Environment InstituteScience Seminar Series 2009

Next Week: Monday 1 June

Why old nuclear power is not new

Presented by: Professor Barry Brook

Professor Barry W. BrookProfessor Barry W. BrookSir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate ChangeSir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change

Director of Climate Science, Environment InstituteDirector of Climate Science, Environment Institute

School of Earth and Environmental SciencesSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences

The University of AdelaideThe University of Adelaide

Email: Email: barry.brook@adelaide.edu.au

Energy Futures

Why old nuclear power is not new

Disclaimer!

• I am not a Nuclear Physicist, Reactor Engineer, etc.*

• I have no vested interest in any form of commercial energy**

• Everyone can (should) learn what I am about to tell you!***

*But then neither is 99% of other ‘expert commenters’ on nuclear power. For those who care, I’m an Earth

systems scientist and modeller. I read widely though.

**I do own a rooftop PV system and occasionally manage to sell back to the grid. Does that count?

*** So you too, with some effort, can become a ‘nuclear expert’ – or at least much better informed.

Why nuclear power is badWhy nuclear power is bad**

• It is a COIt is a CO22-intensive activity (mining, enrichment, plants)-intensive activity (mining, enrichment, plants)

• It leaves a 100,000 year legacy of radioactive wasteIt leaves a 100,000 year legacy of radioactive waste

• Uranium supplies will run out in 40 – 200 yearsUranium supplies will run out in 40 – 200 years

• There is a dangerous risk of nuclear meltdownThere is a dangerous risk of nuclear meltdown

• It facilitates nuclear weapons proliferationIt facilitates nuclear weapons proliferation

• Others (necessity, cost, pace, insurance, water use)Others (necessity, cost, pace, insurance, water use)

*This is all common wisdom. Of course, that doesn’t make it true.*This is all common wisdom. Of course, that doesn’t make it true.

Okay – time to get rationalOkay – time to get rational

• The China (and India) syndromeThe China (and India) syndrome

• Dispelling the myths (a big topic…)Dispelling the myths (a big topic…)

• Generation III+ (the here and now)Generation III+ (the here and now)

• Generation IV (the near future)Generation IV (the near future)

• Limits of renewable energy & EELimits of renewable energy & EE

• Bottom Line: the basket of eggsBottom Line: the basket of eggs

It’s a CO2-intensive energy source (mining, enrichment, plant operation, fuel storage, etc.)

http://www.withouthotair.com

Weisser, D: A guide to life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from electric supply technologies (2007) Energy http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2007.01.008

• 2005 OD output = 4,600 tU3O8 = 22 GWe (LWR)

– 192 Terawatt hours per year (SA total = 12 TWh/yr)

• 2020 expanded OD output = 19,000 tU3O8 = 94 GWe

– 794 TWh/yr (3 – 4 x Australia’s total 2020 electricity demand)

2005 Production Levels

Brown coal (new subcritical): 226 Mt CO2-e 

Black coal (supercritical): 181 Mt CO2-e 

Natural gas (combined cycle): 111 Mt CO2-e 

Nuclear Power (full life cycle): 4 Mt CO2-e 

Expanded Mine: 2020 Production Levels

Brown coal (new subcritical): 933 Mt CO2-e

Black coal (supercritical): 747 Mt CO2-e

Natural gas (combined cycle): 458 Mt CO2-e

Nuclear Power (full life cycle): 16 Mt CO2-e

Electricity generation comparison: OD substitution

• In 2005, South Australia’s emissions were 28 Mt CO2-e

– 2020 under BAU = 36 Mt CO2-e

• If CPRS 5% target met, Oz in 2020 [all sources] = 530 Mt CO2-e

• OD expansion will ‘save’ 915 Mt CO2-e vs coal

• So almost twice offset Oz total, and for SA = 25 times

Uranium ores will be depleted

in 40 to 200 years

99.3% is

U-238

Natural uranium

95 - 97% is U-238

3 - 5% is U-235

Low-enriched uranium for LWR fuel

Highly enriched uranium for weapons

90% is U-235

10% isU-238

URANIUM HAS TWO MAIN

ISOTOPES

0.7% is

U-235

THE FATE OF THE MINED URANIUM TODAY, LESS THAN 1% OF ITS ENERGY IS BEING USED

DU : 99.75% U-238, 0.25% U-235

EU: 95% U-238 5% U-235

As mined, uranium is 99.3% U-238, 0.7% U-235. For LWR fuel, the uranium first goes to an enrichment plant

After enrichment, some 85% isleft behind as depleted uranium

About 15% becomes enriched uranium for LWR fuel

In today’s LWR throwaway fuel cycle about 5% of the EU gets used; the rest is considered “waste”

Mined uranium (after the enrichment process)

USED LWR FUEL

With this portion consumed (in fast reactors), dangerous activity is gone in 300 years

All of it is now treated as waste, but it’s not

The REAL waste

LWR FUEL CYCLE TODAY

Depleted

Reprocessing, as done in France, raisesfuel utilization to 6%, vs 5% for the U.S. once-through cycle

Enriched

Used fuel

Isolation mandated for 10,000 years or more

FUEL CYCLE WITH FAST REACTORS simplified

With enough fast reactors, no more mining, milling, or enrichment of uranium will be needed for centuries – enough uranium is already on hand.

Processing Fuel for fast reactor

Waste(fission products --

no plutonium)

Permanent disposalIsolation needed for

only 300 years

Used

LWR fuel

Reactor

Recycling;Fuel fabrication

Fast-reactor power plant

Spent fuel

Refreshed fuel

Uranium for make-up

Steam

PROCESSING STREAMSwith fast reactors deployed

and before used thermal-reactor fuel has been exhausted

USED LWR FUEL

WASTEDISPOSITION

Fuelfabrication

Uranium as neededfor make-up fuel

ALL THE PLUTONIUM AND OTHER TRANSURANICS,

MIXED WITH SOME URANIUM

FISSIONPRODUCTS

MOST OF THEURANIUM0.8% U-235

Stored forfuture use

Fast-reactor plant

EVENTUAL FAST-REACTOR FUEL CYCLEDecades hence -- after the Pu and other transuranics from

used thermal-reactor fuel have been exhausted

Waste DisposalFission products only – no plutonium

One ton per year per 1 GWe power plantIsolation needed for only 300

years

Reactor

Recycling

To fuel fast reactors, no more mining, milling, or enrichment of uranium will be needed for centuries – a lot of uranium has already been mined.

Steam

Spent fuel

Refreshed fuel

Uranium for make-up, from one source or the other.One ton per year per 1 GWe power plant

Stored uranium left over from used thermal reactor fuel

Stored DU left over from past enrichment activity

Fast-reactor power plant

It leaves a 100,000 year legacy

of radioactive waste

There is a dangerous risk of

nuclear meltdown

It facilitates weapons proliferation

Necessity, pace, cost, insurance

0

200

400

600

800

1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

GW

(e)

high

low

history

PFBR (India)

500 MWe (2010)

CEFR (China)20 MWe (2009)

More information, discussion, references for slides and presentation

downloads:bravenewclimate.com

Environment InstituteScience Seminar Series 2009

Next Seminar: 15 June – 3pm

How can we help biodiversity adapt to the ravages of climate change?

Presented by: Professor Andrew Lowe