8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
1/26
First reactor Greenfield challengesElforsk seminarStockholm, January 25, 2011
Juhani Hyvrinen
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
2/26
2
Technology challenges
Site challenges
Initial challenge
Jan 25, 2011
Implementation challenges
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
3/26
3
The initial challenges
Fennovoima was established in 2007 to build a newnuclear power plant for undersupplied Finnish electricityusers, by 2020 New company, independent of existing nuclear operators in
Finland: needs top quality staff + competent technical
partners Needs a greenfield site The most modern technology by competent and reliable
providers desired
The first big milestone was the Decision-in-Principle (DIP)
Mainly a political challenge, on two levels Local level: needed acceptance of candidate site
communities, both decision makers and land owners National level: government and parliament approval
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
4/26
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
5/26
5
AGA Alajrven Shk Atria Boliden Harjavalta Boliden Kokkola Componenta E.ON Krnkraft Finland Esse Elektro-Kraft Etel-Savon Energia Finnfoam Haminan Energia Haukiputaan Shkosuuskunta Herrfors Hiirikosken Energia Imatran Seudun Shk It-Lapin Energia Jylhn Shkosuuskunta Jyvskyln Energia Kemin Energia Keminmaan Energia Keravan Energia Kesko Koillis-Satakunnan Shk Kokemen Shk
Porvoon Energia Raahen Energia Rantakairan Shk Rauman Energia Rautaruukki Rovakairan Tuotanto Sallila Energia Seinjoen Energia S-ryhm Talvivaaran Kaivososakeyhti Tammisaaren Energia Tornion Energia Turku Energia Uudenkaarlepyyn Voimalaitos Vakka-Suomen Voima Valio Valkeakosken Energia Vantaan Energia Vatajankosken Shk Vetelin Shklaitos Vimpelin Voima lands Elandelslag neseudun Energia
Kotkan Energia Kruunupyyn Shklaitos KSS Energia Kuopion Energia Kuoreveden Shk Kylin-Skyln Shk Lahti Energia Lammaisten Energia Lankosken Shk Lehtimen Shk Leppkosken Shk Myllyn Paras Mntsln Shk Naantalin Energia Nurmijrven Shk Omya Oulun Seudun Shk Outokummun Energia Outokumpu Ovako Bar Paneliankosken Voima Parikkalan Valo Pietarsaaren Energialaitos
70 Owners, 30% of Finnish electricityconsumption; large, diverse ownershipMetal, chemical, food and building materials industries; retail and
services; local energy companies
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
6/26
6
Fennovoimas owners are locate allover the country
Energy industry 2/3 of local Finnish electricity
companies
Serve two million Finnish customers
Foodstuff industryRetailChemical industryMetals and miningConstruction materials
Local electrical utilities
Biggest industrial and retail activities
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
7/26
7 Jan 25, 2011
Electricityfrom the
market
Owngeneration
Industryand retail
Powercompanies
TWh
Owners lack own generation capacityShareholders use in total 30% of the electricity in Finland
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
8/26
8 Jan 25, 2011
FennovoimaE.ON decommissioning
E.ON as minority owner
E.ON as licensee
Simo
Pyhjoki
Forsmark
RinghalsOskarshamn
Barsebck
Brunsbttel
UnterweserBrokdorf
Krmmel
Grohnde
Grafenrheinfeld
Isar
Emsland Stade
Gundgremmingen
Wrgassen
E.ON and Fennovoima
Experienced and competent energycompany Near 100.000 staff Over 200 big power plants in Europe
Europes second largest producerof nuclear electricity 21 nuclear reactors in Germany
and in Sweden 4.000 nuclear experts Nuclear generation 80 TWh/a
Strategic partnership
Fennovoima is committed to usingE.ONs nuclear expertise
E.ON has already committed bothfull-time secondments and tens ofpart time experts to the project
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
9/26
9
Schedule challenge
Jan 25, 2011
Site and mainsupplier selections
Land use plans inforce
Site preparatoryworks
Construction Licenseand other permits
Building the plant andsite facilities
Operating License
At least 60 years ofsafe and economicoperation
Waste disposal 2050-
Decommissioning anddismantling
Broad ownershipSite and technologyalternativesdeveloped
EIA
Municipality, STUKand otherstakeholderstatements
Decision in Principle
2011-2014 2015-2019 2020-2007-2010
Next steps: site and vendor selection = Contracting phase
OperationConstructionContractingPreparation
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
10/26
10
Technology challenges
Site challenges
Initial challenge
Jan 25, 2011
Implementation challenges
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
11/26
11
Two suitable alternative greenfield sites inNorthern Finland
Site selection Site screening process started in 2007 with
~40 candidates Fennovoima will select the final site in early
2011
Sufficient land area acquired Planning process completed in fall 2010
Environment and safety EIA completed in Spring 2009
Both sites passed review of the nuclearregulator STUK
Regions support Fennovoima Both municipalities, regions, and majority of
local people support the project
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
12/26
12
Majority in the regions support the project
Jan 25, 2011
* Kalajoki, Merijrvi, Oulainen, Raahe, Vihanti
What is your opinion aboutFennovoimasplan to build a nuclear power plantin the region?
51 5356 60 61
8 55 1
8
42 42 38 3931
0 %
10 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
50 %
60 %
70 %
80 %
90 %
100 %
5/2008 11/2008 5/2009 1/2010 10/2010
Pyhjoki and surroundingmunicipalities*
47 48 5258 57
4 55
413
49 4743 38
30
0 %
10 %
20 %
30 %
40 %
50 %
60 %
70 %
80 %
90 %
100 %
5/2008 11/2008 5/2009 1/2010 10/2010
Simo and surroundingmunicipalities
Strongly disagree ordisagree
Neither agree or disagree
Agree or strongly agree
Ii, Kemi, Keminmaa, Ranua, Tervola
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
13/26
13
Pyhjoki site
Jan 25, 2011
Areva (EPR and Kerena) and Toshiba (ABWR) as reactor options
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
14/26
14
Simo site
Jan 25, 2011
Areva (EPR and Kerena) and Toshiba (ABWR) as reactor options
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
15/26
15
Technology challenges
Site challenges
Initial challenge
Jan 25, 2011
Implementation challenges
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
16/26
16
Plant alternatives Toshiba ABWR, Areva EPR and Areva Kerena were
shortlisted for the Decision-in-Principle Preliminarily reviewed by STUK Each of these represent a balanced combination of proven
technology, licensability, and advanced features
Jan 25, 2011
Toshiba ABWR EPR Kerena
Vendor, country Toshiba/WESJapan/Sweden
Areva NPFrance/Germany
Areva NPFrance/Germany
Thermal MW 4300 4590 3370
Electric MW ~1600 ~1700 ~1250
Reactor type Boiling water Pressurisedwater
Boiling water
Safety system Active + Passive Active Passive + Active
Reference plant Hamaoka-5 Olkiluoto 3 Gundremmingen C
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
17/26
17
STUK comments on the EPR
Acceptability of reactorpower level 4590 MWth
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
18/26
18
STUK comments on the Kerena 1/2
Passive systems- functional tests- periodic testing concept
Fuel poolcooling
diversification
Containmentisolation valvediversification
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
19/26
19
STUK comments on Kerena 2/2
Aircraft crash protection ofcontrol building
Lessons learnedfrom Forsmarkincidents
Electrical and I&C system- separation principles- redundancy
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
20/26
20
STUK comments on the ABWR
Core catcherqualification
ECCSstrainerqualification
Containment
isolation valvediversification
Fuel pool
coolingdiversification
Lessons learnedfrom Forsmarkincidents
Independence of electrical and
I&C systems for core meltaccidents
Bringing the plantto safe statewithoutcomputerised I&C
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
21/26
21
Further technology challenges
ABWR Europeanisation in detailed design EPR lessons learned from earlier projects Kerena is first-of-a-kind Implementation of EON Fleet principles on designs
Adaptation technologies to site specific conditions Northern Finland is surprisingly seismic
TI challenges Optimisation for cold cooling water Meeting grid compatibility requirements, especially the
NORDEL 250 ms fault ride-out capability
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
22/26
22
Technology challenges
Site challenges
Initial challenge
Jan 25, 2011
Implementation challenges
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
23/26
23
The DIP Phase
The first big milestone was the Decision-in-Principle (DIP) Preceded by a thorough EIA for three separate candidate
sites DIP Application covered 1 to 2 reactors + all other nuclear
facilities on site (storage, L/MLW disposal)
STUK review covering technology candidates, site candidates,and the company itself (competence) Political process where both local and national acceptance is
needed Hundreds of other authority and stakeholder comments filed
on first the EIA, then the DIP
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
24/26
24
Decision in Principle provides a solidfoundation
Goverment decision in Fennovoimas favour on May 6, 2010:According to the decision, Fennovoima Is authorised to build one nuclear reactor up to 1800 MWe Has to apply for a Construction License within five years Has to present next waste management plans within six years
Parliament approved the decision on July 1, 2010 Vote result 121-71 Parliament decision contains four motions; according to one of
them The Government shall bring, during 2010, Posiva and its owners
into negotiations with Fennovoima aiming at one national spent fuelmanagement solution
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
25/26
25
What next?
Continuing Fennovoima organisation build-up Site selection in first half of 2011 Commercial challenge: bidding process & technology
selection in 2012 Coping with the ongoing major revision of the whole set of YVL
Guides presents a challenge Parallel work on CL docs for competing technologies is needed
Licensing challenge: preparations for Construction Licenseapplication Ample time reserved for preparation between now and CL filing,
and subsequent STUK review Site preparation (road, power, water, ...)
Implementation challenge: construction and commissioning In 2020, 1250-1700 MWe up and running in Northern Finland
Jan 25, 2011
8/3/2019 Fennovoimas frsta reaktor
26/26
Thank you.
Fennovoima Oywww.fennovoima.fi020 7579 200Salmisaarenaukio 1, 00180 Helsinki
Dr. Juhani HyvrinenChief Nuclear [email protected]