1. Acumen7 1 Accelerating UK Nuclear New Build Tony Roulstone July 2006

2. 2 Contents Background; Setting the conditions for success; Why is time important? Challenge for UK industry; Is the answer to the nuclear power gap - Modular design & Off site construction?

3. 3 Background Three cycles of nuclear build: oMagnox 11 stations3 GWe1960 & 70’s oAGR7 plants 8 GWE1970 & 80’s oPWR1 plant1.2GWe1990s Nuclear contribution to UK electricity supply declining from ~25% to ~3% over the period 2000 – 2020 as first Magnox then AGRs close; Energy Reviews: o2002/3 promoted energy saving & wind/wave providing subsidies through supply obligations - 10% renewables. o2005/6 considering fall-off in UK oil & gas, security of supply & how to meet environmental targets.

4. 4 Nuclear debate – drivers & inhibitors New Nuclear? Carbon Emissions Energy Security Stable & competitive electricity price Waste disposal Capital Costs uncertain & large Doubts about Nuclear Safety Terrorism DriversInhibitors

5. 5 Setting the conditions for success Clear understanding by public of the need for new nuclear; Waste disposal policy; Planning & licensing modernisation; Transitional incentive for nuclear re-start; Clarity on electricity market including use of carbon credits.

6. 6 UK programme assumptions Nuclear new build programme ‘like with like’ 10GWe; On existing licensed sites - British Energy & NDA ex Magnox; Privately funded & managed; Modern standard foreign plant – one of top 4 Gen III+ designs; Major public enquiry for the first station - with only site specific issues being considered for later stations.

7. 7 Nuclear power sites

8. 8 Generation III+ candidates for UK Candidate systems for UK each based on a successful international design with the latest safety features: ACR 1000 AECLCanada AP1000 WestinghouseUS ESBWRGEUS EPRArevaFrance

9. 9 ACR 1000 – Atomic Energy of Canada 1000 MWe heavy water reactor derived from successful CANDU design built in Canada, Rumania & China; Cycle efficiency – 36% Capacity factor - 90% based on CANDU-6; Design life - 60 years; Construction cycle – 42 months; Yet to receive safety certification;

10. 10 AP1000 - Westinghouse 1GWe simplified passive PWR derived from CE & Westinghouse designs with over 100 reactors in US, Europe & Far East; Cycle efficiency – 33%; Capacity factor - 90% based on PWR family record; Design life - 60 years; Construction cycle – 36 months; US NRC design certificated; Selected by US utilities for NuStart applications made for site licences.

11. 11 ESBR - GE 1500 MWe boiling light water reactor evolved from ABWR built in large numbers in US, Sweden & Japan; Cycle efficiency – 36%; Capacity factor - 90% based on ABWR experience; Design life - 60 years; Construction cycle – 45 months; NRC design certification in process; Selected by utilities in US for NuStart.

12. 12 EPR - Areva 1600 MWe light water reactor evolved from proven French N4 & German Konvoi designs; Cycle efficiency - 36%; Capacity factor - 92% improving on N4 record; Design life - 60 years; 42 month construction cycle: Designed to EU safety standards; Being built at Olkiluoto in Finland & Flamville in France.

13. 13 Why is time important – for Investor? Individual build timescales for stations 2 years delay & 10% cost => +£250m investment +15% through life costs 1GWe plant £1bn cost Build time 4 &1 yr

14. 14 Why is time important – for HMG? Long timescale of re-starting nuclear build & enquiry ~ 10 years to first electricity; Constrains of capacity & build timescale mean oFurther 20 years to replace current nuclear capacity i.e. by 2037. oDecommissioning of current stations opens up carbon free energy gap lasting many years.

15. 15 Challenge for UK industry Previous Gas reactors – too slow and very expensive; Cost overruns on major infrastructure projects – Wembley, West Coast Mainline etc.; Loss of experienced & specialist nuclear engineers; Scale & complexity of programme – multiple stations geographically dispersed, in same time frame.

16. 16 Conventional site based approach Standard 8 Reactors 1.2GWe Capacity constraint - no more than 2 sites at any one time Programme timescale 25 years

17. 17 An Alternative Modular Design & Off-site 10 reactors @ 1GWe No parallel capacity constraints Programme timescale 13 years

18. 18 Capacity increase

19. 19 Facing the issues – discussion topic Could modular build & off site construction be the answer? oNew plants designed for modular & shorter construction; oTake best nuclear construction practice from anywhere in the world – China & Korea? oLearn from other major projects using build off site techniques; oFactory infrastructure & logistics? oRadical programme coordination requirements.