Cooling, 2001). While this has recently been challenged in relation to a proposed 2,000 MWe combined cycle gas turbine (CCGT) power station at Pembroke, the findings of our study indicate that direct cooling can be BAT for estuarine and coastal sites, provided that best practice in planning, design, mitigation and compensation are followed. The potential BAT-status of direct cooling has essentially been preserved owing to improved understanding of survivability of the entrainment process, and substantial developments in impingement mitigation techniques since the BREF was written. As per the BREF advice, there may remain cases where, even with the application of best practice, residual impacts would be unacceptable. In these cases, seawater cooling towers would be used. BREF advocates the use of dry-cooling methods only where water is in extreme short supply; this advice remains appropriate. These conclusions are generic and site specific applications will be assessed individually. The findings are applicable to both nuclear and conventional power stations. We conclude that direct cooling may be the best option for some nuclear power stations. A summary of impacts from the various cooling is summarised below: Cooling towers Environmental Direct cooling concern Natural Mechanical Natural draught (wet) draught draught (dry)* (wet) Generation High efficiency Typically 0.5 - Typically Lowest efficiency Uses less fuel 1.5% less ~2% less efficiency so lower aerial efficient than efficient than 2 - 3% less emissions direct cooling direct cooling efficient than direct cooling Complexity Low Moderate High Very high Water abstraction High Moderate/low Moderate/low None Abstraction effects Site-specific -depends on characteristics of receiving waters Water consumption None on-site Moderate Moderate None Visible plumes None Moderate Moderate/low None Ground fog & icing No icing. Local None Possible None fog plume over shoreline discharges Visual impact Occasional High Moderate High foam or ‘slick’ at outfall Noise None Low Moderate Low/none Discharge effects Site-specific -depends