Presentation on theme: "Current Issues DOE's Nuclear Energy Programs Dr. Peter Lyons Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy U.S. Department of Energy Energy Communities Alliance."— Presentation transcript:
Current Issues DOE's Nuclear Energy Programs Dr. Peter Lyons Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy U.S. Department of Energy Energy Communities Alliance Peer Exchange February 27, 2014
2 President Obama’s Nuclear Energy Goals “Thanks to the ingenuity of our businesses, we're starting to produce much more of our own energy. We're building the first nuclear power plants in more than three decades in Georgia and South Carolina.“ -Georgetown University June 26 th, 2013 “Now, one of the biggest factors in bringing more jobs back is our commitment to American energy. The all-of-the-above energy strategy I announced a few years ago is working, and today, America is closer to energy independence than we’ve been in decades.” - State of the Union, January 28th, 2014
3 “The Energy Department is committed to strengthening nuclear energy’s continuing important role in America’s low carbon future, and new technologies like small modular reactors will help ensure our continued leadership in the safe, secure and efficient use of nuclear power worldwide.” New Investment in Innovative Small Modular Reactor, December 12, 2013 “All-of-the-above is not merely a slogan, but a clear-cut pathway to creating jobs and at the same time reducing carbon emissions, which recently stood at their lowest level in 20 years… President Obama has made clear that he sees nuclear energy as part of America’s low carbon energy portfolio. And nuclear power is already an important part of the clean energy solution here in the United States.” The National Press Club, February 19, 2014 Secretary Moniz on Nuclear Energy
5 Role of U.S. Department of Energy for Sustainable and Innovative Nuclear Energy Conduct Research, Development, and Demonstration to: Reduce regulatory risk Reduce technical risk Reduce financial risk and improve economics Used fuel disposition Minimize the risks of nuclear proliferation and terrorism Foster international and industry collaboration
6 Overview Omnibus Budget Fuel Cycle R&D Reactor Technology R&D NE Modeling and Simulation Nuclear Energy University Programs (NEUP) Challenge of Plant Retirements
7 Fuel Cycle Research and Development Mission –Develop used nuclear fuel management strategies and technologies; conduct R&D on fuel cycle technologies and options. FY 2014 Planned Accomplishments –Increase in Advanced Fuels for assessing the feasibility of accident tolerant fuel concepts for development and qualification (explicit Congressional direction is noted in the text box, below left). –Continue activities that support the Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste. –Develop design concepts for consolidated storage facilities and explore logistics for shipping orphan fuel to such a facility. –Conduct R&D for the long-term storage of high- burnup used nuclear fuel. –Complete the evaluation and screening of fuel cycle options in order to identify the most promising options for further research and development. Program Element FY 2013 Final FY 2014 Omnibus Separations and Waste Forms37,45034,300 Advanced Fuels39,14660,100 Systems Analysis & Integration21,99319,605 Materials Protection, Accounting & Control Technology 6,9837,600 Used Nuclear Fuel Disposition57,84960,000 Fuel Resources6,4754,600 Total:169,896186,205 Budget Summary $ in thousands “Not later than 30 days after enactment of this Act, the Department shall provide the Committees on Appropriations of the House of Representatives and the Senate a plan for development of meltdown-resistant fuels leading to in-reactor testing and utilization by 2020 as required in the Fiscal Year 2012 Consolidated Appropriations Act.” (FY 2014 Omnibus, Explanatory Statement)
8 Administration Strategy for Used Fuel Disposition Key Elements
9 High temperature during loss of active cooling High temperature during loss of active cooling Slower Hydrogen Generation Rate Hydrogen bubble Hydrogen explosion Hydrogen embrittlement of the clad Improved Cladding Properties Clad fracture Geometric stability Thermal shock resistance Melting of the cladding Improved Fuel Properties Lower operating temps Clad internal oxidation Fuel relocation/dispersion Fuel melting Enhanced Retention of Fission Products Gaseous fission products Solid/liquid fission products Improved Reaction Kinetics with Steam Heat of oxidation Oxidation rate Behaviors of Accident Tolerant Fuels & Fuel and Cladding at High Temperatures
10 Uranium Extraction from Seawater U.S. Investment Strategies- Develop novel adsorbent materials: Increase surface area via reduced fiber size and modified fiber shape; Increase functional group density and grafting efficiency via tailored nanostructure design, nanomanufacturing and irradiation techniques; Enhanced ligand design via computational modeling and computer-aided screening Understand ligand coordination modes, sorption mechanism, kinetics, and thermodynamics Enhance adsorbent reuse and durability Increase the number of recycles/reuse; Improve U-stripping methodology Vast potential resource in seawater: ~4.5 billion tonnes U Challenge is low concentration: ~3.3 ppb in seawater - provide a price cap and ensure centuries of U supply even with aggressive world-wide growth in nuclear energy applications 3-fold Increase of the best Japanese samples The ORNL developed adsorbent materials received 2012 R&D 100 Award
11 DOE Program to Support SMR Design Certification & Licensing The U.S. Government wants to support the safest, most robust SMR designs that minimize the probability of any radioactivity release In 2012, DOE initiated the SMR Licensing Technical Support program – Currently a 6 year/$452 M program Accelerate commercial SMR development through public/private arrangements Deployment as early as 2022 Provide financial assistance for design engineering, testing, certification, and licensing of promising SMR technologies with high likelihood of being deployed at domestic sites Exploring additional mechanisms for SMR fleet deployment
12 Status of SMR Licensing Technical Support Program B&W mPower America Cooperative Agreement established with team consisting of B&W, Bechtel, and TVA in April 2013 Initial DOE commitment of $101 M through March 2014 Design Certification Application (DCA) submittal to NRC in late 2014; Construction Permit in mid-2015 mPower is meeting the DOE goals established in the agreement NuScale Power Selection of NuScale announced on December 12, 2013 Negotiations on cooperative agreement terms are underway DCA submittal planned for late 2015 DOE is examining options to optimize the funding split between the industry partners within the $452 M program
13 B&W mPower SMR Features Integral NSSS Module: 180 MWe per unit (530MWt) 2 units/plant 60-year design life / rail shippable modules Standard UO 2 LWR fuel (<5% enriched) 4 year refueling interval N o shuffling of fuel / Burnable poisons / no boron in coolant Core remains covered during all postulated accidents Ongoing proactive pre-application engagement with NRC Design Certification application submittal to NRC estimated October 2014 Supports DOE goal for SMR deployment in the 2022 timeframe Next generation passive safety design philosophy uses non-safety “defense-in-depth” systems first - Multiple defense-in-depth layers deliver ~10-8 CDF
14 NuScale Power SMR Features 45 MWe per unit (150 MWt) – up to 12 units/plant Standard UO 2 LWR fuel (4.95% enriched) 2.5 year refueling interval Utilizes passive circulation cooling under normal operating conditions SMR containment vessels submerged in reactor pool for improved safety Core Damage Frequency for internal events calculated at 2.9x10 -9 Ongoing proactive pre-application engagement with NRC Design Certification application submittal to NRC estimated Q3 2015 Supports DOE goal for SMR deployment in the 2025 timeframe Containment Vessel Reactor Vessel Core Steam Generator Innovative emergency core cooling system design requires no operator intervention, no AC or DC power, and no additional cooling water to maintain safe condition for an indefinite period
15 Advanced Reactor Technologies R&D focused on Advanced, Small and Modular Reactor Concepts Fast Reactor Technologies – For actinide management and electricity production – Current focus on sodium coolant High Temperature Reactor Technologies – For electricity and process heat production – Current focus on gas- and liquid salt-cooled systems Advanced Reactor Generic Technologies – Common design needs for advanced materials, energy conversion, decay heat removal systems and modeling methods Advanced Reactor Regulatory Framework – Development of licensing requirements for advanced reactors Advanced Reactor System Studies – Analyses of capital, operations and fuel costs for advanced reactor types High Temperature Test Facility Oregon State University
16 Light Water Reactor Sustainability Program LWRS Program Goal Develop fundamental scientific basis to allow continued long-term safe operation of existing LWRs (beyond 60 years) and their long-term economic viability LWRS program is developing technologies and other solutions to Enable long term operation of the existing nuclear power plants Improve reliability Sustain safety LWRS focus areas Materials Aging and Degradation Advanced Instrumentation and Controls Risk-Informed Safety Margin Characterization Systems Analysis and Emerging Issues (includes research to support post-Fukushima lessons learned) Nine Mile Point ~ Courtesy Constellation Energy
17 Comparison Rankine efficiency is 33% Potential for Supercritical CO 2 (sCO 2 ) to surpass 40% efficiency Greatly reduced capital cost for sCO 2 compared to conventional steam Rankine cycle sCO 2 compact turbo machinery is easily scalable Supercritical CO 2 Energy Conversion 1 meter sCO 2 (300 MWe) ( Brayton Cycle ) 20 meter Steam Turbine (300 MWe) (Rankine Cycle) 5-stage Dual Turbine Lo Hi Lo 3-stage Single Turbine Hi Lo
18 HUBS AND NEAMS – PARTNERSHIP AND COMPLEMENTARITY Partnership Advance multi-scale, multi-physics computational methods for reactor simulations Demonstrate positive impact of models and simulations on NE technology Complementarity CASL – focus on solutions to industry defined challenges NEAMS – focus on insights into performance and safety “hubification” – using successful Hub R&D and business models to improve other programs Medium-long term objectives, plan Independent advisory boards Self-sustained user groups Funding stability Computational methods Industry challenges Insights Positive Impact on NE technology
19 Nuclear Energy University Programs The Nuclear Energy University Programs (NEUP) and the Integrated University Program (IUP) have a well established competitive process for awarding R&D, infrastructure and scholarships/fellowships. The Office of Science and Technology Innovation will continue implementing this competitive process and will expand to incorporate it into all competitive research. The NE R&D Programs are the cognizant technical managers of these competitive R&D awards and therefore play in integral role in the success of each project. Universities, national laboratories, industry, and foreign research partners are strongly encouraged to actively engage and collaborate with the NE R&D programs. Since FY09, NEUP and IUP have awarded $290M to 89 schools in 35 States and the District of Columbia.
20 Impact of Early Retirements on Clean Energy Goals Consider Dramatic Retirement Scenario One-third of the reactor fleet, ~26 GW, 200 TWh/yr Replacement power estimated to add 125 MT per year Near-term Target: Reduce Emissions 17% by 2020 2005 emissions from power sector: 2,417 MT Reduction target of 411 MT climbs to 536 MT (30% increase) Long-term Target: 80% Clean Electricity by 2035 Need 2,900 TWh non-emitting power; EIA: 800 TWh of nuclear, 700 TWh of renewable 1,400 TWh shortfall grows to 1,600 TWh with retirements Meeting energy goals will be challenging. Retiring nuclear plants early makes the challenge more daunting.
21 Sanmen –November 2013 Source: SNPTC Summer – November 2013 Source: SCE&G Global Demand for Nuclear Energy Continues Haiyang – December 2013 Source: Shandong Nuclear Power Company,Ltd.. Vogtle – January 2014 Source: Georgia Power Co.
22 Global Energy Distribution as indicated by nighttime electricity use
24 Office of Nuclear Energy FY 2014 Appropriations FY 2013 Final a FY 2014 Request FY 2014 Omnibus e Change from Request Integrated University Program4,67705,500 SMR Licensing Technical Support62,67070,000110,00040,000 Reactor Concepts RD&D104,78072,500112,82240,322 Fuel Cycle R&D169,896165,100186,20521,105 Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies 67,90462,30071,1098,809 Radiological Facilities Management b 65,3705,00024,96819,968 International Nuclear Energy Cooperation 2,8062,5002,496-4 Idaho Facilities Management144,981181,560196,27614,716 Idaho Safeguards and Security c 89,85394,000 0 Program Direction85,11887,50090,0002,500 Adjustments d 227-5,000 0 Total, Nuclear Energy$798,282$735,460$888,376$152,916 a)Reflects full year CR, sequestration and $4.1M provided to Idaho S&S via appropriation transfer b)FY 2013 included $46.6M for Space & Defense Infrastructure this included in NASA budget starting in FY 2014. c)Funded within Other Defense Activities in FY 2013; Nuclear Energy in FY 2014 (retains Defense function designation) d)FY 2013 transfer from Department of State; FY 2014 reflects use of prior year balances e)Reflects NE’s share of general reduction associated with contractor foreign travel; does not reflect potential 0.2% general reduction (Dollars in Thousands)
25 Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies Crosscutting Technology Development Provide R&D solutions to address critical technology gaps relevant to multiple reactor and fuel cycle concepts Reactor Materials: New classes of alloys and materials that may enable transformational reactor performance. Advanced Sensors and Instrumentation: Unique sensor and instrumentation technology to monitor and control reactors and fuel cycle systems. Advanced Methods for Manufacturing: Manufacturing technologies that draw upon successful practices in oil, aircraft, and shipbuilding industries, as appropriate, and employ modeling and simulation capabilities.
26 FY 2013 NEUP IRP Award High Fidelity Ion Beam Simulation of High Dose Neutron Irradiation Lead: Gary Was, University of Michigan Collaborators: University of Tennessee, Pennsylvania State University, University of Wisconsin, Madison, University of South Carolina, University of California, Berkeley, University of California, Santa Barbara, University of Manchester, Oxford University, Queens University, CEA Saclay Center, Tour AREVA, TerraPower, LLC, EPRI, ORNL, LLNL, ANL, LANL, INL DOE Funding: $5M Collaborator Contributions: $4M Total Project Budget: $9M Upgrade and utilize ion beam irradiation capabilities to: Simulate advanced (e.g. fast) reactor neutron irradiations Predict microstructural evolution and other properties of structural materials in-reactor and at high doses