1
Australia and Nuclear Energy Power
Professor Peter Johnston, RMIT
2
Nuclear Fuel Cycle
3
Mining and Milling
• Uranium is extracted from the ground, removed from the host rock and daughter products
• Uranium is made into Uranium Ore Concentrate “Yellowcake” which is a hydrated Uranium Oxide of 80-95% purity depending on the temperature of calcining the product.
• Yellowcake is often green.
4
Australia has the world’s largest U resources (38%) but only 2nd largest producer (23%)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
'000 t
on
nes U
3O
8
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
% w
orl
d p
rod
ucti
on
low cost resources production 2005
5
Uranium deposits are widespread
6
World uranium market outlook• Increasing world demand for uranium
Increased NPP duty cyclesPower upgrades of some plantsIncreased plant lifetimes
• Uranium price increasingUS$10/lb to $86 in 4 years (Jan 21 2008)
• U resources are plentifulnot expected to constrain development of new nuclear power capacity
• Timely opportunity for Australia to increase uranium exports significantly
7
Downstream value-add: opportunities and challenges
• Uranium exports (presently $0.5 bn) could be transformed into a further $1.8bn in value– Conversion, enrichment and fuel fabrication activities
• However, the challenges are significant
8
Conversion to UF6 and Enrichment
• Purification of Uranium Ore Concentrate
• Production of UF6 which is a chemical process
involving fluorine. UF6 becomes a gas at 50˚C• Enrichment takes natural U of 0.7% U-235
abundance and increases U-235 abundance to approx. 3.5% typically using centrifuges
• USA and France have gaseous diffusion enrichment plants still operating. Centrifuge technology is 50 times more efficient.
9
Enrichment is the largest value-add step after uranium mining
Component cost shares of a kg of uranium as enriched reactor fuel
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
WNA estimate avg 2005 uranium prices mid-2006 spot prices
U3O8 Conversion Enrichment Fabrication
27%
6.8%
47%
19%
56%
4%
29%
11%
44%
5%
36%
15%
$US
$US1633
US$1255
US$2149
U3O8
10
Enrichment challenges
• Enrichment market is highly concentrated – small number of suppliers worldwide
• High barriers to entry – capital intensive, technology tightly held, trade restrictions, limited access to skill base
• Enrichment technology is proliferation sensitive. It is used for civil and weapons purposes
11
The fuel fabrication market
• Highly customised products
• Specifications depend on reactor design and a utility’s fuel management strategy
• Forecasts indicate capacity significantly exceeds demand
Boiling water reactor fuel assembly
12
Nuclear Power for Australia?
• How quickly?
• How expensive?
• How safe – operations, accidents, proliferation, waste?
• Environmental benefits?
• Water requirements?
13
14
Life cycle greenhouse gas emissionsfrom electricity generation
wind21
nuclear60
solar PV106
gas combined
cycle577
black coal supercritical
863
brown coalsubcritical
1175
hydro 15
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
kg
CO 2-
e p
er
MW
h
u shows most likely value;bar shows range
15
Ingredients to emissions model
• The large range of values for nuclear contributions to greenhouse gas emissions come from:-- Concentration of U in ore- Enrichment technology used- Electricity source for enrichment
16
Retail Electricity prices 2006
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Australia France Germany Italy Japan Korea New Zealand United Kingdom United States
$A/M
Wh
(20
06)
Source: IEA Key World Energy Statistics 2006
17
Nuclear power cost ranges
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
Lev
elis
ed C
ost
s ( A
$ 20
06 /
MW
h )
Tarjanne
Gittus
Chicago
MIT
RAE
Chicago
MIT
Discount Rates (capital spend of A$2 - 3 billion)
Indicative Ranges of Nuclear Power Cost
Low Medium High
Low = 5%Medium = 7-10%High = 11-13%
18
Generation cost comparisons
$20
$30
$40
$50
$60
$70
$80
$90
$100
$110
$120
Le
ve
lise
d C
os
t E
sti
ma
tes
( A
$ 2
00
6 /
MW
h )
Nuclear costs are for an established industry
Nuclear
Coal
Coal - Supercritical Pulverised Coal
Combustion + CCS
Gas - Combined Cycle Gas Turbine
+ CCS
Coal - Integrated Gasification Combined
Cycle + CCS
Renewables
High Capacity Factor Wind / Small Hydro
Solar PV
Solar Thermal / Biomass
Gas - Combined Cycle Gas Turbine
CCS estimates are indicative onlyRenewables have large ranges and substantial overlaps
19
Generation cost comparisons• Nuclear is least-cost low emission technology
(LET)– Renewables, CCS more expensive on average but
will have substantial role to play
• Nuclear power is internationally proven, least cost option in many countries– Includes waste disposal and decommissioning
• Without carbon constraint all LETs to remain uncompetitive
• Nuclear power can be competitive with low to moderate emissions price– $15 to $40 /tonne CO2-E (ETS €20 12 Feb 2008)– Competitiveness of other LETs would also improve
20
Investment in nuclear power
• Potential investors in nuclear power in Australia require:– A stable policy environment– A predictable licensing and regulatory regime
• Time frame is determined by the timing and nature of this regime.
• Best practice is to establish funds to meet waste and decommissioning costs
21
Nuclear Waste
• Key issue is the quantity of waste.
• One pellet of NPP fuel (~5 g) yields as much energy as 1 tonne of coal.
• The disposal of this fuel pellet generates high level waste, but there are significant quantities of less radioactive waste at the mine site and in the use of uranium,
22
Low and intermediate waste
• Safe disposal demonstrated at many sites across the world, including in Australia
• High standard of management of waste at Australia’s current uranium mines
23• Relatively small waste volume
Radioactive waste and spent fuel management
24
Reprocessing and high-level waste(HLW) disposal• Reprocessing is technically complex and is
unlikely to be attractive for Australia• Technology exists for safe disposal of HLW and
spent fuel and is being applied in several countries. No HLW yet to operation.
• Areas in Australia are suitable for HLW and spent fuel disposal– not required before 2050 if we adopt nuclear power
25
Implementing deep disposal
26
Why do we think HLW disposal is OK? Natural Analogues
• Ore deposits that have been isolated for millions of years
• Natural Reactors at Oklo and Bangombé in Gabon. The remnants of nuclear reactors nearly two billion years old were found in the 1970s.
• Oklo by-products are being used today to probe the stability of the fundamental constants over cosmological time-scales and to develop more effective means for disposing of human-manufactured nuclear waste.
27
Health and Safety
• Operational – construction, operation of the plant and its decommissioning as well as in the mining of uranium, manufacture of fuel and waste processing.
• Accidents – rare events of high impact
28
Operational Health and safety
• Nuclear power has fewer health and safety impacts than fossil fuel generation and hydro
• Ionising radiation and its health impacts are well understood
• Well established international safety standards which are reflected in Australian practice
29
Health and safety: Accidents Fatal accidents in the worldwide energy sector, 1969–2000*
No. accidents Immediate fatalities
Immediate fatalities per GWe year
Coal 1221 25 107 0.876 Oil 397 20 283 0.436 Coal (China excluded) 177 7090 0.690 Natural gas 125 1978 0.093 LPG 105 3921 3.536 Hydro 11 29 938 4.265 Hydro (Banqiao/Shimantan dam accident excluded)a
10 3938 0.561
Nuclear reactorb 1 31 0.006 a The Banqiao/Shimantan dam accident occurred in 1975 and resulted in 26 000 fatalities b See Box 6.2 for information on long-term impacts of nuclear reactor accidents Source: derived from Burgherr et al[120] and Burgherr and Hirschberg[121] *These figures do not Include latent or delayed deaths such as those caused by air pollution from fires, chemical exposure or radiation exposure that might occur following an industrial accident
30
Chernobyl
• An uncontained steam/chemical explosion and subsequent fire at Chernobyl in 1986 released radioactive gas and dust
• Wind dispersed material across Finland, Sweden, and central and southern Europe
• People living within a 30 km radius of the plant were relocated— approx 116 000.
31
Chernobyl – Immediate Casualties
• 28 highly exposed reactor staff and emergency workers died from radiation and thermal burns within four months of the accident (160 had radiation sickness. 19 more died by the end of 2004 not necessarily as a result of the accident).
• Two other workers were killed in the explosion from injuries unrelated to radiation
• One person suffered a fatal heart attack.
32
Chernobyl Longer-term• > 4000 mostly children or adolescents at the time of the accident,
have developed thyroid cancer as a result of the contamination, and fifteen of these had died from the disease by the end of 2002.
• Possibly 4000 people in the areas with highest radiation levels may eventually die from cancer caused by radiation exposure. Of the 6.8 million individuals living further from the explosion, who received a much lower dose, possibly another 5000 may die prematurely as a result of that dose.
• The small increase in radiation exposure caused by the accident for the population of Europe and beyond should not be used to estimate future likely possible cancer fatalities. The ICRP states that this approach is not reasonable.
• The Chernobyl Forum report in 2006 clearly identifies the extensive societal disruption in the region as the most significant impact resulting from the accident, compounded by the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989.
33
Nuclear’s contribution to radiation exposure
Source: United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR)
34
Non-proliferation• Export of Australian uranium takes place within
the international non-proliferation regime • Australia has the most stringent requirements for
the supply of uranium • Actual cases of proliferation have involved illegal
supply networks, secret nuclear facilities and undeclared materials
• An increase in Australian uranium exports would not increase the risk of proliferation
35
Uranium exports and non-proliferation
• The amount of uranium required for a nuclear weapon is relatively small
• Uranium is commonplace in the earth’s crust
• Any country that wished to develop a weapon need not rely on the import of uranium
• The greatest proliferation risk arises from undeclared centrifuge enrichment plants
36
Nuclear security
• Strict physical protection standards apply to nuclear power plants
• Studies have found that containment structures at modern power reactors would not be breached by the impact of a large commercial airliner
37
Water requirements?
• NPPs usually use water for cooling as do coal-fired power plants.
• Current PWRs and BWRs operate at lower temperatures and are therefore less efficient (use slightly more water)
• Coal PPs must be located very near the coal deposit. Transport of ore is a major issue.
• NPPs can be located remote from ore and often on the coast using seawater.
38
Other Nuclear Power Systems
• Thorium Fuel Cycle
• Gen IV Reactor Systems
• Accelerator Driven Systems
• Fusion (ITER)
39
Dan’s Questions
• Reactor grade Pu for bombs
• Swedish ‘incident’ of 2007
• Earthquake in Japan
40
Reactor grade Pu for bombs
• Reactor grade Pu contains Pu-239 and Pu-240 is similar quantities.
• Pu-240 is undesirable in weapons manufacture because of short SF half-life
• Certainly a critical assembly could be produced by reactor grade Pu.
• US planned a trial in 1962 – I understand it did not proceed.
• No state player is likely to use such material because the device could not be reliably stored.
41
2007 Earthquake at Kashiwazaki Kariwa NPP
• 7965 MWe nuclear power plant• Earthquake produces ground accelerations to
0.68g at plant – locally 11 killed, 2000 injured• Design criteria was to withstand 0.27g• Off-site power fail expected at 0.25g• Plants shut down automatically without problem• Radioactivity release – sloshing of water in spent
fuel pond and leak through cable penetrations (IAEA judged leak trivial)
42
scram of the Forsmark unit 1 reactor on 25 July 2006
• Electricity failure caused by the short circuit in the switchyard
• Forsmark 1 reactor was scrammed and a number of safety systems were activated
• Two of four emergency generators failed to start. This common cause fault resulted in INES level 2 report.
• Position of the control rods was unclear due to lack of power supply.
43
Conclusions
• Australia has the opportunity to expand uranium mining.
• Enrichment may represent an opportunity for Australia – the business case is not clear.
• Regulation needs review and a new regulatory system created if nuclear power is pursued.
• Australia must deal with existing and future nuclear waste, but reprocessing and taking other countries waste are unlikely to be attractive
• Nuclear Power is the lowest cost low emission technology for baseload power generation.
44
Potential emission cuts from nuclear build
45
Questions?The UMPNER report
is available from the National Library Pandora archive website:
http://pandora.nla.gov.au/tep/66043
46
Thorium Fuel Cycle
• Thorium is a naturally occurring element• Th is three times more abundant than U• Th like U-238 is fertile, not fissile• U-233 can be bred from Th and used like U-235• Requires reprocessing cycle to extract U-233,
Th much less soluble than U.• Side product U-232 gives radiation protection
problem.• Proliferation issues raised by U-233.
47
Gen IV Reactor Systems
• Six reactor concepts judged to be most promising by collaborating nations.
• Technical goalsProvide sustainable energy generation that meets clean air objectives and promotes long term availability of systems and effective fuel utilisation for worldwide energy productionMinimise and manage nuclear waste, notably reducing the long term stewardship burden in the future and thereby improving protection for the public health and the environmentIncrease assurances against diversion of theft of weapons-usable materialEnsure high safety and reliabilityDesign systems with very low likelihood and degree of reactor core damageCreate reactor designs that eliminate the need for offsite emergency responseEnsure that systems have a clear life cycle cost advantage over other energy sourcesCreate systems that have a level of financial risk that is comparable to other energy projects.
48
Gen IV Reactor SystemsReactor type Coola
ntTem
p (oC)
Pressure
Waste recycling Output Research needs Earliest delivery
Gas-cooled fast reactor (GFR)
Helium 850 High YesElectricity
and hydrogen
Irradiation-resistant materials, helium turbine, new fuels, core design, waste recycling
2025
Lead-cooled fast reactor (LFR)
Lead-bismut
h
550–800
Low YesElectricity
and hydrogen
Heat-resistant materials, fuels, lead handling, waste recycling 2025
Molten salt reactor (MSR)
Fluoride salts
700–800
Low YesElectricity
and hydrogen
Molten salt chemistry and handling, heat- and corrosion-resistant materials, reprocessing cycle
2025
Sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR)
Sodium
550 Low Yes Electricity Safety, cost reduction, hot-fuel fabrication, reprocessing cycle 2015
Supercritical-water-cooled reactor (SCWR)
Water510–550
Very high
Optional ElectricityCorrosion and stress corrosion cracking, water chemistry,
ultra strong non-brittle materials, safety2025
Very-high-temperature reactor (VHTR)
Helium 1000 HighNo – waste goes
directly to repository
Electricity and
hydrogen
Heat-resistant fuels and materials, temperature control in the event of an accident, high fuel burn-ups
2020
49
Accelerator Driven Systems
• The need for fissile material is partly replaced by using a spallation source of neutrons
• Accelerator-driven systems consist of three main units — the accelerator, target/blanket and separation units.
• The accelerator generates high energy (around 1 GeV) charged particles (usually protons) which strike a heavy material target producing spallation surrounded by a blanket of fertile material.
• The system works like a reactor without a critical assembly and can burn or breed fissile material.
50
Fusion (ITER)
• The experimental fusion reactor ITER is a major international research collaboration.
• To be built at Cadarache in France
• Cost €10 billion, half to construct the reactor over the next seven years and the remainder to operate it for 20 years and then decommission the facility.
• Power 300 MW for up to 30 minutes.