dan gabriel cacuci - orizzontenergia · 2018-11-15 · conversion • kinetic advantages: high...

DG Cacuci, Torino, 04.02.11

NUCLEAR ENERGY:

RISKS AND BENEFITS

Dan Gabriel Cacuci

Conference “Europe, Italy, Piedmont: Energy as a Development Driver”

Torino, 04 February 2011


Nuclear Energy: Risks and Benefits

Benefits Risks

Energy-IndependenceLong-Term SecurityEconomically Feasible No Greenhouse Gases

High Capital-InvestmentsLow-Dose Irradiation/Contamination Effects ?Severe Accidents (very low probability)Ultimate Disposal of High-Level WasteProliferation of Nuclear Weapons

1. Security of Supply

2. Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

3. Competitiveness

Europe’s Energy Challenges (EU SET-Plan 2008)


Challenge 1: security of supply

Generation IV RoadmapDG Cacuci, Torino, 04.02.11

• Main EU imports from politically stable countries (Canada, Australia);• Easy to build strategic stockpiles;• For Gen-IV, optimized use of resources sustainability


Challenge 2: reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

• Cannot achieve Europe’s objectives of CO2 reductions without nuclear


Challenge 3: Competitiveness, electricity generation costs [www.eusustel.be ]

• Nuclear energy is economically competitive.

http://www.eusustel.be/


Spent Fuel Radiotoxicity

Reu

sabl

e M

ater

ials

Was

te

OtherPu: 1 %FP: 3 - 5 %

U: 94 - 96 %

Spent Fuel Radiotoxicity

Contributions to Radiotoxicity

1 10 100 1 000 10 000 100 000 1 000 0000

1

2

3

4

5

6108 Sv/t

UOther

Pu

FP

Time (Years)

1 10 100 1 000 10 000 100 000 1 000 0000

Time (Years)

0,10,2

0,30,40,50,6

0,7

0,80,9

1

FP

Pu

Other

AmNp

U


Responsible Management of Spent Fuel

• Recycle 96% of spent fuel • Save 30% of natural resources• Represents less than 6% of total kWh-price• Reduces by factor 5 the volume of waste• Reduces by factor 10 the radiotoxicity of waste• Current technologies guarantee long-term (tens of

thousands of years) confinement and stability

Proven adProven advantages of recycling vantages of recycling

Mines Enrichment

Fuelfabrication

Reactors& Services

Recycling :MOX Fuelfabrication

EnrichedUranium

UltimateWasreDisposal

Front-End Sector Reactors & Services Sector Back-End Sector

Uranium recyclable

Plutonium

Uranium recyclable

Plutonium

ChemistryNatural Uranium ChemistryNatural Uranium

Spent FuelReprocessing

Recycling Recycling ““buys timebuys time”” for exploring all possibilities to for exploring all possibilities to optimize sustainable waste management strategies optimize sustainable waste management strategies


R&D for new isotope separation processes

Generation-IV Reactors: Closed Fuel Cycle

Integral reIntegral re--use of nonuse of non-- separated Actinidesseparated Actinides

SP MA + SP

Spent Fuel (Pu + MA + SP)

Natural Uranium

Time (Years)

Rel

ativ

eR

adio

toxi

city

Drastic Time-Reduction of Radiotoxicity

10 100 1000 10 000 100 000

1

10

100

10 000

0,1

1 000


Vitrified HLR Waste-Package

Vitrification of High-Level Radioactive Waste

Over 15000 Packages fabricated so far in La Hague

1 % Volume > 90 % of Radiotoxicity


Reprocessing Plant La HAGUE (AREVA, France)

Vorführender

Präsentationsnotizen

Le recyclage : une industrie déjà mûre. Il y a deux usines en Europe, une en Angleterre (Sellafield, BNFL), une en France (La Hague, COGEMA). L’usine française traite non seulement le combustible français, mais également à peu près autant de combustible étranger (Belgique, Allemagne, Japon, …).


La Hague: Interim Storage of HLR Waste-Packages


Underground Waste-Disposal Laboratory in Bure (France)


Underground Waste-Disposal Laboratory in Bure

Vorführender


La loi française prescrit l’ouverture de deux laboratoires souterrains pour mener les recherches nécessaires à la réalisation et à la démonstration de sûreté d’un stockage profond. Un laboratoire est actuellement en cours de creusement dans l’Est du Bassin Parisien, sur le site de Bure, en Champagne. Le milieu géologique est une argile raide, du Callovo-Oxfordien.


Development of renewable energies Valorization of biomass (particularly bio-fuels from wood)

Bure-Saudron Laboratory


1st Generation

2nd Gen.Auto-thermal

2nd Gen.Allo-thermal

External input electricity(NUCLEAR)


External input electricity (NUCLEAR)

+ H2

(NUCLEAR)


External inputelectricity

(NUCLEAR)

+ H2

(NUCLEAR)+

Use ofdomestic

andmunicipal

waste 4 MToe

7 MToe

15 MToe

25 MToe

50 MToeCurrent Consumption

(Transport)

LIMIT of the auto-thermal thermo-chemical (or enzymatic) routesCompetition with other uses of wood or vegetal materials

?

LIMIT:Competition with food

Goal 2008

Goal 2015

Goal 2030

EXAMPLE: Gen-I vs. Gen-II Biofuels (Potential) in France:

http://idata.over-blog.com/0/00/53/43/macro/paille.jpg


R & D in Support of Current LWRs

Improved Fuels (MOX, Higher Burnup…)

Life-time Extension,Improved Reliability…

Environmental impact reduction…

Cost reduction…


CASL: The Consortium for Advanced Simulation of LWRs A DOE Energy Innovation Hub for Modeling and Simulation of Nuclear Reactors (www.casl.gov or [email protected])

US President Obama (01.25.11): “At ORNL, they’re using supercomputers to get a lot more power out of our nuclear facilities.”

http://www.casl.gov/


CASL interface with M&S R&D Programs

• MPO – LWRS Materials and Aging:collaborative agreement to address

pressure vessel and internals materials characterization studies.

• MPO/VRI – NEAMS: Draft plan to establish a common fuel

properties data structure

• VUQ – LWRS & NEAMS: Draft plan to establish a common set of

benchmark problems and validated experimental data files.

• CASL SLT: Determine degree of collaboration on

modeling and simulation development on certain programs of mutual benefit, e.g., Exascale Co-Design

• OBJECTIVE 1: Develop technologies and other solutions that can improve the reliability, sustain the safety, and extend the life of current reactors

• OBJECTIVE 2: Develop improvements in the affordability of new reactors to enable nuclear energy to help meet the Administration's energy security and climate change goals

• OBJECTIVE 3: Develop sustainable nuclear fuel cycles

• OBJECTIVE 4: Understand and minimize the risks of nuclear proliferation and terrorism

PoR-1 (2010)


The Vision for Future Nuclear Energy


Generation IV Int. Forum (GIF): Goals

Technological Maturity: ca. 2030

Progress (beyond Gen III)Economically competitiveSafe and ReliableWaste minimizationResource maximizationNon-proliferation and Safeguards

Additional ApplicationsElectricity, Hydrogen Production, Desalinization, Process heat

Nuclear Systems for Sustainable Energy Development

E.U.

CharteredJuly 2001


Worldwide plans…

USA + 1500 Power Plants

by 2020 including nuclear (> 50 GWe)

FINLAND 5th reactor (+1 EPR?)

Source : TotalFinaElf0%

20%

40%

60%

1900 1950 2000 2050

Coal R en

Oil

Gas

HydroNuclear

KOREA nuclear capacity

increase + 9 GWe by ~ 2015

INDIA nuclear capacity

increase from 2.5 to 20 GWe by 2020

JAPAN nuclear capacity

increase + 21 GWe by 2012

CHINA nuclear capacity

increase > 30 GWe by 2020

FRANCE +2 EPR

UKRAINE+11 Reactors

by 2030

ITALY…


7 points about Nuclear Energy (NE):

• NE is part of the solution (not the problem!) for meeting the increasing national & international need for electricity;

• NE is needed to attain CO2 savings;

• NE guarantees economical, safe & reliable electrical energy, particularly for base-load;

• NE and renewable energies are synergetic, not competing!Germany uses now NE to compensate time-varying production from renewables; France plans to use NE-generated electricity & H2 for Gen-II biofuels;

• NE is internationally increasing, which would be good for Italian industries (new int. markets and home jobs);

• NE has great potential for technological advances (GEN-IV);

• NE has *today* technological solutions for safe & economical waste disposal (Sweden, Finland, France, Switzerland, Russia, etc).


In the next 50 years ….~ 1010 people…

~ 15 Gtoe/year consumption…

…I believe all sources of energy will besynergistically needed.


• RESERVE SLIDES


Challenge 2: reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Share in energy consumption in EU-25 in 2004 • Nuclear energy =

largest source of low Carbon energy in Europe


Uranium Enrichment

• Natural Uranium = 0.7% U-235 + 99.3% U-238

• LWRs need enriched fuel (2,5% - 4,9% U-235)

• Enrichment Technologies: Gas- Ultracentrifuge or Gaseous- diffusion plants

Vorführender


La séparation isotopique : une entreprise difficile, car les isotopes à séparer ont les mêmes propriétés chimiques, et presque les mêmes propriétés physiques. Diffusion gazeuse : décrire le principe. Technique lourde, coûteuse en énergie. Le processus élémentaire enrichit très peu. Notion de cascade UCG : décrire le principe : le gaz UF6 lourd est plaqué à la paroi d’un bol de centrifugeuse, on récupère le gaz léger à l’aide d’une écope. Nécessité de faire travailler beaucoup de centrifugeuses à la fois.


A wide international spectrum of Generation III / III+ Reactors:

„Generation IV“ Int. Forum (GIF) List of „Near Term Deployment“ Plants of „Generation III /III+“:

Advanced PWR:

AP 600, AP 1000, APR1400, APWR+, EPR

Advanced BWR:ABWR II, ESBWR, HC-BWR, SWR-1000

Advanced „Heavy-Water Reactor“:

ACR-700 (Advanced CANDU Reactor 700)

„Integrated“ Small- und Medium- Power Reactors:

CAREM, IMR, IRIS, SMART

High-Temperature- Gas-Cooled Modular Reactors:GT-MHR, PBMR


2050 - Energy Scenarios

B C “ecologically driven growth”

(1300GWe)


Process evaluation and choice (1/2)

High temperature processesThermo dynamical advantages:

High temperature and low pressure processes allow optimal conversion

• Kinetic advantages:High temperature(1250-1500°C) help

• Tar cracking • Methane conversion to CO +

H2 • Ashes fusion(Interesting when using wastes)

IDEAL FOR PRODUCTION OF CO & O2

High pressure processes

• Final application depending on pressure

30bar =>Gas-shift20-40bar =>Fischer-Tropsch synthesis~70bar => Methanol synthesis

• Less compression stages=>10% reduction of the energetic cost (PCI biomass)

• Reduction of investment costs and technological constraints for big industrial plants (> 50 MWth)

• Optimization of gas cleaning process

012345678

500 600 700 800 900 1000 1200 1300 1400T( °C)

mol

es

C solide

H2

CO

CO2CH4

H2O

H2/CO

012345678

500 600 700 800 900 1000 1200 1300 1400T( °C)

mol

es

C solide

H2

CO

CO2CH4

H2O

H2/CO

012345678

500 600 700 800 900 1000 1200 1300 1400T( °C)

mol

es

C solide

H2

CO

CO2CH4

H2O

H2/CO


Process evaluation and choice (2/2)

Noell Entrained-Flow Gasifiers

Burner insert

outletGas and slag

Reactor with Cooling Screen

systemPartial quench

Gas outlet

Reactor with Cooling Wall

Coolant

lining

SiC layer

Refractory

Cooling jacket

Burner insert

•Process of reference 1 for CEA : thermal pre-treatment (250-700°C) + Entrained flow reactor working between 1200 and 1400°C•Existing technology for coal gasification : Shell Uhde, Future- Energy, Lurgi, Conoco-Phillips ….•Limited experience on biomass : CHOREN plants

•Process of reference 2 :Fluidised bed (700-900°C)+ high temperature gas reformer (1200-1400°C)


C6 H9 O4 + 2 H2 O => 6 CO + 6,5 H2

La combustion consomme ~ 2C et 2 H2Restent: 4 CO + 4,5 H2

Réaction de Gaz-Shift: 1,5 CO => 1,5 H2

Restent: 2,5 CO + 6 H2

Bilan synthèse: max 2,5 -CH2-

Bilan avec pertes: ~1,5 (-CH2- )

Rendement masse ~ 15%

Restent 6 CO + 6,5 H2

Shift2 CO=> 2 H2

4 CO + 8,5 H2

4 -CH2-

~3 (-CH2-)

Rendt masse ~30 %

Pas de shift, maisApport H2 externe

6 CO + 12 H2

6 -CH2-

~ 5 (-CH2-)

Rendt masse ~ 48%

Autothermique Allothermique (énergie externe)

La synthèse de biocarburant nécessite: H2/CO ~2

Le procédé allothermique : augmenter le rendement masse

Réaction de gazéification idéale : une réaction endothermique

dan gabriel cacuci - orizzontenergia · 2018-11-15 · conversion • kinetic advantages: high...

Documents