atw 2018-12
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>atw</strong> Vol. 63 (<strong>2018</strong>) | Issue 11/<strong>12</strong> ı November/December<br />
Operating Results August <strong>2018</strong><br />
Plant name Country Nominal<br />
capacity<br />
Type<br />
gross<br />
[MW]<br />
net<br />
[MW]<br />
Operating<br />
time<br />
generator<br />
[h]<br />
Energy generated. gross<br />
[MWh]<br />
Month Year Since<br />
commissioning<br />
Time availability<br />
[%]<br />
Energy availability<br />
[%] *) Energy utilisation<br />
[%] *)<br />
Month Year Month Year Month Year<br />
OL1 Olkiluoto BWR FI 910 880 744 669 103 4 345 198 258 999 384 100.00 82.75 99.92 81.53 98.83 81.89<br />
OL2 Olkiluoto BWR FI 910 880 744 666 6<strong>12</strong> 4 924 872 249 224 053 100.00 93.13 100.00 92.19 97.39 91.80<br />
KCB Borssele 3) PWR NL 5<strong>12</strong> 484 87 42 413 2 214 214 160 421 133 <strong>12</strong>.04 75.22 <strong>12</strong>.02 74.76 11.13 74.29<br />
KKB 1 Beznau 7) PWR CH 380 365 744 252 974 1 470 392 <strong>12</strong>6 216 479 100.00 68.05 96.15 67.33 89.13 66.25<br />
KKB 2 Beznau 1,7) PWR CH 380 365 744 262 373 2 073 452 133 238 325 100.00 94.60 100.00 94.40 92.51 93.47<br />
KKG Gösgen 7) PWR CH 1060 1010 744 772 515 5 575 163 310 769 750 100.00 91.14 99.94 90.65 97.96 90.20<br />
KKM Mühleberg 1,2) BWR CH 390 373 432 139 480 2 069 740 <strong>12</strong>6 407 885 58.07 94.32 56.45 93.85 48.07 91.01<br />
CNT-I Trillo PWR ES 1066 1003 744 785 558 5 160 565 244 184 989 100.00 84.24 100.00 83.87 98.22 82.51<br />
Dukovany B1 PWR CZ 500 473 744 359 880 2 226 223 110 856 705 100.00 77.67 100.00 77.06 96.74 76.36<br />
Dukovany B2 PWR CZ 500 473 744 358 886 2 166 632 106 789 170 100.00 75.97 100.00 75.30 96.48 74.31<br />
Dukovany B3 PWR CZ 500 473 744 355 026 2 734 024 105 356 451 100.00 96.06 99.98 95.74 95.44 93.78<br />
Dukovany B4 PWR CZ 500 473 738 356 094 2 649 692 105 921 433 99.19 92.39 98.67 91.96 95.72 90.88<br />
Temelin B1 PWR CZ 1080 1030 744 797 599 4 713 715 111 195 009 100.00 75.34 99.67 75.02 99.08 74.76<br />
Temelin B2 2) PWR CZ 1080 1030 47 36 816 4 698 353 106 188 299 6.32 74.82 6.32 74.79 4.58 74.61<br />
Doel 1 2) PWR BE 454 433 0 0 1 229 715 135 444 462 0 46.31 0 46.28 0 46.44<br />
Doel 2 2) PWR BE 454 433 0 0 1 549 672 133 801 939 0 58.32 0 58.14 0 58.43<br />
Doel 3 3) PWR BE 1056 1006 668 697 467 814 287 251 983 508 89.79 14.10 88.55 13.15 88.35 13.13<br />
Doel 4 2) PWR BE 1084 1033 138 146 133 5 638 809 260 184 650 18.53 88.95 18.38 88.78 17.88 88.27<br />
Tihange 1 PWR BE 1009 962 744 728 677 5 829 907 296 668 783 100.00 99.70 99.97 99.44 97.06 99.31<br />
Tihange 2 2) PWR BE 1055 1008 426 430 706 5 702 393 254 651 930 57.29 93.64 56.16 92.64 55.07 93.20<br />
Tihange 3 3) PWR BE 1089 1038 0 0 2 332 443 271 227 273 0 36.66 0 36.62 0 36.70<br />
619<br />
NEWS<br />
Operating Results August <strong>2018</strong><br />
Plant name<br />
Type<br />
Nominal<br />
capacity<br />
gross<br />
[MW]<br />
net<br />
[MW]<br />
Operating<br />
time<br />
generator<br />
[h]<br />
Energy generated, gross<br />
[MWh]<br />
Time availability<br />
[%]<br />
Energy availability<br />
[%] *) Energy utilisation<br />
[%] *)<br />
Month Year Since Month Year Month Year Month Year<br />
commissioning<br />
KBR Brokdorf DWR 1480 1410 739 954 469 6 617 713 346 809 772 99.30 85.88 92.74 81.15 86.10 76.34<br />
KKE Emsland DWR 1406 1335 744 1 032 1<strong>12</strong> 7 417 601 342 740 884 100.00 92.16 100.00 92.00 98.62 90.47<br />
KWG Grohnde DWR 1430 1360 744 1 004 431 6 976 954 373 604 533 100.00 89.21 100.00 87.41 93.68 83.11<br />
KRB C Gundremmingen SWR 1344 <strong>12</strong>88 744 977 634 6 450 395 327 030 288 100.00 85.59 100.00 85.00 97.24 81.83<br />
KKI-2 Isar DWR 1485 1410 726 1 036 464 7 849 782 349 448 105 97.55 93.19 97.30 92.85 93.38 90.33<br />
KKP-2 Philippsburg DWR 1468 1402 735.75 943 960 6 892 786 362 060 302 98.89 85.92 98.32 85.71 84.51 79.15<br />
GKN-II Neckarwestheim 2) DWR 1400 1310 740 957 150 7 914 800 328 037 934 99.42 99.93 99.32 99.57 91.80 97.13<br />
to be low carbon replacements for<br />
ageing fossil fuel fired power plants.<br />
They display enhanced safety features<br />
and are suitable for non-electric applications,<br />
such as cooling, heating and<br />
water desalination. SMRs also offer<br />
options for countries with smaller<br />
electricity grids as well as regions with<br />
less developed infrastructure and for<br />
energy systems that combine nuclear<br />
and alternative sources, including<br />
renewables.<br />
SMRs require less upfront capital<br />
per unit, but their electricity generating<br />
cost will probably be higher than<br />
that of large reactors. Their costs will<br />
be weighed against alternatives and<br />
competitiveness will need to be pursued<br />
through economies of scale. An<br />
expeditious deployment of SMRs will<br />
involve the development of a resilient<br />
supply chain, human resources and a<br />
robust regulatory framework.<br />
“There are safety and security<br />
considerations that have to be taken<br />
into account at all stages of the<br />
development and implementation of<br />
SMR projects,” IAEA Deputy Director<br />
General Juan Carlos Lentijo, Head of<br />
the Department of Safety and Security.<br />
“The IAEA safety standards and<br />
security guidance provide a framework<br />
that can support in this regard.”<br />
| | www.iaea.org<br />
ENSREG approves first peer<br />
review report on ageing<br />
management<br />
(nucnet) The European Nuclear Safety<br />
Regulators Group (ENSREG) has<br />
approved the first topical peer review<br />
report on ageing management of<br />
nuclear power plants and research<br />
reactors.<br />
The peer review concluded that<br />
there are “no major deficiencies”<br />
in European approaches to ageing<br />
management. However, it identified<br />
areas where further work would<br />
improve ageing management.<br />
The review concluded that<br />
ageing management programmes<br />
for research reactors are not<br />
regulated or implemented as systematically<br />
and comprehensively as for<br />
commercial nuclear plants. This<br />
may be justified by the variety of<br />
research reactor designs and their<br />
potentially lower risk significance<br />
compared to commercial plants, but<br />
further attention is needed from both<br />
regulators and licensees the review<br />
said.<br />
*)<br />
Net-based values<br />
(Czech and Swiss<br />
nuclear power<br />
plants gross-based)<br />
1)<br />
Refueling<br />
2)<br />
Inspection<br />
3)<br />
Repair<br />
4)<br />
Stretch-out-operation<br />
5)<br />
Stretch-in-operation<br />
6)<br />
Hereof traction supply<br />
7)<br />
Incl. steam supply<br />
8)<br />
New nominal<br />
capacity since<br />
January 2016<br />
9)<br />
Data for the Leibstadt<br />
(CH) NPP will<br />
be published in a<br />
further issue of <strong>atw</strong><br />
BWR: Boiling<br />
Water Reactor<br />
PWR: Pressurised<br />
Water Reactor<br />
Source: VGB<br />
News