4a. nuclear ppt 2011
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
1/75
, , ,Ian Horton, Hsiao-chi Peng, Roxanne Li
1
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
2/75
What is Current Nuclear Technology?hat is Current Nuclear Technology?
classifications of nuclear reactors Generation I: earliest prototypes and reactors developed
Generation II: reactors built commercially through the 1990s
Generation III: evolutionary improvements on Generation II
researched
2
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
3/75
All reactors generate fissile
material, but breeders produce
more fissile material than theyconsume (Pu-239!). . VERY expensive.
Reprocessing required.
Thorium :
Potential source of massive amounts ofenergy, with less waste.
.
Definitively Generation IV technology.3
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
4/75
Breeder Reactors
Can produce more fissile material than theyconsume.
Require an initial stock of fissile enricheduranium or plutonium.
water as a coolant (usually molten sodium).
Have been successfully built before! Notablythe French Superphnix produced electricityfrom 1985 to 1997.
Can be rigged to burn fertile Thorium ornaturally occurring uranium.
Very few made for commercial production highly experimental.
Generall considered Generation IV.
4
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
5/75
More abundantthan uranium
Difficult to reprocess
Less long-lived
waste products
Still requires an initialstock of enriched
uranium or plutonium
Less overallradioactive waste
No large scalecommercial reactors
are currently
e a ve y cu oweaponize (it is not
fissile)
opera ona
Generation IV fuelsource
5
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
6/75
A reactor A reactor
with lessthan 300 with lessthan 700
capacity is
considered
capacity is
defined as. .
SMRs provide flexibility and require less capital investment.
Unfortunately, SMRs are NOT currently available on themarket, and it may be a long time before they arecommercially available in the United States.
6
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
7/75
Small and Medium Sized Reactors: SMRs
Smaller reactors have a smaller capital investment. By riggingseveral smaller plants to achieve the same output as a larger plant,revenue can be enerated before the ro ect is com leted limitinthe maximum negative cash flow of the project. This is the conceptbehind the 225 MWe International Reactor Innovative and Secure(IRIS), which will boast a built time of 2-3 years for a single unit.
SMRs can also be hooked up independent of the grid toserve remote locations.
, ,the pressurized water reactor, IRIS. Here are a few of the front-runners:
The 80-165 MWe Pebble Bed Modular Reactor uses helium gas as a
coolant and graphite as a modulator. Since it can operate at highertemperatures than conventional reactors, it is more efficient with its fuel:metal-alloy pellets. The design is in the pre-application process with the
,Temperature Gas Cooled Reactor.
7
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
8/75
The Toshiba Super Safe, Small, and Simple (4S) is a sodium cooled
,operate without maintenance for 30 years before being excavated andreturned to the company. It is in the pre-application stage with theNRC, and there is a proposed site for a prototype in Galena, AK. It isscheduled to perhaps be the first of its kind to reach the commercial
market, but there are significant safety concerns. A lack of routinemaintenance for 30 years poses a problem, as unexpected problems
. ,unnoticed breach in the system could lead to a large explosion. Thelack of maintenance, while initially appealing, is possibly a potential
snag for many SMRs.
The 25 MWe Hyperion Power Module (HPM) is designed to be buriedand maintenance free for a eriod of 7-10 ears before refuelin . It
would use a 20% enriched uranium nitride fuel, and would be leadbismuth cooled. A mere 1.5m x 2.5m in size, the HPM is highlyportable, completely sealed, and has no moving parts. Hyperion
,build a prototype by 2015.
8
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
9/75
SMRs are not currentl available on the commercial market, and even themost advanced ones still have a long way to go before they can be soldcommercially in the US. This is for a few possible reasons:
,
SMRs require new technology, and this technology has not been as readilyavailable as that of large reactors.
2) Furthermore, regulatory barriers prevent SMRs from being economicallyviable at this point, even if the capital costs are lower. That is because
regulations put in place by the NRC are specifically for large plants, and they. ,
of $4.5M for each operating license it issues. This is not a huge fee for alarge plant, but for the small rate of power SMRs produce, the number canbe stifling. Similar regulatory issues exist with decommissioning funds,
insurance, and liability that make it easier and more economical to build alarger plant. Until these regulations are tailored to the new situation, SMRswill have difficulty reaching the commercial market in the US.
9
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
10/75
Design
Characteristics Coolant NRC
Status
GenerationIII
(ABWR)
Reactors,1350Mwe Water Certifiedin1997
AP600 PassiveSafetyFeatures,
600MWe Water Certifiedin1999
AP1000 Passive
Safety
Features,
1,100MWe Water Certifiedin2005
EconomicSimpleBoilingWater PassiveSafetyFeatures,Water
AppliedforCertification in 2005;
eac or , we n er ev ew
U.S.EvolutionjaryPowerReactor
(USEPR)
GreaterSafetyMargins,
1,600Mwe Water
AppliedforCertification2007;
UnderReview
U.S.Advanced
Pressurized
Similar
to
Current
Applied
for
Certification
in
2007;
WaterReactor(ASAPWR) Reactors,1700Mwe UnderReview
InternationalReactorInnovative
andSecure(IRIS)
InnovativeModular
Design,325MWe Water
HasnotyetAppliedfor
Certification
GenerationIV
SupercriticalWater
Cooled
Reactor(SCWR) Large
Plant,
1,700MWe Water Has
not
yet
Applied
for
Certification
LeadCooledFastReactor(LFR)
Lowpowerreacors,Long
refulingperiod;501200LiquidLeador HasnotyetAppliedfor
MWe
SodimCooled
Fast
Reactor
(SFR) 150
1,700
Mwe Liquid
Sodium
HasnotyetAppliedfor
Certification10
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
11/75
Generation III+ Pressurized Light
Water Reactor
Many simplified passive safetymeasures in place.
1154 MWe
12 units are scheduled foroperation in China by 2015.
14 licenses have been filed forreactors in the US, and 1 contracthas been agreed upon in Vogtle,
**First Generation III+ reactorto have been approved by
.
Commission (2005)**
11
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
12/75
Westinghouse AP1000
Great Things to Come!
12
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
13/75
Construction Decommissioning
Operation
3 650
13
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
14/75
Capital
Material costs var widel overtime and geography
Construction
Delays and unexpected
Discount Rate
Interests rates have asignificant effect in this period All construction performed withnegative profit
Solution: Modularization
Westinghouse hasattempted to cut construction
time to 36 months thou h
modularization of AP1000
reactor sections14
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
15/75
AP1000 Construction Cost
Estimates$3.3 B Westinghouse
2008 MIT
StudyWorld Nuclear
$1.8 B
$2.2 BAssociation
$1.32 B
600 MWe CoalPlantWestinghouse AP1000 15
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
16/75
$3000/KW $3000/KW
$2000/KW
$1200/KW
600 MWe CoalPlantWestinghouse AP1000 16
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
17/75
Uranium
Consistently theowes cos ener y
resource Front end
-20% of totalcost/KW
inelastic withrespect to fuel
Source: Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI):http://www.nei.org/resourcesandstats/documentlibrary/reliableandaffordableenergy/graphicsandcharts/monthlyfuelcosttouselectricutilities17
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
18/75
18
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
19/75
- Only 3 licensed facilities in U.S.
Carolina US Ecology in Washington State
EnergySolutions Clive Operations in Utah
19
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
20/75
20
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
21/75
21
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
22/75
-
cooling pools
Safety controls-
monitors and
22
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
23/75
Inde endent S ent
Fuel StorageInstallations
ac o s up toPWR fuel
For AP1000 over 10yrs, produce enough
fuel assemblies tofill 28 ISFSIs
23
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
24/75
-
Vitrification
Stored on-site for 40-50 years, after
remains
24
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
25/75
5x less high-level waste
Faster rate of decay
Recovery of uranium andplutonium for re-use
Further development throughU.S. partnership with GNEP
25
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
26/75
In 2010, construction halted and Office of
Civilian Radioactive Waste Managementwas disbanded , , an
environmental
NRC.
industry suingEnergyDepartment
26
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
27/75
Nuclear Accidents are not viewed as a good
thing due to loss of life and long term effects
on the land Chernobyl, Fukushima, 3 mile island
In all 3 cases, critical safety precautions wereoverlooked (this is true in Fukushima Japan
too even thou h it was s urred b a tsunami Nuclear Plants feature defense in depth, a
series of redundant safety features that will
emergency Most accidents occur because these
27
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
28/75
Control of Radioactivit
Most common method is to introduceneutron absorbing control rods into thereac or
Maintenance of Core Cooling
temp environments, sodium may be needed
Concrete walls, vacuum building, PPE and
SOP
28
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
29/75
Stron Em hasis on Passive Safet
Systems use natural forces (gravity, natural
physics
Virtually no moving parts (lack of pumps,ans, ese genera ors, c ers, e crequired for safety system
Valve onl movin art movement is
made using stored energy from springs,compressed gas or batteries.
29
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
30/75
Core cooling and containmentindefinitel with no o erator or AC owersupport requirements
Passive residual heat removal
30
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
31/75
Emergency Core cooling system
in AP1000
Desi ned to rotect a ainst leaks in the
reactor cooling system Safety Injection and Depressurization
Relies on water from core makeup tanks,accumulators, and in-containment refueling
water stora e tank Passive Residual heat removal
PRHR heat exchanger
Passive Containment Cooling system Relies on air circulation passing over
31
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
32/75
32
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
33/75
33
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
34/75
. Not always taken into consideration when
discussing Nuclear Power Includes Shutdown, waste disposal,
dismantlin and restoration of overall site to astate in which it is no longer hazardous to thegeneral public
Immediate Dismantling: relatively quick Safe enclosure: average 40 to 60 years before doing
an thin
Entombment: site is designed to retain everything itgenerates over the course of its active life foreveronsite in a safe manner
34
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
35/75
Greenhouse Gas Emissionsreenhouse Gas Emissions
http://depletedcranium.com/greenpeace-issues-top-ten-against-nuclear-power/
Nuclear power plant operation emits no or negligible
amounts of carbon dioxide.
35
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
36/75
A European treatmentof roduction andexternal costs,
specifically of powergeneration in
Project), has been doneby the Paul Scherrer
Institute and shows thatthe damage costs fromfossil fuels are 10 to350% of the production
The twin bars represent the range of values for plants operating in=
,
nuclear are very small.
http://www.vattenfall.com/en/file/2005-LifeCycleAssessment_8459810.pdf36
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
37/75
Carbon Footprint Comparison
Continued
Figures published from Japan's CentralResearch Institute of the Electric Power
Full Lifecycle CO2 Emissions from Energy
Industry give life cycle carbon dioxideemission figures for various generationtechnologies. Nuclear power is only bestedby wind and hydro.
Wind is the only more carbon neutralpower generation source
http://world-nuclear.org/info/inf68.htmlhttp://www.world-nuclear.org/climatechange/nuclear_meetingthe_climatechange_challenge.html
37
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
38/75
Emissions of a nuclear power plant at various stages of operation showing thefossil CO2 contributions from fossil fuel derived sources.
http://www.vattenfall.com/en/file/2005-LifeCycleAssessment_8459810.pdf
38
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
39/75
Nuclear ower has hi her overall lifetime costs.
Cap and Trade may drive down that cost bytrading credits.
Cap and Trade has little impact on the nuclearpower option because of it negligible production of
reenhouse ases. Policies are currently being considered to increase
reliance on nuclear power in conjunction with
renewa es an ap an ra e o ecreasedependency on foreign fuel.
http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/pdf/nuclearpower-ch1-3.pdf39
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
40/75
Ma or U.S uranium reserves
http://www.energy-net.org/01NUKE/u-mining/us-uranium-usgs.jpg40
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
41/75
Cayuga Lake
en tat on
290-megawatt coal-fired plant
830-megawatt nuclear-fueledsteam electric station
Heat from the lant would add a roximatel 6 billion Btu er hour to the water over and
Maximum depth of 435 feet, and a mean depth of 179 feet.
A volume of 331 billion cubic feet.
above the reported 1.3 billion Btu per hour heat rejection from Milliken.
41
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
42/75
Simple Calculation of Temp. incensementimple Calculation of Temp. incensement
Capacity of power it will be heated at a rate
Flow rate of coolingwater:1100 cubic feet /
o =
megawatts. 1780X947 = 1 680 000
The thermal efficiency ofnuclear power plants : 32%
Btu (of energy are putinto 1100 cubic feet of
megawatt = 947 Btu ofenergy
.
The water will be heated1,680,000/(62.4X1100)
the temperature of onepound of water by 10 F
=25F
.pounds
25F in the condensers.
42
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
43/75
The effects on Ca u a Lake
Thermal Stratification - refer to a change inthe temperature at different depths in the lake,
due to the change in water's density with.
Heat
Temp. high Temp. low
ens y ow
Temp. low
MIXED
ens y g .Density high
43
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
44/75
depletion in the large underlying layer of cooler water,
will become lower than they do at present, before being
re lenished b the dela ed fall mixin of the u er andlower layers.
44
G S f N
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
45/75
Government Support for New
Projects
The typical U.S. electric company cannotafford to inde endentl finance new ro ects
High construction costs
Political and re ulator risks Cost overruns by the licensing process and
litigation
45
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
46/75
tax credits
loan guarantees
46
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
47/75
Production Tax Credits
allows 6,000 megawatts of new nuclear capacity to
earn $18 per megawatt-hour for the first eight years
.
plant is capped at $125 million per year
The construction and operating license application had to
have been submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission by Dec. 31, 2008. The plant must be under construction by January 1, 2014.
e p ant must e operat ng y anuary , .
47
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
48/75
Loan Guarantee
through the Department of Energy General Ob ective of the Loan Guarantee: to
support the commercial deployment of
innovative technologies that reduce
em ss ons
allows a more highly leveraged capital
guaranteed project debt cannot exceed 80percent of total project cost)
48
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
49/75
pay a premium for the insurance coverage
six new nuclear plants. Standby support
covers delays caused only by factorsou s e a company s con ro
administered by the Department of Energy
49
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
50/75
State-specific policies Some states may:
guarantee that capital costs associated with construction willbe added to the rate base when the plant comes online
passed on to ratepayers during construction. *Note: Allowing CWIP reduces the cost ratepayers will pay
for power from the plant when it goes into commercial. assist with financing for unregulated plants by allowing pre-
negotiated, long-term power purchase agreements (PPA). PPAs guarantee the project will have a source of cash flow
an cos recovery once s opera ona
50
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
51/75
Government Support for Research
and Development (R D)
The U.S. wants to develop in collaboration with
other nations reprocessing and fuel treatment
technolo ies that are:
cleaner,
more e c en ,
less waste intensive, and
more proliferation-resistant
51
Government Support for Research
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
52/75
Government Support for Research
On February 6, 2006 the Global Nuclear Energy
and Development (R&D)
Partnership (GNEP) began as a U.S. proposal,
announced by then Secretary of Energy SamuelBodman
GNEP represents an international partnership topromote the use of nuclear power and close the
nuclear fuel cycle in a way that reduces nuclearwas e an e r s o nuc ear pro era on
In July 2007, DOE announced that, through itsAdvanced Fuel Cycle Initiative, it would be making
$20 million available to conduct detailed sitingstudies for public or commercial entities interestedin hosting GNEP facilities
52
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
53/75
Who is the primary regulating agency?
The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
e s espons e orlicensing and regulating the construction and
o eration of commercial nuclear
power plants.
53
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
54/75
The Extent of Federal Authority
N l Pver Nuclear Power
construction ( licensing ) andoperations, including:
nuclear health and environmental safety concerns and onsite physical security
Exclusivel controls the trans ortation
and storage of spent nuclear fuel
licensees to store spent nuclear fuel at reactor sites
54
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
55/75
includes a Safety Analysis Report, which contains:
comprehensive data on the proposed site,
various hypothetical accident situations and the safetyfeatures of the plant that prevent accidents or willcontain them, and
55
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
56/75
If the application is accepted, the NRC holds a public
with: the safety and environmental aspects,
the regulatory process, and
the provisions for public participation in the licensing
NRC then conducts:
a safety review, an environmental review, and
56
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
57/75
Safet Review
The NRC reviews characteristics of the site,
including surrounding population, seismology,meteorology, geology and hydrology;
design of the nuclear plant; anticipated response of the plant to hypothetical
accidents plant operations including the applicant's
technical qualifications to operate the plant;
Safety Evaluation Report, prepared by the NRCsummarizing the anticipated effect of thero osed facilit on ublic health and safet
57
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
58/75
The National Environmental Policy Act requiresthe NRC to evaluate the potential environmentalimpacts and benefits of the proposed plant
the NRC then issues a Draft Environmental
appropriate Federal, State, and local agenciesas well as by the public.
The NRC issues a Final Environmental ImpactStatement that addresses all commentsreceived
58
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
59/75
hearing be held before a constructionermit is issued
The public hearing is conducted by a
-Licensing Board
,
who acts as chairperson, and twotechnicall ualified ersons
59
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
60/75
some construction at the site prior to theissuance of a construction ermit.
This authorization is known as a Limited
risk of the licensee
60
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
61/75
Operating License Application
Includes a Final Safety Analysis Report describes the final design of the facility and
NRC prepares a Final Safety Evaluation Report
ublic hearin is not mandator for o eratin licenseapplications the NRC publishes a notice in the Federal Register
,
providing notice to those whose interest might beaffected by the issuance of the license to request a
61
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
62/75
62
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
63/75
operating in accordance with regulations ree ers o overs g o ensure:
Reactor safety - avoiding accidents
Radiation safety - for plant workers andpublic from radiation exposure during
routine operations Safeguards - protection against security
threats
63
Oversi ht of O erations
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
64/75
Oversi ht of O erations
64
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
65/75
Measuring and Inspecting Nuclear Plant
er ormance: wo er rocess
objective performance indicators
provides plant operational insight about, among otherthings, the possible occurance of:
- - safety system failures- reactor cool ing system leakage- securit breaches
- etc. inspection findings
prov es grea er ep an rea o n orma on
65
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
66/75
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
67/75
Detecting, preventing, and responding toterrorist attacks requires government
coordination among: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Intelligence Staff
Department of Defense
Department of Homeland Security
Federal Bureau of Investigation
National Counterterrorism Center State and Local Government law enforcement
etc.
67
NRC Security Experts
inspect facilities for
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
68/75
the following Onsite Security Requirements:
Vehicle barriers and checks before plant entry
Trained security patrols Force-on-Force inspections
Including simulated combat between mock adversary
force and lant securit force Comprehensive employee background checks
Criminal record checks
Psychological assessments Behavioral observations
mergency response personne
68
Exclusive federal control over spent
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
69/75
nuclear fuel transportation and storage
how high level radioactive waste and spentnuclear fuel enerated b civilian nuclearpower reactors must be disposed
reactors (e.g., utilities)
DOE "takes title" to the nuclear waste
69
The Federal Government holds the
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
70/75
ibilit f b ildi g tesponsibility of building a permanent
storage site
DOE has a contractual obligation to accept nuclear
waste from commercial reactors
Several utilities have sued the federal government civilly fordamages.
Earlier Federal Court decided that the government indeed had
breached its contracts, but the courts did not award damages Later decisions awarded monetary damages to nuclear power
plant owners
70
Should the Obama dministration
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
71/75
have terminated theYucca Mountain
Maybe, if the health and environmental fears weresu c en y we groun e
Howeverfrom a financial standpoint the political
s ammer ng as een cos y
The government had invested two decades and $10 billion on
Recent court decisions awarding damages to nuclear power
plant owners have been in the tens, if not hundreds, of millions
of dollars
71
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
72/75
Getting Ithaca Onboardetting Ithaca Onboard
Community Against Health and Safety Threats
Petitioning represents an additional means
for the public to raise safety concerns
The other means for the ublic to raise concerns:
Rulemaking
cens ng
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Public Petition Process, NUREG/BR-0200, Rev. 5, February 2003. 72
Getting Ithaca Onboardg
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
73/75
Public Petit ions to SafeguardAgainst Health or Safety
Threats
Anyone may petition the NRC to take enforcement action related
to NRC licenses or licensed activities
NRC may modify, suspend or revoke an NRC-issued license
In writing the petit ioner can identify the affected licensee or
licensed activity
The NRC evaluates whether the petition includes supportedassertions of safety problems
- .g., e w no a e ac on n response o genera oppos on o nuc ear
power
73
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
74/75
Getting Ithaca Onboard
Nuclear risks associated with power productionGetting Ithaca Onboard
are covere y:
a private liability insurance fund made. .
American Nuclear Insurers ($375 million liability
limits , and a public fund has been made available by
assessments on nuclear power plant
operators, which was created in 1957 aspart of the Price Anderson Act ($12.2on o a y pro ec on
74
-
8/12/2019 4a. Nuclear Ppt 2011
75/75
Getting Ithaca Onboard
Coverage under Price-Anderson is comprehensiveGetting Ithaca Onboard
and includes injuries caused by:
theft,,
transporting or storing nuclear fuel or waste, and
the o eration of reactors Covered Injuries include:
h sical illness e.g., bodily injury sickness, disease resulting in death
property damage and losses, and reasonable living expenses for people who have been
evacuated from an affected area
75