India's Energy Options and

Strategies post Fukushima

Anil Kakodkar

Energy Consumption Per Capita vs. Human Development Index

Source: The Energy Challenge for Achieving the Millennium Development Goals, (UN-Energy, 2005)

SOURCE: THE ENERGY CHALLENGE FOR ACHIEVING THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS, (UN-ENERGY, 2005)

We need as much additional electricity as we produce today to provide a reasonable standard of living (~5000 kWh per capita) in the developing world

India alone would need around 40% of present global electricity generation to be added to reach average 5000 kWh per capita electricity generation

World OECD Non-OECD Population (billions) 6.7 1.18 5.52

AnnualElectricityGeneration 18.8 10.6 8.2(trillion kWh)

Carbon-di-oxideEmission 30 13 17(billion tons/yr)

Annual av. per capita ~2800 ~9000 ~1500Electricity (kWh)

. Global average temperature over last one and a half century showing a more or less steady increase over the last fifty years or so. The fluctuations and their cycles can be correlated with various events like solar cycles

We do not know how close we are

to the tipping point. However we

need to act now to secure survival

of our future generations.

Current Indian Energy Resources(Ref: A Strategy for Growth of Electrical Energy in India, DAE, 2004; Coal data from Report of The Expert

Committee on Road Map for Coal Sector Reforms)

Years of depletion for electricity generation by single source

Current rate(697 TWh)

130 * 4.12 211 >1950

2052 rate(7957 TWh)

11.5 * 0.36 18.5 >170

Total Solar collection area required (based on MNES estimate 20 MW/km2) :At current rate- >>3900 sq. kmAt 2052 rate- >>44650 sq. km

*: To be preferentially used in transport sector

TOTAL DEATHS;

62 (47 PLANT, 15 DUE TO THYROID CANCER )ACUTE RADIATION SYNDROME;

134 (OUT OF WHICH 28 HAVE DIED)INCREASED CANCER INCIDENCE; AMONG RECOVERY WORKERSTHYROID CANCER; (CURABLE, WAS AVOIDABLE)

6000 ( 15 HAVE DIED)PROJECTED HEALTH CONSEQUENCES FROM VERY LOW DOSES TO LARGE SECTIONS OF POPULATIONS ARE QUESTIONABLEAN ESTIMATE IN 2006—93,000 WILL DIE DUE TO CANCER UP TO THE YEAR2056ANOTHER ESTIMATE IN 2009---985,000 DIED TILL 2004

Chernobyl Consequences

Energy Source Death Rate (deaths per TWh)

Coal world average 161 (26% of world energy, 50% of electricity)Coal China 278Coal USA 15Oil 36 (36% of world energy)Natural Gas 4 (21% of world energy)Biofuel/Biomass 12Peat 12Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

Comparative Seismic Hazard

Catastrophe syndrome

• Low quantitative risk is not a good enough criteria

• Maximum impact in public domain needs to be limited irrespective of the low probability

Not withstanding Fukushima most countries are going ahrad with nuclear power

( USA, UK, France, Russia, China, Japan, Finland ---)

The Indian Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR), a quick, safe, secure and proliferation resistant

solution for the energy hungry world AHWR is a 300 MWe vertical pressure tube type, boiling light water cooled and heavy water moderated reactor (An innovative configuration that can provide low risk nuclear energy using available technologies)

AHWR can be configured to accept a range of fuel types including LEU, U-Pu , Th-Pu , LEU-Th and 233U-Th in full core

AHWR Fuel assemblyAHWR Fuel assembly

Bottom Tie Plate

Top Tie Plate

Water Tube

Displacer Rod

Fuel Pin

Major design objectives

Significant fraction of Energy from Thorium

Several passive features 3 days grace period No radiological impact

Passive shutdown system to address insider threat scenarios.

Design life of 100 years.

Easily replaceable coolant channels.

11

PSA Level 3 calculations for AHWR indicate practically no probability of impact in public domain

Plant familiaisation & identification of design aspects important to severe accident

Plant familiaisation & identification of design aspects important to severe accident

PSA level-1 : Identification of significant events with large contribution to CDF

PSA level-1 : Identification of significant events with large contribution to CDF

Level-2 : Source Term (within Containment) Evaluation through Analysis

Level-2 : Source Term (within Containment) Evaluation through Analysis

Release from Containment Release from Containment

Level-3 : Atmospheric Dispersion With Consequence Analysis

Level-3 : Atmospheric Dispersion With Consequence Analysis

Level-1, 2 & 3 PSA activity block diagramLevel-1, 2 & 3 PSA activity block diagram

Variation of dose with frequency exceedence(Acceptable thyroid dose for a child is 500 mSv)

Iso-Dose for thyroid -200% RIH + wired shutdown system unavailable (Wind condition in January on

western Indian side)

Contribution to CDF

SWS: Service Water System

APWS: Active Process Water System

ECCS HDRBRK: ECCS Header Break

LLOCA: Large Break LOCA

MSLBOB: Main Steam Line Break Outside Containment

SWS63%

SLOCA15%

10-3 10-2 10-1 100

10-14

10-13

10-12

10-11

10-10

Fre

qu

ency

of

Exc

eed

ence

Thyroid Dose (Sv) at 0.5 Km

1 mSv 0.1 Sv 1.0 Sv 10 Sv

10-

14

10-

13

10-

12

10-

11

10-

10

AHWR300-LEU provides a robust design against external as well as internal threats, including insider malevolent acts. This feature contributes to strong security of the reactor through implementation of technological solutions.

Reactor Block Components

AHWR 300-LEU is a simple 300 MWe system fuelled with LEU-Thorium fuel, has advanced passive safety features,

high degree of operator forgiving characteristics, no adverse impact in public domain, high proliferation

resistance and inherent security strength.

Peak clad temperature hardly

rises even in the extreme condition of

complete station blackout and failure

of primary and secondary systems.

STRONGER PROLIFERATION RESISTANCE WITH AHWR 300-LEU

MUCH LOWER PLUTONIUM PRODUCTIONMuch Higher 238Pu & Lower Fissile Plutonium

Reduced Plutonium generation

MODERN LWR

AHWR300-LEU

238Pu239Pu240Pu

242Pu

241Pu

238Pu 3.50 %239Pu 51.87 %240Pu 23.81 %241Pu 12.91 %242Pu 7.91 %

238Pu 9.54 %239Pu 41.65 %240Pu 21.14 %241Pu 13.96 %242Pu 13.70 %

High 238Pu fraction and low fissile content of Plutonium

The French N4 PWR is considered as representative of a modern LWR.. The reactor has been referred from “Accelerator-driven Systems (ADS) and Fast Reactor (FR) in Advanced Nuclear Fuel Cycles”, OECD (2002)

The composition

of the fresh

as well as the

spent fuel of

AHWR300-LEU

makes the

fuel cycle

inherently

proliferation

resistant.

MODERN LWR

AHWR300-LEU

232U 0.00 %233U 0.00 %234U 0.00 %235U 0.82 %236U 0.59 %238U 98.59 %

232U 0.02 %233U 6.51 %234U 1.24 %235U 1.62 %236U 3.27 %238U 87.35 %

232U233U234U

236U

235U

238U

Presence of 232U in uranium from spent fuel

Uranium in the spent fuel contains about 8% fissile isotopes, and hence is suitable to be reused in other reactors. Further, it is also possible to reuse the Plutonium from spent fuel in fast reactors.

AHWR300-LEUprovides a betterutilisation ofnatural uranium,as a result ofa significantfraction of theenergy is extractedby fission of 233U,converted in-situfrom the thoriumfertile host.

With high burn up possible today, LEU-Thorium fuel can lead to

better/comparable utilisation of mined Uranium

Nuclear power with greater proliferation

resistance

Enrichment Plant LEU

Thermal reactors

Safe &Secure

ReactorsFor ex. AHWR

LEU Thorium fuel

Reprocess Spent Fuel Fast

Reactor

Recycle

ThoriumReactorsFor ex. Acc. Driven MSR

Recycle

Thorium

Thorium

Uranium

MOX

LEU-Thorium

233UThorium

Thorium

For growth in nuclear

generation beyond thermal reactor

potential

Present deploymentOf nuclear power

GREATER SHARE FOR NUCLEAR IN ELECTRICITY SUPPLY

REPLACE FOSSIL HYDRO- CARBON IN A PROGRESSIVE MANNER

RECYCLE CARBON- DIOXIDE DERIVE MOST OF PRIMARY ENERGY THROUGH SOLAR & NUCLEAR

Sustainable development of energy sector Transition to Fossil Carbon Free Energy Cycle

Fossil Energy Resources

Nuclear Energy Resources

Hydrogen

ENERGY CARRIERS

(In storage or transportation)

• Electricity

• Fluid fuels

(hydro-carbons/ hydrogen)

Biomass

WASTE• CO2

• H2O

• Other oxides and products

Nuclear Recycle

Sustainable Waste Management Strategies

CO2

Sun

Urgent need to reduce use of fossil carbon in a progressive manner

chemical reactor

CO2

CH4 FluidHydro carbons

Electricity

Electricity

Carbon/Hydrocarbons

Other recycle modes

Thank you

Strategies for long-term energy security

Hydroelectric

Non-conventional

Coal domestic

Hydrocarbon

Nuclear (Domestic 3-stage programme)

Projected requirement*

*Ref: “A Strategy for Growth of Electrical Energy in India”, document 10, August 2004, DAE

No imported No imported reactor/fuelreactor/fuel

Deficit to be filled by fossil fuel / LWR imports

LWR (Imported)

FBR using spent fuel from LWR

LWR import: 40 GWe LWR import: 40 GWe Period: 2012-2020Period: 2012-2020

Deficit 412 GWe

Required coal import:Required coal import:1.6 billion tonne1.6 billion tonne** in in

20502050

** - Assuming 4200 kcal/kg - Assuming 4200 kcal/kg

Deficit 7 GWe

The deficit is The deficit is practically wiped practically wiped out in 2050out in 2050