DOCSLIB.ORG

Atomic Energy of Canada Limited OUTLOOK for CANDU REACTORS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Atomic Energy of Canada Limited OUTLOOK for CANDU REACTORS Atomic Energy of Canada Limited OUTLOOK FOR CANDU REACTORS PART 1: TECHNICAL PART 11: ECONOMIC by D.G. HURST Papers presented at the IAEA International Survey Course on Economic and Technical Aspects of Nuclear Power, Vienna, September 1-12, 1969. Chalk River, Ontario Januory 1970 AECL-3553 ATOMIC ENERGY OF CANADA LIMITED Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories OUTLOOK FOR CANDU REACTORS PART I : TECHNICAL PART II : ECONOMIC by D. G. Hurst Papers presented at the International Survey Course on Economic and Technical Aspects of Nuclear Power, sponsored by the IAEA at Vienna, September 1-12, 1969. AECL-3553 OUTLOOK FOR CANDU REACTORS PART I : TECHNICAL PART II : ECONOMIC by D. G. Hurst ABSTRACT The CANDU reactor system, established at NPD and Douglas Point, is the basis for two of the world's large nuclear generating stations - Pickering and Bruce - now under construction. Further evolution of the system will result from materials development, fusl modifications, and higher thermodynamic efficiency, but with firm guidance by cost evaluations that are kept fully up-to-date. Significant reduction of capital cost should be attainable without seriously affecting the already low fuelling cost. Papers presented at the International Survey Course on Economic and Technical Aspects of Nuclear Power, sponsored by the IAEA at Vienna, September 1-12, 1969. Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories January 1970 AECL-3553 Perspective d'avenir pour les réacteurs CANDU 1 Partie: Aspects techniques 2 Partie: Aspects économiques par D.G. Hurst Mémoires présentés au Colloque international sur les aspects économiques et techniques des réacteurs de puissance organisé à Vienne par l'Agence internationale de l'énergie atomique, du Ie* au 12 septembre 1969. Résumé La filière CANDU, employée dans le NPD et à Douglas Point, sert de base à deux centrales nucléaires - Pickering et Bruce - actuellement en construction qui compteront parmi les plus grandes du monde. La filière CANDU va connaître une évolution résultant du développement de certains matériaux, de modifications apportées au combustible, d'un rendement thermodynamique accru, mais tenant compte des évaluations de coût tenues constamment à jour. Une réduction importante des investissements devrait être possible sans augmentation du coût de l'approvisionnement en combustible qui devrait rester bas. L'Energie Atomique du Canada, Limitée Chalk River, Ontario Janvier 1970 AECL-3553 -1- OUTLOOK FOR CANDU REACTORS PART I: TECHNICAL by D. G. Hurst 1. 1 Introduction I am very pleased to have this opportunity to discuss once again the outlook for CANDU reactors, which are heavy-water moderated pressure tube reactors without restriction on the fuel and coolant con- tained in the pressure tubes. It is ten years or more since I was pub- licly involved in discussions of this topic. At that time the operation of any power reactor using heavy water was some years away - the commis- sioning of the NPD reactor took place in 1962. We, the proponents of heavy-water, gave theoretical proof of a promising outlook and others gave theoretical proof of failure. Today we no longer rely on theory; we have a major heavy-water power reactor program underway. 1. 2 Survey of Operating and Committed CANDU Reactors On Figure 1 are shown the operating and committed CANDU nuc- lear power plants representing an investment of more than lj billion dollars. Note that the word CANDU is followed by PHW (Pressurized Heavy Water) or BLW (Boiling Light Water) signifying the coolant and a number giving the electrical output. The first three stations, NPD, Douglas Point, Gentilly, although operated by electric utilities, are owned by AECL. The Pickering and Bruce stations on the other hand, which together require an investment of about 1. 4 billion âollars, are wholly utility owned. The utility, Ontario Hydro Electric Power Commission, is a provincial organization in no way controlled by AECL or the Federal -2- 6000 BRUCE 4 x CANDU - PHW - 750 — 5000 PICKERING 4000 1 4 x CANDU- PHW-500 .r GENTILLY 3000 CANDU-BLW - 250 DOUGLAS POINT CANDU - PHW - 200 2000 - P n \ \ N. s- CANDU-•PHW-25 \ 1000 - \CANDU •BHW-25-^ \ \ \ 1 V i i i i i 1 i i i i . i , N 0 960 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 1979 IN SERVICE DATE Figure 1. Nuclear Power Commitment in Canada -3- Government and its decisions to proceed with Pickering and Bruce removes the sometimes implied criticism that the power reactors in Canada are D2O because AECL blindly follows its owr. predilection. Utilities make investments of this magnitude only after hard-headed scrutiny of all alter- natives. Not included on this figure are the commitments of India to 800 MWe from similar reactors, the 137 MWe KANUPP plant being built in Pakistan by Canadian General Electric, and the plans of other countries for heavy- water reactors. Tvluch information on CÀNDU reactors is in the literature, for example, the Canadian contributions to the Agency "Symposium on Heavy Water Power Reactors" September 1967. Let us look in more detail at the solid prospects for CANDU shown on Figure 1. NPD NPD has been in operation since 1962 and the details up to September 1967 are given in (1). Its success has been one of the factors leading to the major commitments. It has fulfilled its primary purpose but is continued in operation as a training centre and a test bed for new equipment and operating methods. During the summer of 1968 changes were made to per- mit net boiling and throughout the 1968-69 winter run it operated smoothly in the boiling mode with net exit quality of 13% and an output of 25 MWe (gross). Douglas Point The 200 MWe Douglas Point reactor is still in its "shakedown" stage which the operations staff expect to see last for 5 years, i.e. they do not feel that a meaningful on-line capability figure can be expected for -4- another year or so. This is in line with experience elsewhere. Although Douglas Point was planned as a "full-scale" power station under the cond- itions existing in the Ontario system and taking into account available turbine sizes, these conditions have changed so much that 200 MWe is no longer "full-scale" and 500 MWe and 750 MWe are more appropriate. The scaling-up is also advantageous economically. The history of Douglas Point is checkered. During the crucial winter periods when full system capability is required it has come through adequately, but there were early problems with purnp seals and bearings (now hopefully solved) and teething problems with the fuelling machines which are of a somewhat different design from NPD. Experience with NPD and Douglas Point has been published and reference may be made to some of the more recent papers (1, 2, 4). Gentilly With one exception the committed CANDU reactors are cooled by heavy water. Other coolants have been kept in mind and development effort has been expended on the more promising. A comprehensive review (3) was made in 1962 of CANDU variations from which four coolants - heavy-water, light water fog, boiling light water, and organic - were selected for quantitative comparison. Cost studies gave organic coolant a slight economic edge with boiling light water next. However, the economic assessment of organic involved some parameters which had not been fully substantiated and accordingly the committee did not give organic top priority but recommended vigorous development of fog and boiling light water and also continued development of organic coolant. As a result of further studies, construction was authorized in 1966 of a 250 MWe BLW (Boiling Light Water) prototype at Gentilly in the Province of Quebec as a -5- joint project of AECL and Hydro-Quebec. The design and construction have progressed well, in spite of early labour difficulties not arising locally. The predicted cost appears to be a good estimate. The BLW reactor, as represented at Gentilly, is an advance but it contains greater promise still with higher steam quality. The current value of 16. 5% exit quality is imposed by the decision to avoid dryout with a 50% margin, i.e. the critical power ratio is 1.5. As heat trans- fer data accumulate it should be possible to operate much closer to 1. The result will be a higher exit quality with accompanying higher burnup which, together with smaller reactivity hold-up, higher efficiency, and elimination of high temperature D,O, will keep BLW in the competition. 1. 3 Industrial Participation From the early days of the Canadian power program the intent has been to involve industry to the maximum extent possible. Through design and construction of NPD, the Canadian General Electric Co. Ltd. (CGE) acquired the necepsary know-how to enable them to bid successfully on the KANUPP power reactor in Pakistan and the WR-1 research reactor in Canada. The power reactor design group is at present merged with AECL, providing a coordinated organization for supply of reactors. Canadian design and consulting firms have been active in a number of nuclear projects throughout the world using experience gained in Canadian work. All reactor components are obtained from industry. Because of their specialized technology and the small volume to date, the pressure tubes and sheaths have been obtained from the USA, but with the large reactors now committed the market will support Canadian production, -6- and at least two companies will shortly be qualified to produce pressure tubes. Eldorado Nuclear Ltd. has set up a zirconium billet production plant. The fuel program has been most successful. Close liaison was maintained among the design group, the two manufacturers who set up production shops, and the fuel development group at Chalk River which had the use of fuel testing loops.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In the Red: the Green Behind Nuclear Power
    In the Red: The Green Behind Nuclear Power By Heath Packman Saskatchewan Office Suite G – 2835 13th Avenue Regina, SK S4T 1N6 www.policyalternatives.ca In the Red: The Green Behind Nuclear Power By Heath Packman July 2010 About the Author i>Ì Ê*>V>Ê `ÃÊ`i}ÀiiÃÊvÀÊÌ iÊ1ÛiÀÃÌÞÊvÊ,i}>ÊÊ VVÃÊ>`ÊÃÌÀÞ°ÊÊÜÀÌiÀÊ>`Ê ÀiÃi>ÀV iÀÊvÊ«ÕLVÊ«VÞ]Êi>Ì ÊëiÌÊÃÝÊÞi>ÀÃÊÜÀ}Ê>}Ã`iÊÌ iÊiÞÊÃÌiÀÃÊvÊÌ iÊ >ÛiÀÌÊ >`ÃÌÀ>ÌÊÊÌ iÊÃÌÀiÃÊvÊ`ÕÃÌÀÞ]Ê>Vi]Ê>`Ê`Û>Vi`Ê `ÕV>ÌÊ>`Ê/À>}° Acknowledgements / iÊ>ÕÌ ÀÊÃÊÃViÀiÞÊ}À>ÌivÕÊÌÊÌ iÊ >>`>Ê iÌÀiÊvÀÊ*VÞÊÌiÀ>ÌÛiÃÊvÀÊÃÕ««ÀÌ}ÊÌ iÊ ÊÜÀÌ}ÊvÊÌ ÃÊÀi«ÀÌ°Ê/ >ÃÊÌÊ-Ê V ]Ê ÀiVÌÀÊvÊÌ iÊ >>`>Ê iÌÀiÊvÀÊ*VÞÊÌiÀ>ÌÛi]Ê ->Ã>ÌV iÜ>]ÊvÀÊ ÃÊ>ÃÃÃÌ>ViÊÊ«ÀÛ`}Ê}Õ`>Vi]ÊÌÀiiÃÃÊvii`L>VÊ>`ÊÛiÀ>Ê`ÀiVÌ°Ê-«iV>Ê Ì >ÃÊÌÊÌ iÊ>ÞÕÃÊ«iiÀÀiÛiÜiÀÊvÀÊ>}Ê>ÞÊÕÃivÕÊÃÕ}}iÃÌÃÊÌÊvÀÌvÞÊÌ iÊ«>«iÀÊ>`Ê ÃÌÀi}Ì iÊÌÃÊ>ðÊ/ iÊ>ÕÌ ÀÊÜÕ`Ê>ÃÊiÊÌÊ«iÀÃ>ÞÊÌ >ÊÀ>ÃiÀÊ ii` >Ê>`Ê>ÀÊ «iÀÊ vÀÊÌ iÀÊ«>ÀÌ>ÊÀiÛiÜÊ>`Ê>>ÞÃÃÊvÊ`À>vÌÃ]Ê>`Êw>ÞÊÌ iÊ i«vÕÊ}Õ`>ViÊvÊ*iÌiÀÊ*ÀiLLi° / ÃÊ«ÕLV>ÌÊÃÊ>Û>>LiÊÕ`iÀÊÌi`ÊV«ÞÀ} ÌÊ«ÀÌiVÌ°Ê9ÕÊ>ÞÊ`Ü>`]Ê`ÃÌÀLÕÌi]Ê« Ì V«Þ]ÊVÌiÊÀÊiÝViÀ«ÌÊÌ ÃÊ`VÕiÌÊ«ÀÛ`i`ÊÌÊÃÊ«À«iÀÞÊ>`ÊvÕÞÊVÀi`Ìi`Ê>`ÊÌÊÕÃi`ÊvÀÊViÀV>Ê Ê«ÕÀ«ÃiðÊ/ iÊ«iÀÃÃÊvÊ *ÊÃÊÀiµÕÀi`ÊvÀÊ>ÊÌ iÀÊÕÃiÃ°Ê *ÀÌi`ÊV«iÃ\Êf£x°ää - ÊÇn£ÓÈnnnäÇ£ *i>ÃiÊ>iÊ>Ê`>ÌÊiÊ>ÌÊwww.policyalternatives.ca ÀÊV>ÊÌ iÊ *Ê >Ì>Ê"vwViÊÈ£ÎxÈΣÎ{£Ê ÀÊÎäÈÓ{ÎÎÇÓÊ->Ã>ÌV iÜ>Ê *°Ê>}Ê>Ê`>ÌÊÀÊLiV}Ê>ÊiLiÀÊvÊ *Ê i«ÃÊÕÃÊÌÊ VÌÕiÊÌÊ«ÀÛ`iÊ«i«iÊÜÌ Ê>VViÃÃÊÌÊÕÀÊÀiÃi>ÀV ÊvÀiiÊvÊV >À}i° ÓÊUÊ *ÊqÊ->Ã>ÌV iÜ>Ê"vwViÊ ÊÌ iÊ,i`\Ê/ iÊÀiiÊ i `Ê ÕVi>ÀÊ*ÜiÀ]ÊÕÞÊÓä£ä Contents ÌÀ`ÕVÌÊ°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° { ÊÌ iÊ,i`\Ê/ iÊÀiiÊ i `Ê ÕVi>ÀÊ*ÜiÀÊ°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°
    [Show full text]
  • Canadawest in the International Arena FOUNDAT ION GOING for GOLD Western Canada’S Economic Prosperity Is Not Only Good for the West, but for Canada As a Whole
    GOING FOR GOLD The Western Canadian Economy Prairiein the International Atoms: Arena The Opportunities and Challenges of Nuclear Power in Alberta and Saskatchewan Duane Bratt, PhD September 2008 GOING FOR GOLD The Western Canadian Economy CanadaWest in the International Arena FOUNDAT ION GOING FOR GOLD Western Canada’s economic prosperity is not only good for the West, but for Canada as a whole. But the West can not rest on its laurels. Like the athletes training for the forthcoming Winter Olympics in Vancouver, western Canada needs to be at the top of its game if it is to continue to compete successfully in the international economic arena, especially as its competitors step up their games. If we are not successful, our standard of living will fall. The Going For Gold Project is examining how best to position western Canada in the global economy through a series of research papers, provincial research roundtables, public opinion and expert surveys, and will end with a seminal international economic conference in Vancouver in the fall of 2009. Funding for the Going for Gold Project has been provided by the Provinces of British Columbia (Economic Development), Alberta (Employment, Immigration and Industry), Saskatchewan (Enterprise and Innovation), and Manitoba (Competitiveness, Training and Trade). This paper was prepared by Dr. Duane Bratt, Department of Policy Studies, Mount Royal College. The paper is part of the Canada West Foundation’s Going for Gold Project Research Paper Series. A total of 12 research papers have been commissioned. Each paper examines a key issue related to improving western Canada’s ability to compete and win in the global economy over the long-term.
    [Show full text]
  • Know Your Power
    NUCLEAR CANDU reactors use enriched Uranium as fuel, and Nuclear Fast Facts heavy water (deuterium) as the moderator. Nuclear power is derived from a nuclear fission reaction There is ample uranium in the world to fuel nuclear through a process in which large amounts of heat power plants today and in the future. are generated. The heat produced from the nuclear Eight pellets of uranium (smaller than an average reaction is used to generate the steam which rotates adult thumb), contains enough energy to power an the turbines to generate electricity. average home for about one year. In order for the nuclear fission reaction in a CANDU There were 438 operable nuclear power reactors in system to sustain a chain reaction, an atom com- 30 countries and 54 nuclear reactors under con- prised of Uranium, U-235, is required. The CANDU struction as of February 1, 2010. system can be described as a tank which contains tubes of uranium fuel, covered with heavy water that Nuclear power produced 12.9 per cent of global moderates the speed of neutrons thereby enabling a electricity in 2010. chain reaction of splitting atoms. As the fuel con- The Canada Deuterium Uranium (CANDU) reactor is tained in the tubes is heated, the heat is pumped also used in Argentina, Romania, Pakistan, India, through an external pipe using heavy water. The re- China, and the Republic of Korea. sult is hot heavy water which enters a boiler and converts to steam, thus producing electricity. Canadian Nuclear Uranium which is used to ignite the fission reaction in the nuclear power process is a common and Power Process abundant metal found in most rocks, soil, rivers, oceans and food.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Summaries Sommaires Du Congrès
    CA9500253 INIS-mf—14667 CONFERENCE SUMMARIES SOMMAIRES DU CONGRÈS 29th Annual Conference - Canadian Nuclear Association 29 e Congrès annuel - Association Nucléaire Canadienne 10th Annual Conference - Canadian Nuclear Society 10 e Congrès annuel - Société Nucléaire Canadienne 5 'ta 1 2 Co OTTAWA, ONTARIO June 4-7,1989 juin 4 - 7 3/ttî 29th Annual Conference Canadian Nuclear Association 29e Congrès annuel Association nucléaire canadienne Abstracts 29th Annual Conference Canadian Nuclear Association Résumés 29e Congrès annuel Association nucléaire canadienne Canadian Nuclear Association/Canadian Nuclear Society Special Symposium: 50 Years of Nuclear Fission in Review Co-sponsored by: The Royal Society of Canada Canadian Association of Chemistry Canadian Association of Nuclear Medicine Canadian Association of Physicists Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering The Chemical Institute of Canada Chairman: A.J. Hooradian, former senior Vice-President, AECL Moderator and Commentator: R. Bothwell, University of Toronto 1. Hov it all Began B. Goldschmidt, Former Director of Chemistry at Montreal and CRNL, 1942-1946, Former Director, Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique, France, and Former Chairman, Board of Governors, IAEA 2. Personal Reminiscences and Observations L. Cook, Consultant on Energy, Science & Technology, U.S.A., and Former Director, Chemistry and Metallurgy Division, CRNL 3. Fission and Physics in Canada G. Hanna, Former Director of Research, CRNL and Former Chairman, Physics and Astronomy Committee, NSIDRC 4. The Development of Nuclear Power J. Foster, Chairman of the International Executive Council of the World Energy Conference 5. The Second Nuclear Era A. Weinberg, Director, Institute for Energy Analysis, Oak Ridge and Former Director, Oak Ridge National Lab., U.S.A. "HOW IT ALL BEGAN" Bertrand Goldschmidt (From the discovery of fission to the Anglo-Canadian project and its French roots) 1934-1938 The Uranium puzzle - 1939 The leading Paris work of Joliot, Halban, Kowarski - 1940 The French acquisition of the Norwegian worldvide stock of heavy water.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power in Ontario Report Number Three
    mi NUCLEAR POWER IN ONTARIO REPORT NUMBER THREE Established by the Committee on Government Productivity of Ontario. JU JU JU JU JU vQ vQ (D fD (!) fD fD fD u< u> vo oo H 00 1 f fc-i t- H- H- JU H- JU 3 3 3 3 fD fD ir fD tr H w N) rO UI (D 00 to a c Hl Hl S *—N. Hl P m O O O rt CD fD 3 o (D fD CO TJ ju rt i-a i 3 3 H- I Pi rt 2! 0) Hl O (D O a Hl" 0) fD rt O (D O o ft JU Ju H w JU C 0) Pi H w 3 & u> CD 2! 8 M oo°8 i O D fD JU 3 Ut 25 fD 3 H* Pi O Pi 3 CQ - M 31 a I-S ft H- O M fD h 0 3 O JU P> fD 3 fD c 0) CO " H- M CO rt (D fj (1) I C Pi rt n a O ju * » p- IB N Additional copies of this report may be obtained by contacting: Ontario Government Bookstore, 880 Bay Strtet, Toronto 181, Ontario. 966-2054 REPORT NUMBER THREE sa 3 3 co REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL § O NUCLEAR POWER IN ONTARIO m W K w Presented to the Executive Council 16 February, 1973 FEROUSON CLOCK, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT PRODUCTIVITY QUEEN'S PARK, TORONTO I»». ONTARIO TELEPHONE <*!«> S«S-7iai ONTARIO TO HIS HONOUR THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR We» the members of the Committee on Government Productivity, appointed by Order-in-Council, dated 23rd December, 1969, to inquire into all matters pertaining to the management of the Government of Ontario and requested in the Speech from the Throne dated 30th March, 1971, to review the function, structure, operation, financing and objectives of the Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario, herewith submit for your consideration a third report of Task Force Hydro containing their recommendations relating to Nuclear Power in Ontario.
    [Show full text]
  • Atomic Energy of Canada Limited CANADIAN POWER REACTOR
    Atomic Energy of Canada Limited CANADIAN POWER REACTOR PROGRAM- PRESENT AND FUTURE by E.C.W. PERRYMAN Presented at the 27th Annual Congress of the Canadian Association of Physicists, Edmonton, Alberta, on 27 June 1972 Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Chalk River, Ontario September 1972 AECL-4265 CAI" ADIAN POWER REACTOR PROGRAM - PRESENT A. .D FUTURE1 by E.C.W. Perryman ABSTRACT A brief historical review of the Canadian Power Reactor Program is given, covering heavy-water moderated reactors cooled with heavy water, light water and organic liquid. The experience obtained from NPD and Douglas Point is discussed in relation to the first year's successful operation of the Pickering Nuclear Power Station. Future improvements and trends in the CANDU family of reactors are described. 1 This talk was presented at the 27th Annual Congress of the Canadian Association of Physicists, Edmonton, Alberta, on 27 June 1972. Chalk River Nuclear Laboratories Chalk River, Ontario September 1972 AECL-4265 Programme canadien des reacteuirs de puissance — Le present et l'avenir1 par E.C.W. Perryman Resume On passe brievement en revue le programme canadien des reacteurs moderes par eau lourde dont le caloporteur est de l'eau lourde, de l'eau legere ou un liquide organique. L'experience acquise grace a NPD et a Douglas Point est commentee a la lumiere du foncttonnement initial heureux de la centrale nucleaire Pickering. Les ameliorations futures et les tendances de la filiere CANDU sont decites. 'Cette conference a ete presentee lors du XXVIIe Congres annuel de 1'Association canadienne des physicien.% tenu a Edmonton, Alberta, !e 27 juin 1972.
    [Show full text]
  • CNS Bruce Licence Review Submission
    Intervention by the Canadian Nuclear Society (CNS) Before the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) Application by Bruce Power To renew for a five year term and to merge The operating licences for the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station (Ref 2015-H-02) The Canadian Nuclear Society (CNS) 700 University Avenue, 4th floor Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X6 (416) 977-7620 Email: [email protected] Canadian Nuclear Society | 2 Introduction The Canadian Nuclear Society (CNS) views with great interest the renewal of the operating licence for the Bruce nuclear power station under review today during Day 2 of the hearings by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC). In this short paper, the CNS will present some perspective on the importance of the Bruce NGS and the role nuclear power plays in Canada and in the province of Ontario. We will address five areas of interest with respect to the continued operation of the Bruce station: • The strong continued safety record of all CANDU reactors; • The extensive public outreach program conducted by Bruce Power; • Emergency preparedness; • Changing demographics of the Bruce work force; and • The importance of nuclear reactors to public health. The licensing of a nuclear facility is not an abstract activity. To operate, all regulated nuclear facilities in Canada must meet the safety performance requirements of the CNSC. However, all regulated nuclear facilities in Canada exist for important commercial, research, or energy supply reasons. This means that licensing decisions have direct research, technical and commercial consequences. It is the purpose of this paper to provide the views of the CNS on the importance of these licensing decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • THE FUTURE of NUCLEAR ENERGY to 2030 and ITS IMPLICATIONS for SAFETY, SECURITY and NONPROLIFERATION Part 1 – the Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030
    THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY TO 2030 AND IT’S IMPLICATIONS FOR SAFETY, SECURITY AND NON PROLIFERATION: PART 2 – THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY TO 2030 TO THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY 2 – PART AND NON PROLIFERATION: SECURITY FOR SAFETY, AND IT’S IMPLICATIONS 2030 TO THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY THE FUTURE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY TO 2030 AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR SAFETY, SECURITY AND NONPROLIFERATION Part 1 – The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 57 Erb Street West TREVOR FINDLAY Waterloo, Ontario N2L 6C2, Canada tel +1 519 885 2444 fax +1 519 885 5450 www.cigionline.org CIGIONLINE.ORG Addressing International Governance Challenges The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 and its Implications for Safety, Security and Nonproliferation Part 1 – The Future of Nuclear Energy to 2030 Trevor Findlay CIGI’s Nuclear Energy Futures Project is conducted in partnership with the Canadian Centre for Treaty Compliance (CCTC) at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs, Carleton University, Ottawa. The project is chaired by CIGI Distinguished Fellow Louise Fréchette and directed by CIGI Senior Fellow Trevor Findlay, director of CCTC. CIGI gratefully acknowledges the Government of Ontario’s contribution to this project. The opinions expressed in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Centre for International Governance Innovation, its Board of Directors and/or Board of Governors, or the Government of Ontario. Copyright © 2010 The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (www.cigionline.org). This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution — Noncommercial — No Derivatives License.
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power in Canada: Present & Future
    Nuclear Power in Canada: Present & Future Canada’s Nuclear Industry • 60 years developing nuclear technology, 46 years generating electricity from nuclear plants. • Nuc lear tech nol ogy devel opment has been led by the Government of Canada through Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL). • Canada is one of the world’s largest Uranium producers. • Nuclear industry is a $6.6 Billion per year industry and supports 71,000 Canadian jobs. • Canadian produced medical isotopes are used in 50,000 procedures worldwide on a daily basis. • Nuclear power produces 15% of Canada’s electricity and is used currently in three provinces. • Most of Canada’s nuclear industry is in the public sector although there is a significant trend towards more private involvement. Canada’ s Nuclear History Source: AECL Darlington ACR and beyond 900 900900++MWMW Class CANDU 9 RtReactors 800 Bruce A Bruce B Enhanced CANDU 6 700 CANDU 6 Pt Lepreau Embalse Qinshan W)W) Wolsong 1&2 MMMM 2,3,4 600 600+ MW Class Gentilly 2 Wolsong 1 Cernavoda Reactors 500 Pickering A Pickering B ower (ower ( P PPP RAPPRAPPSS1,21,2 200 Douglas Point Research & Prototype NRU Reactors 100 KANUPP ZEEP NRX NPD 19501960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Today Energy Challenges Facing Canada 6,205 • Public concern about climate 7,000 change/greenhouse gases. 5,449 • Growing electricity demand 6,000 combined with aging infrastructure. 5,000 • Drastically different supply mixes throughout the 4,000 country. • Policy alignment versus 3,000 government jurisdiction. • Capital investment 2,000 977 requirements – public versus private sector. 1,000 0 Canada USA Mexico Energy use per capita Canada’s Supply Mix - 2009 Renewables, 1% Gas, 4% Nuclear, 15% Coal, 17% Hydro, 63% Sources of Provincial Supply 94% Hydro 57% Hydro 95% 86% Thermal Thermal99% Hydro 95% Hydro 55% Nuclear Nuclear Provinces OOtaontario Quebec New Brunswick Darlington Bruce Gentilly Pt.
    [Show full text]
  • Contributions to the Canadian Economy
    Canadian Energy Research Institute The Canadian Nuclear Industry: Contributions to the Canadian Economy Govinda Timilsina Thorn Walden Paul Kralovic Asghar Shahmoradi Abbas Naini David McColl Phil Prince Jon Rozhon Final Report Prepared for Canadian Nuclear Association Ottawa, Ontario June 2008 THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR INDUSTRY: CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE CANADIAN ECONOMY The Canadian Nuclear Industry: Contributions to the Canadian Economy Copyright © Canadian Energy Research Institute, 2008 Sections of this study may be reproduced in magazines and newspapers with acknowledgement to the Canadian Energy Research Institute. Authors: Govinda Timilsina Thorn Walden Paul Kralovic Asghar Shahmoradi Abbas Naini David McColl Phil Prince Jon Rozhon CANADIAN ENERGY RESEARCH INSTITUTE #150, 3512 – 33 STREET NW CALGARY, ALBERTA CANADA T2L 2A6 TELEPHONE: 403-282-1231 June 2008 Printed in Canada Canadian Energy Research Institute i TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES............................................................................................................. V EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................vi A. Introduction.............................................................................................................vi B. Canadian Nuclear Development .................................................................................vi C. The
    [Show full text]
  • Nuclear Power: the Canadian Issues
    . Atomic Energy L'Énergie Atomique of Canada Limited du Canada, Limitée Nuclear Power: The Canadian Issues A Submission from Atomic Energy of Canada Limited to The Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning in response toThe Commission's Issue Paper No.1 "Nuclear Power in Ontario" Copies may be obtained by writing to: Scientific Document Distribution Office Atomic Energy of Canada Limited Chalk River, Ontario KOJ 1J0 Editor: F. H. Krenz, Head Office, AECL Design: A. V. Bradshaw, Graphics Dept, Power Projects, AECL Printed by Heritage Press Co. Ltd., Mississauga, Ont. Foreword The Royal Commission on Electric Power Planning of the Province of Ontario, since its appointment a year and a half ago, has done valuable work in bringing into focus a number of public issues involved in planning the expansion of the electric power system of Canada's most populous and industrialized province. One set of issues having implications well beyond the borders of Ontario is that concerning nuclear electric generation, a relatively new form of electric power production in which Canada is a world leader but about which some Canadians have deep-seated fears and apprehensions. Within Ontario, the issue of nuclear power is of immediate and major importance. Ontario Hydro, with the operation of the 2,000 MW Pickering Generating Station and the recent start up of the 3,000 MW Bruce Generating Station has made a major commitment to the use of nuclear power. Ontario Hydro's generation of nuclear electricity may amount to 10,000 megawatts by 1985, or some 30% of Ontario's total generating capacity at that date.
    [Show full text]
  • Northern Indigenous Peoples & the Prospects for Nuclear Energy
    Northern Indigenous Peoples & The Prospects for Nuclear Energy Submitted by Dr. Ken Coates & Dazawray Landrie-Parker Table of Contents List of Figures................................................................................................................................ 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................................................................ 4 INDIGENOUS PERSPECTIVES ON NUCLEAR ENERGY PRODUCTION AND SMALL NUCLEAR ALTERNATIVES: A PRELIMINARY INTRODUCTION ................. 5 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 5 NUCLEAR POWER AND INDIGENOUS RESPONSES: A GLOBAL OVERVIEW REVIEW .................................................................................................................................... 6 FINLAND ................................................................................................................................ 7 SWEDEN................................................................................................................................. 9 NORWAY ............................................................................................................................. 10 RUSSIA ................................................................................................................................. 12 GREENLAND ....................................................................................................................... 14 AUSTRALIA........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]