atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power | 04.2019

More documents

Recommendations

Info

atw Vol. 64 (2019) | Issue 4 ı April 232 NEWS Top IAEA: Member states discuss modelling human resource development for nuclear power (iaea) Modelling human resource development can be an effective tool to assist nuclear newcomer countries in understanding the required competencies and workforce needed to establish and maintain a safe, secure and sustainable nuclear power programme. The IAEA is providing a modelling tool that can help countries in planning and educating the required human resources. “Human resource development for nuclear power requires a national effort and will involve a Member State’s government, education system, existing nuclear organizations and national utilities and industries,” said Dohee Hahn, Director of the IAEA Division of Nuclear Power. Planning for this endeavor therefore requires a comprehensive national analysis. “Modelling is uniquely suited to support this effort. The IAEA will continue to assist Member States as they examine their workforce.” The IAEA provides helpful guidance for Member States to survey their workforce and educational systems to identify and close gaps in their workforce for nuclear power. One example for its guidance and assistance is the Nuclear Power Human Resource (NPHR) Model, provided to Member States for use in analyzing their human resource development. The NPHR modelling tool is a system dynamics simulation of a nuclear power programme and the national nuclear workforce. The model includes the educational tracks, training, and career cycles for the workforce supporting the owner/operator organizations, the regulatory body, and the construction workforce. The tool is useful for providing a long perspective look at the workforce to determine any skill gaps that might present risk to the programme. More than 14 Member States have so far been trained in using the model. Users of the modelling tool from ten nuclear newcomer countries (Egypt, Ghana, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Morocco, Niger, Nigeria, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkey and Uganda) gathered for the Technical Meeting on Human Resource Development Analysis and the Use of the NPHR Modelling Tool for New Nuclear Power Progammes, held from 12 to 15 February 2019 at the IAEA. In addition, experts from operating countries (France, Russia, the UK and the USA) highlighted the status of their nuclear workforce and the challenges that every country may face. Each of the embarking countries presented results of their human resource development studies and explained how they used the model. Most Member States indicated that their national workforce studies were directed by the nuclear energy programme implementing organization (NEPIO) and conducted with participants from other relevant organizations. The studies relied on data from the national education system and the national workforce. Several Member States indicated that modifications to the model were needed to properly reflect their education system. Participants reported on additional modelling they did in their countries to validate modelling results and on national gaps that they had identified as well as decisions made to close them. Main take-away points were the identification of key events during programme development with which the human resource development plan must be coordinated: the delivery of a full scale simulator of a reactor control room and the delivery of fuel prior to commissioning. Participants also discussed the other factors that can affect the workforce requirements, and the resources available to embarking countries. The model users highlighted that working groups composed of representatives from different national organizations should support the analysis and reiterated the need for a national effort. Human resource development and the NPHR Model Human resource development is one of the 19 infrastructure issues identified in the three-phased, comprehensive IAEA Milestones Approach which enables a sound programme development process. It is an important component for developing the nuclear power infrastructure and must be started at the earliest phases of a nuclear power programme. Suitably qualified and experienced workers are required in every phase of the programme. It can take more than a decade to grow the required skills in sufficient numbers for the organizations that need them, and the resulting workforce must be sustained for the life time of the plant. | | www.iaea.org NEI: Why we should listen to Bill Gates on nuclear energy (nei) As the founder of one of the world’s most recognized and successful companies, Bill Gates receives a lot of attention for what he says and does. When Bill Gates talks, people listen. And today, Bill Gates is talking about nuclear energy. In his 2018 year-in-review blog post, Gates said: “Nuclear is ideal for dealing with climate change, because it is the only carbon-free, scalable energy source that’s available 24 hours a day.” But to Bill Gates, nuclear energy is not just a technology that can help us meet climate change goals; it also can be used to reduce global poverty. Gates believes that if we are able to expand access to affordable and clean electricity, it would drastically improve living conditions for millions and would ultimately be a huge step in lifting those people out of poverty. Gates has done more than just write about the benefits of nuclear energy. In 2006, he helped launch TerraPower LLC, a nuclear reactor design company that aims “to improve the world through nuclear energy and science.” In Gates’s view, investing in advanced nuclear technology can help America regain its position as the global leader on nuclear energy while fighting poverty and driving worldwide decarbonization. “Nuclear is ideal for dealing with climate change, because it is the only carbon-free, scalable energy source that´s available 24 hours a day.” – Bill Gates on why he believes in the potential of nuclear. https://bit.ly/2DSSXUS As important as Bill Gates’ voice is to the cause of promoting nuclear energy as a critical solution to solving complex global problems, he is hardly alone among technology entrepreneurs. The late Paul Allen, who was co-founder of Microsoft Corp. with Bill Gates, also championed the benefits of nuclear energy. And Peter Thiel, the co-founder of PayPal, Palantir Technologies and Founders Fund, wrote a New York Times op-ed arguing for adapting U.S. energy policy to support a new atomic age. Thiel wrote: “If we are serious about replacing fossil fuels, we are going to need nuclear power, so the choice is stark: We can keep on merely talking about a carbon-free world, or we can go ahead and create one.” Gates, Allen and Thiel are just a few names of our nation’s most technologically savvy business leaders who have invested in promoting the value of nuclear energy. And as more and more organizations and environmental News
atw Vol. 64 (2019) | Issue 4 ı April Operating Results December 2018 Plant name Country Nominal capacity Type gross [MW] net [MW] Operating time generator [h] Energy generated, gross [MWh] Month Year Since commissioning Time availability [%] Energy availability [%] *) Energy utilisation [%] *) Month Year Month Year Month Year OL1 Olkiluoto BWR FI 910 880 744 680 983 7 001 022 261 655 208 100.00 88.25 99.05 87.24 100.58 87.82 OL2 Olkiluoto BWR FI 910 880 744 686 482 7 597 361 251 896 543 100.00 95.31 100.00 94.58 100.29 94.27 KCB Borssele PWR NL 512 484 744 379 826 3 514 770 161 721 689 99.47 79.32 99.46 79.00 100.03 78.49 KKB 1 Beznau 7) PWR CH 380 365 744 286 584 2 588 023 127 334 110 100.00 78.73 100.00 78.26 101.43 77.68 KKB 2 Beznau 7) PWR CH 380 365 744 285 074 3 185 534 134 350 407 100.00 96.40 100.00 96.28 100.84 95.62 KKG Gösgen 7) PWR CH 1060 1010 744 794 572 8 680 941 313 875 528 100.00 94.10 99.99 93.77 100.75 93.49 KKM Mühleberg BWR CH 390 373 744 283 870 3 066 170 127 404 315 100.00 92.84 98.80 92.01 97.83 89.75 CNT-I Trillo PWR ES 1066 1003 744 789 917 8 267 245 247 291 669 100.00 89.51 100.00 89.26 99.16 88.00 Dukovany B1 PWR CZ 500 473 729 362 664 3 599 011 112 229 493 97.98 83.36 97.06 82.84 97.49 82.17 Dukovany B2 2) PWR CZ 500 473 744 370 524 3 611 634 108 234 171 100.00 84.01 99.98 83.55 99.60 82.46 Dukovany B3 PWR CZ 500 473 161 70 038 3 875 614 106 498 041 21.64 90.72 21.25 90.37 18.83 88.48 Dukovany B4 PWR CZ 500 473 744 376 529 3 171 527 106 443 269 100.00 74.18 99.99 72.99 101.22 72.41 Temelin B1 PWR CZ 1080 1030 744 809 838 7 879 748 114 361 042 100.00 83.58 99.94 83.33 100.60 83.18 Temelin B2 PWR CZ 1080 1030 744 816 260 7 782 571 109 272 517 100.00 82.29 99.99 82.14 101.40 82.21 Doel 1 2) PWR BE 454 433 0 0 1 229 715 135 444 462 0 30.83 0 30.81 0 30.91 Doel 2 2) PWR BE 454 433 0 0 1 549 672 133 801 939 0 38.82 0 38.70 0 38.89 Doel 3 PWR BE 1056 1006 744 804 825 3 963 264 255 132 485 100.00 42.82 100.00 42.19 101.82 42.62 Doel 4 2) PWR BE 1084 1033 292 188 760 5 827 569 260 373 410 39.24 62.54 22.26 60.98 22.26 60.65 Tihange 1 PWR BE 1009 962 744 760 609 7 991 982 298 830 858 100.00 91.59 100.00 91.05 101.61 90.59 Tihange 2 3) PWR BE 1055 1008 0 0 5 702 393 254 651 930 0 62.33 0 61.67 0 62.04 Tihange 3 3) PWR BE 1089 1038 0 0 2 332 443 271 227 273 0 24.40 0 24.37 0 24.43 233 NEWS Plant name Type Nominal capacity gross [MW] net [MW] Operating time generator [h] Energy generated, gross [MWh] Time availability [%] Energy availability [%] *) Energy utilisation [%] *) Month Year Since Month Year Month Year Month Year commissioning KBR Brokdorf DWR 1480 1410 744 952 106 10 375 751 350 567 810 100.00 90.60 94.33 84.72 86.08 79.65 KKE Emsland 4) DWR 1406 1335 744 1 007 298 11 495 686 346 818 969 100.00 94.78 100.00 94.67 96.21 93.33 KWG Grohnde DWR 1430 1360 744 1 013 399 10 946 635 377 574 214 100.00 92.82 99.98 91.61 94.60 86.79 KRB C Gundremmingen SWR 1344 1288 744 1 005 494 10 361 862 330 941 755 100.00 90.41 100.00 89.85 99.93 87.51 KKI-2 Isar DWR 1485 1410 744 1 084 754 12 127 490 353 725 813 100.00 95.46 100.00 95.24 97.90 92.92 KKP-2 Philippsburg DWR 1468 1402 744 1 068 384 10 993 639 366 161 155 100.00 90.63 100.00 90.47 96.33 84.05 GKN-II Neckarwestheim 2) DWR 1400 1310 744 1 025 400 9 703 700 329 826 834 100.00 81.35 100.00 81.00 98.80 79.29 groups stand behind carbon-free nuclear energy, the support for nuclear has never been so vast and varied. Some of the smartest thinkers of our time are calling on us to see nuclear energy for its potential to change the world. It’s time we listen. | | www.nei.org EU needs all low-carbon sources to achieve its 2050 decarbonisation goals (foratom) Reflecting on how low-carbon technologies can help the European Union achieve its 2050 decarbonisation objectives and what the needs of the industrial sector are when it comes to increased electrification were the main topics discussed during an event hosted in Brussels by the Permanent Representation of Romania to the EU and organised in the context of the country’s Presidency of the Council. The event “Solutions for a 2050 Carbon- free Europe”, organised by the Romanian Ministry of Energy in cooperation with FORATOM and the Romanian Atomic Forum (ROMATOM), gathered together more than 100 representatives of EU Member States, EU institutions and power industries. The conference provided participants with a platform to exchange views on how low-carbon technologies can together contribute to reaching EU climate goals. During his keynote speech, EU Commissioner for Climate Action & Energy Miguel Arias Cañete stated that by 2050 the deployment of renewables and a stable share of nuclear energy is the solution to make the European power sector carbon- free. He also underlined that the role of low-carbon technologies is essential in reaching carbon-neutrality. This approach was echoed by the Ro manian Minister of Energy Anton Anton, who – in his introductory speech – reiterated that all low-carbon energy sources need to be explored in the future in order to ensure a sustainable development of economy. He also stated that Europe has already managed to achieve a lot in this field, also thanks to the contribution of nuclear energy. Fabien Roques, Executive Vice President of FTI Compass Lexecon Energy presented in detail a recent study entitled “Pathways to 2050: role of nuclear in a low-carbon Europe”, commissioned by FORATOM pro viding the vision for the nuclear sector by midcentury. According to the study, nuclear energy provides an important contribution to an efficient transition towards a decarbonised European power system as it can help ensure compliance with EU emissions targets, avoid temporary increase of emissions and locking in fossil fuels investments. The complementarity role of nuclear for renewables was also emphasised. *) Net-based values (Czech and Swiss nuclear power plants gross-based) 1) Refueling 2) Inspection 3) Repair 4) Stretch-out-operation 5) Stretch-in-operation 6) Hereof traction supply 7) Incl. steam supply 8) New nominal capacity since January 2016 9) Data for the Leibstadt (CH) NPP will be published in a further issue of atw BWR: Boiling Water Reactor PWR: Pressurised Water Reactor Source: VGB News
Page 1 and 2: nucmag.com 2019 4 The Role of Resou
Page 3 and 4: atw Vol. 64 (2019) | Issue 4 ı Apr
Page 5 and 6: Kommunikation und Training für Ker
Page 37 and 38: Wir bieten Ihnen: P Eine abwechslun
Page 51: atw Vol. 64 (2019) | Issue 4 ı Apr
Page 55 and 56: All results are from a survey of 2,
Page 59 and 60: Kommunikation und Training für Ker

atw - International Journal for Nuclear Power | 04.2019

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?