Réflexions sur le secteur nucléaire américain

1Nuclear in US - 17 Décembre 2013 - SFEN Tricastin Copyright EDF 1

Nuclear power in US

Some key points

Michel Debes

Electricité de France - Generation and Engineering Division

[email protected]

SFEN Tricastin

17 Décembre 2013

Espace d'information du public EDF


Summary

- La place du nucléaire dans le monde et aux USA

- Le nucléaire aux USA

place dans la production électrique

les réacteurs en exploitation et la sûreté

production

extension de la durée de fonctionnement à 60 ans

augmentation de puissance

L'organisation de l'industrie nucléaire et de la NRC

Plan d'action post FKH

Economie du nucléaire aux USA et conséquences

Les nouvelles constructions

- les perspectives et le développement des SMRs

- le back end: Blue Ribbon Commission, entreposage du combustible usé

- point marquant: l'implication des universités dans les programmes de R&D nucléaire du DOE

- les activités d'EDF aux USA


Global Energy Distribution worldwide

Global energy distributionas indicated by

nighttime electricity use

Nuclear power has been used to produce

electricity since the early 1950s.

Today there are more than 430 nuclear

power reactors, with a total capacity of

about 372 GWe, operating in 31 countries.

An additional 70 units, totaling more than

60 GWe, are under construction.

During 2011, nuclear power produced

more than 2500 TWh of electricity.

Globally, the nuclear energy industry now

has about 15,000 reactor-years of

operating experience.

Concentration of currently operating reactors


Nuclear worldwide - USA and France

- France: 2nd largest nuclear country after US

- EDF: largest nuclear operator (58 units)

- USA: Exelon is the largest in US (22 units inc. CENG)


Nuclear Energy

Plays an Important Role in US Energy Supply

• Nuclear power is a clean, reliable base load energy source

– Provides 19% of U.S. electricity generation mix

(770 TWh in 2012)

– Provides 61% of U.S. emission-free electricity

– Avoids about 700 MMTCO2 each year

– Helps reduces overall NOx and SOx levels

• U.S. electricity demand projected to increase ~28% by 2040

from 2011 levels

• 100 GWe nuclear capacity - 100 operating plants (104 in 2012)

– Fleet maintaining close to 90% average capacity factors

– Most expected to apply for license renewal for 60 years of

operation.Source: Energy Information Administration

US DOE


President Obama’s Nuclear Energy Goals

“With rising oil prices and a warming climate, nuclear energy will only become more important. That’s why, in the United States, we’ve restarted our nuclear industry as part of a comprehensive strategy to develop every energy source.” Nuclear Security Summit - March 26, 2012

"We have an obligation to leave our children a

planet that’s not polluted or damaged, and by

taking steady, responsible steps to cut carbon

pollution and an all-of-the-above approach to

develop homegrown energy … We're building

the first nuclear power plants in more than three

decades in Georgia and South Carolina.―

- Georgetown University June 26th, 2013


From the 1950s through the 1980s, the US

dominated the international market for

commercial nuclear technology.

As the dominant supplier, the US was able to exert

great influence in shaping the global nuclear

nonproliferation regime.

A strong program of domestic nuclear plant

operation and construction, combined with

government policies to promote advanced

technologies and support nuclear technology

cooperation with, and exports to, other nations

helped the United States sustain this leadership

position for decades.


As of August 2013:

100 licensed commercial nuclear power reactors operating at 62 sites in 31 States, of which:

- 35 BWRs and 65 PWRs.

- 4 different reactor vendors

- 25 operating companies

- about 80 different designs.

Although commercial U.S. reactors have many similarities, each one can be considered unique.

21 power reactors undergoing decommissioning (during 2013, 4 NPPs - Kewaunee, Crystal River, San

Onofre 1&2 - were permanently shut down and entered the decommissioning process).

U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Reactors


Nuclear Production and Capacity factor

Nuclear capacity: 100 GWe

Net nuclear power generation: 769,7 TWh in

2012,

The total capacity factor of US NPPs during

2012 was 86.4%, the lowest since 1999, a result

of a series of extended outages that kept four

units shut for most of the year

(Cristal River 3 for containment damage

permanently shutdown, fort Calhoun for flooding

risk, San Onofre 2-3 for SGs permanently shut

down)

US nuclear plant capacity factors peaked in 2007

at 91.8%, and the figure for 2011 was 89.1%.

The highest annual net generation was 806,9

TWh in 2010.

(nb: the average was in the 50% range during the

1970s and 1980s, rising above 80% for the first

time only in 1999).


Power uprate

Since the 1970s, the US utilities have sought

power uprates on existing nuclear plants.

By January 2013, the NRC had approved 146 power uprates,

resulting in a gain of approximately 6,823 megawatts electric (MWe) at existing plants.

Collectively, these uprates have added the equivalent of six new reactors.

ex: last authorization in December 2013 for Monticello BWR 613 MW +10%

.... but now: posponent due to capital cost and competition with shale gas

Reactor license renewal, up to 60 years

Commercial power reactor operating licenses

are valid for 40 years and may be renewed for up to

an additional 20 years.

• 28 units with original license

• 43 sites comprised of 72 units issued renewal licenses

• 9 sites with license renewal applications in review

• 11 sites with letters of intent to submit renewal license applications

=> under review: possibility to extend up to 80 years

DOE, NRC and the nuclear industry are beginning to consider the

prospects for such long-term operation, known as ―life beyond 60‖


The US industry and NRC organization

Nuclear industry:

- Nuclear Utilities: the primary responsibility for safety rests with licensees, which are accountable for meeting regulatory

requirements. In addition, voluntary safety initiatives can enhance safety if implemented and maintained effectively.

- Institute of Nuclear Power Operations (INPO): a strong force for self-regulation, implemented after TMI, to promote high

levels of safety and reliability in the NPPs operations.

- NEI: Nuclear Energy Institute: nuclear lobbying, interaction with NRC for generic issues

- EPRI: R&D Electric Power Research Institute, gathering nuclear utilities

- Department of Energy (DOE) whose mission is to advance energy technology and promote related innovation in the US

- US Export-Import Bank :which was formed for the purposes of financing and insuring foreign purchases of US goods

The safety authority: the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

- An independent agency (4000 people) created by Congress. Its mission is to license and regulate the civilian use of

radioactive materials to protect public health and safety, promote the common defense and security, and protect the

environment.

- The NRC regulates commercial nuclear power plants; research, test, and training reactors; nuclear fuel cycle facilities; the

use of radioactive materials in medical, academic, and industrial settings; the transport, storage, and disposal of radioactive

materials and waste; the export and import of radioactive materials.

- The NRC regulates US industries and works with agencies around the world to enhance global nuclear safety and security.

- The NRC’s Commission has five members nominated by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate for 5-year terms.

The President designates one member to serve as Chairman.

- Values: The NRC adheres to the principles of good regulation—independence, openness, efficiency, clarity, and reliability.

The agency puts these principles into practice with effective, realistic, and timely actions.


Reactor safety oversight process

The NRC’s Reactor Oversight Process (ROP) verifies that U.S. reactors

are operating in accordance with NRC rules, regulations, and license

requirements.

If they are not, the NRC has full authority to take actions ranging from

conducting additional inspections to shutting a plant down in order to

protect public health and the environment.

In general terms, the ROP combines NRC inspection findings and

performance records of each reactor to assess the plants’ safety

performance and security measures. Every 3 months the NRC places the

plants in one of five categories ranging from ―fully meeting all safety

cornerstone objectives‖ to ―unacceptable performance‖


The NRC issued three orders in March 2012, which required U.S. reactors to:

• Obtain and protect additional emergency equipment, such as pumps and generators, to support

all reactors at a given site simultaneously following a natural disaster (Industry initiative FLEX)

• Install enhanced equipment for monitoring water levels in each plant’s spent fuel pool.

• Improve/install emergency venting systems that can relieve pressure in the event of a serious

accident (only for reactors with designs similar to the Fukushima plant).

The NRC has also requested information from all U.S. reactors related to earthquake and

flooding hazards (cf also earthquake east US and flooding in 2011).

The NRC is also working on new or revised rules related to filtering radioactive material after an

accident, maintaining key safety functions in an extended ―black out‖ situation, and several

aspects of emergency preparedness.

Post FKH action plan




US nuclear generation cheaper than alternatives in long term(NEI analysis-NW 130228)

US nuclear power plants that operate for more than 60 years are projected to produce electricity at a lower

cost than coal or wind generation, or than natural gas generation, provided gas prices are above $4/MMBtu.

- In the current environment of low natural gas prices, the economic situation for nuclear power is ―dismal,‖

but those prices will rise and the longterm prospects ―remain very strong‖ which is the basis for ―Long Term

Operations/Subsequent License Renewal‖

In the low-end case, electricity produced at nuclear units operating beyond 60 years is estimated to cost

$53/MWh (including additional capital cost). The high-end estimate is about $60/MWh.

- This compares with a production cost of about $54/MWh for gas-fired generation with gas at $5/MMBtu,

and ―approaching‖ $62/MWh with gas at $6/MMBtu.

Electricity generated by a supercritical pulverized coal facility is estimated to cost $75-76/MWh

Wind generation is estimated to cost $112/MWh

New nuclear costs

Electricity generated from newly constructed NPPs would be the most expensive option at $121/MWh (with

overnight capital costs $5,500/kw, as assumed by DOE).

With ―appropriate financing support,‖ such as federal loan guarantees, ―those prices could be substantially

down, into the range of $84-90/MWh".


Reactor shutdowns in 2013

During 2013, the Kewaunee, Crystal River, and San Onofre 1&2 nuclear power reactors

permanently shut down and entered the decommissioning process.

- Kewaunee (PWR 556 MW): in May 2013 Dominion retired its Kewaunee NPP approximately 20 years before the

expiration of its renewed license; it is the first early retirement of a NPP explicitly due to competition from abundant,

cheap natural gas and coal, as well as large volumes of government-backed wind power.

- Cristal River 3 (PWR 912 MW) for containment damage (delamination of concrete after cable retensionning, following

work to cut an opening for SG replacement) now permanently shutdown due to uncertainty in reparation cost and results

- San Onofre 2-3 in CA (PWR 2x1127 MW) for SGs tube wear, now permanently shut down

SG générators were replaced by MHI on unit 1 & 2 in 2009 and 2010 (2 SGs per unit, U tube, B&W). Both units have

been shut since January 2012 due to the unusual amount of tube wear seen in their new SGs. The cause would be in-plane

fluid elastic instability, in which high steam flow velocities cause excessive side-to-side tube vibrations that lead to tube-

to-tube wear from tubes hitting one another. For ―in-plane vibration, the vibrating tube would potentially impact the

neighboring tubes above and below.

A limitation in power at 70% was proposed by SCE to restart the plant before being repaired but NRC (ASLB) decided

that a new formal licence was necessary (with a new hearing). SCE decided to shut permanently the 2 units du to

uncertainties in delays and cost for repair and in the licensing process. SCE is now suing MHI.

Other reactor shudowns announced:

- La centrale de Vermont Yankee en service depuis 1972 et qui ne possède qu’un seul réacteur (BWR 605 MW), cessera

ses activités à la fin de son cycle actuel et sera fermée au cours du 4e trimestre de 2014.


Back end: Blue Ribbon Commission RecommendationsUS DOE

As a group we concluded that it is premature at this point for the US to commit irreversibly to any particular fuel cycle

as a matter of government policy given the large uncertainties that exist about the merits and commercial viability of

different fuel cycles and technology options. Rather, in the face of an uncertain future, there is a benefit to preserving

and developing options so that the nuclear waste management program and the larger nuclear energy system can

adapt effectively to changing conditions.

U.S. path forward

- Used fuel can be stored safely for decades

- BRC provided recommendations that help guide

management of used nuclear fuel and fuel cycle

R&D

- BRC affirms the need for R&D on advanced fuel

cycles that represent advantages over today’s

technologies

Disposal and Storage:

As of end 2012, the amount of spent fuel in safe storage at NPPs was an

estimated 69000t (+2400t/yr).

There are no active high-level radioactive waste disposal facilities.

In September 2011, the NRC orderly closed its Yucca Mountain activities.

- A new, consent-based approach to siting future nuclear waste

management facilities.

- A new organization dedicated solely to implementing the waste

management program and empowered with the authority and resources

to succeed.

- Access to the funds nuclear utility ratepayers are providing for the

purpose of nuclear waste management.

- Prompt efforts to develop one or more geologic disposal facilities.

- Prompt efforts to develop one or more consolidated storage facilities.

- Prompt efforts to prepare for the eventual large-scale transport of spent

nuclear fuel and high-level waste to consolidated storage and disposal

facilities when such facilities become available.

- Support for continued U.S. innovation in nuclear energy technology

and for workforce development.

- Active U.S. leadership in international efforts to address safety, waste

management, non-proliferation, and security concerns.


Design certification • 4 DCs issued and 3 applications in review

The four certified designs are:

• GE-Hitachi NE Advanced Boiling-Water Reactor (ABWR)

• Westinghouse’s System 80+

• Westinghouse’s AP600

• Westinghouse’s amended AP1000

The NRC is reviewing design certification applications for:

• AREVA’s U.S. Evolutionary Power Reactor (US-EPR),

I&C issues (scheduled 2015)

• MHI U.S. Advanced Pressurized-Water Reactor (US-APWR)

The NRC completed the technical reviews

on GE-Hitachi Economic Simplified BWR (ESBWR).

The NRC is performing preapplication activities with KHNP for the APR1400 design

The NRC’s commercial reactor licensing activities in 2012 included reviewing the TVA's

operating license application for the Watts Bar 2 reactor, now under construction.

U.S. New Nuclear Build


U.S. New Nuclear Build New reactors license process

Early Site Permit (ESP)

• 4 ESPs issued and 2 applications in review Combined License Construction and Operating

(COL)

• 4 COLs issued and 16 applications received and docketed for 24 units; of these, 10

applications are under active review

Although the NRC continues to review new reactor license applications, the NRC decided in

August 2012 not to make final licensing decisions until completion of the waste confidence

rule. The NRC expects to finish its waste confidence work in September 2014.

Four new units AP100 (two at the Vogtle site in Georgia and two at the V. C. Summer site

in South Carolina) are under construction (nb: 2 regulated states).

Construction of one partially completed reactor at the TVA’s Watts Bar site: resumed in

2007 with a target completion date of December 2015 (Watts Bar 2 1150 MW).

- Planning for about two dozen other new reactors has been underway; these plants are in

various stages of the licensing process but none is expected to be in operation prior to 2020.


New nuclear build in US today:

- completion of TVA Watts Bar 2 (1150 MW)

- construction of 4 AP1000 at Vogtle and V.C. Summer


The US may face a substantial contraction of commercial nuclear energy in the coming years.

- Very low prices for natural gas have fundamentally transformed the energy economy, with many positive

benefits, but in so doing also contributed to a reduction in the competitiveness of commercial nuclear

power.

- In addition, state and federal mandates and direct and indirect subsidies for renewable energy—

particularly wind—create market distortions in the electricity sector that contribute to undermining the

economic viability of nuclear power.

- Together, these forces are causing nuclear energy facilities to become increasingly uneconomic,

particularly in competitive state electricity markets. Indeed, as many as a quarter of commercial nuclear

energy facilities in America are cash-flow negative, or may be soon, or could be facing difficult investment

decisions which may lead to early shutdowns.

=> Restoring U.S. Leadership in Nuclear Energy, at home and abroad, should be a national interest

priority for the U.S. government.

BUT .... (Report of the CSIS Nuclear Energy Program)


Small Modular Reactors Development

“I believe small modular reactors could represent the next generation of nuclear energy technology, providing a strong

opportunity for America to lead this emerging global industry. ... We are committed to fostering the safe and secure

contribution of nuclear power to the global energy mix.” Secretary Moniz on Nuclear Energy - DOE

Why are SMR technologies of interest to DOE?

Safety Benefits

Passive decay heat removal by natural circulation; Smaller source term inventory; Simplified

design eliminates/mitigates several postulated accidents; could be air-cooled; Below grade

reactor siting; Potential for reduction in Emergency Planning Zone; security advantages from

underground siting

Economic Benefits

Reduced financial risk; shorter construction time; lower capital cost & less financing required;

Flexibility to add units; Right size for replacement of old coal plants and provide low carbon

energy to address GHG goals; Use domestic forgings and manufacturing; Job creation

Definition of SMRs:

reactor units < 300 MWe and able to have large

components or modules fabricated remotely and

transported to the site for assembly of components and

operation.

US DOE


US DOE SMR Licensing Technical Support Program

Supports first phase for deployment

Facilitates and accelerates commercial development and deployment of

near term U.S. SMR designs at domestic locations ($452 M in cost-share

program over 6 years);

DOE has selected one award under the first SMR funding opportunity

announcement (FOA): => Babcock and Wilcox mPower Design 180 MWe,

in partnership with TVA (standard UO2 LWR fuel, up to 4 year refueling

interval, air-cooled condenser ..)

DOE issued a second FOA that places more emphasis on innovation in

improved safety attributes: lower core damage frequencies; longer post-

accident coping periods; enhanced resistance to natural phenomena ;

potentially smaller emergency preparedness zones; smaller workforce

requirements

=> 13/12/13: The US DOE has chosen NuScale Power's SMR 45 MW to

receive federal funding that will see DOE invest up to half of the cost of

developing, licensing and commercialising the reactor (operates under natural

circulation conditions, relying on gravity and convection to circulate water for

cooling rather than pumps....)



Nuclear Energy University Programs

• The Nuclear Energy University Programs (NEUP - US DOE) 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. Since FY09, NEUP has awarded

$238M to 83 schools in 34 States

and the District of Columbia.

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 and Industry are strongly encouraged to actively engage and collaborate with the associated NE R&D programs.

US DOE


Les activités d'EDF aux USA

Les activités d’EDF en Amérique du Nord regroupent principalement :

- la production d’électricité d’origine nucléaire, par le biais de Constellation Energy Nuclear Group

(CENG), détenu à 49,99 %, qui exploite cinq réacteurs nucléaires aux USA (capacité totale 4,1 GW):

Calvert Cliffs 1/2, Ginna, BWR Nine Mile Point 1 & 2(82%),

production quote part EDF: 14,3 TWh en 2012;

accord (29/7/13) avec Exelon: reprise de CENG & option de vente sur Exelon exerçable entre 2016 et

2022 à la "juste valeur de marché".

- UniStar Nuclear Energy (« UNE »), société 100 % par EDF, qui travaille sur de nouveaux

développements dans le nucléaire ; UNE poursuit l’obtention d’une COLA pour un réacteur EPR sur le

site de Calvert Cliffs 3 (Maryland); suspendue par la NRC en attente d'un partenaire US: "... a license

cannot be granted to UniStar to build a 1,600-MW reactor adjacent to CENG’s two-unit Calvert Cliffs

plant in Maryland because UniStar is owned 100% by EDF, which is 85%-owned by the French

government".

- les énergies renouvelables, notamment l’éolien et le solaire, principalement aux USA par le biais

d’enXco (filiale 100 % EDF EN)

- le trading et l’optimisation sur les marchés nord-américains de gaz et d’électricité dans le cadre

d’EDF Trading North America.

-------------------------------