atw International Journal for Nuclear Power | 04.2020

More documents

Recommendations

Info

atw Vol. 65 (2020) | Issue 4 ı April 188 Generation IV | The Key Challenges in the Race for Commercialization INSIDE NUCLEAR WITH NUCNET Designers of new nuclear reactors need to find the right funding model and bridge the gap between concept and prototype. The problem for developers of Generation IV nuclear power plants is that it is too early in the development process for investors and potential customers to bet significant money on the winners from an increasingly crowded field. A working prototype would give developers a reactor model they could sell to customers. As yet, no one has got that far. New patterns of investment could help. Public-private partnerships for reactor development, of the type formed by NuScale and the Bill Gates-backed TerraPower with the US Department of Energy, are creating opportunities for entrepreneurial developers who can harness the knowhow and get access to funds. One revenue model that holds promise for developers of small modular reactors (defined by the International Atomic Energy Agency as units with electrical power ratings of less than 300 MW) is to offer heat as the primary output of their plants. Heat can be used to generate electricity, but it can also be used for process heat for industry, especially for manufacturing chemicals, the production of hydrogen, and desalinisation. The combination of revenues from these heat streams could expand the business case for advanced reactors. US think-tank Third Way says companies investing in Generation IV technologies are being built and funded because the innovators and investors see profit in creating an answer to the global energy paradox – there are 1.3 billion people in the world without access to reliable electricity. “Advanced nuclear can provide that electricity while cutting global carbon emissions,” the think-tank said. Generation IV reactors offer the promise of improved safety, efficiency, and lower costs. A 2017 study by Energy Innovation Reform Project put the average levelised cost of electricity (LCOE) at $ 60/MWh, or 39 % lower than the $ 99/MWh expected by the US Energy Information Agency for pressurised-water reactor nuclear plants entering service in the early 2020s. The LCOE is the long-term price at which the electricity produced by a nuclear plant will have to be sold at for the investor to cover all their costs including a profit. There are other advantages that could be unlocked by the development of Generation IV plants. Up-front capital is less than for conventional reactors and lead times are shorter. The proliferation risk is lower because used nuclear fuel can be used. Some models offer the possibility of burning actinides to further reduce waste and of being able to „breed more fuel“ than they consume. Many can be factory-manufactured and transported to isolated, energy-hungry areas on the back of vehicles. The problem remains that Generation IV plants still require substantial R&D effort, preventing their commercial adoption in the short term. In the US and Canada more than 50 companies representing more than $ 1 bn in investor money, are pursuing technical innovations in nuclear energy. They include big-name projects like TerraPower and small startups including California-based Oklo, which recently received a site use permit to build a demonstration Aurora energy plant – comprising a small reactor with integrated solar panels – on the Idaho National Laboratory site. There are significant differences in the timelines and prospects for success between developers of SMRs, depending on the type of technology they are pursuing. Plants based on established light-water reactor technologies, which have been in use since the 1950s, are inevitably closer to fruition than plants based on fast neutron reactors that do not use water as a moderator or coolant. Potential new coolants for Generation IV plants include liquid metal, high temperature gases, and molten salt. Third Way says nuclear reactors using these coolants can be even safer than most light-water reactors. The higher operating temperatures of coolants like helium, liquid metals, and molten salts more readily lend themselves to industrial applications requiring high temperature process heat – exactly the kind of applications that would add value to the business model. Another major focus is developing thorium-based, molten- salt reactors – which scientists hope can be developed to help meet the world’s growing need for energy without contributing to global warming. These reactors are powered by controlled fission reactions in the same way as conventional uranium reactors. However, the technology could prove to be cheaper and cleaner, while the use of thorium – which is less radioactive than uranium – may generate less waste. India has a three-stage programme to develop thorium fueled reactors. The country plans to use advanced heavy-water reactors fueled with U-233 obtained from the irradiation of thorium in PHWRs and fast reactors. Replacing water as a coolant with liquid molten salt could tap more of the energy available in radioactive materials and reduce the risk of a meltdown by slowing the nuclear reactions automatically if they get too hot. The South China Morning Post reported that Xu Hongjie, director of China’s molten-salt program, said China had mastered the technology in laboratories and planned to put it into commercial use by 2030 – before anyone else did so. The newspaper said China has invested about 2 billion yuan ($ 300 m) over the past few years in molten salt research and development, but building the plants will require tens of billions more. A first objective for China is reported to be the design and development of a first-of-a-kind 100 MW thorium molten salt reactor in 2020 in the city of Wuwei in Gansu province. Commercial development is targeted for the early 2030s. Another aspect of the R&D effort is that developers need places to test their technologies, develop materials, and new types of reactor fuel. Public-private partnerships with government agencies, labs, private companies, and non-profit R&D centres are vital. A number of public-private partnerships have made progress. NuScale’s cost-sharing agreement with the Inside Nuclear with NucNet Generation IV | The Key Challenges in the Race for Commercialization
atw Vol. 65 (2020) | Issue 4 ı April DOE covers design and licensing work for its 60-MW-SMR. TerraPower has a $ 60 m grant from the DOE for its work with Southern, a nuclear utility, and Oak Ridge National Laboratory on its molten chloride salt reactor. Southern and other partners, such as the Electric Power Research Institute, add their resources, including funds and expertise, to the effort. The most significant international endeavor to make progress with Generation IV technology is the Generation IV International Forum (GIF), a cooperative effort set up by nine founding-member countries (it now has 14 member countries) in 2000 to carry out the R&D needed to establish the feasibility and performance capabilities of Generation IV nuclear energy systems. The forum aims to pool resources, allowing scientists to develop safer and cheaper next-generation systems. It wants to commercially deploy Generation IV systems by 2040. The six technologies undergoing R&D are the gascooled fast reactor, lead-cooled fast reactor, molten salt reactor (MSR), supercritical water-cooled reactor, sodiumcooled fast reactor (SCFR) and very high-temperature reactor (VHTR). Of the six, three have attracted most attention from entrepreneurial developers: the MSR, SCFR, VHTR designs. US national labs have rated these three designs as having the greatest likelihood of success in the next decade. Yet the challenges they face are enormous. No one has ever built a commercial scale unit for any of these designs and put the unit into revenue service for a nuclear utility. The capital and operational costs to build and operate a first-of-a-kind (FOAK) unit are still in a process of discovery. The forum itself has acknowledged that for real long-term progress to be made in Generation IV development, advanced research facilities need to be built, the industry must become more involved and the “workforce of the future” should be developed. Regulation is another obstacle. Regulatory agencies have never assessed Generation IV reactors and the preparations for doing so are costly and time-consuming. Plans by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission to cooperate to speed up design reviews are a step in the right direction. Two companies – Terrestrial Energy, a developer of an MSR, and NuScale, which is developing an SMR based on LWR design principles – have so far signed up for the design review process. The two biggest challenges remain getting through the licensing process and convincing a nuclear utility, based on real experience with prototypes, that an advanced design can be built on time, within budget, and operated at a profit. For this to happen, a business model that includes heat output could be crucial. What next for Generation IV? The nuclear industry sees a number of key steps governments can take to speed up Generation IV deployment. Some governments – notably the US and China – are already making commitments of this sort. p Fund and support test environments for MSR, SCFR, VHTR; p Offer cost-sharing grants to cover design, testing and regulatory reviews. p Legislate to introduce power purchase agreements, which are a key instrument of project financing. p Offer loan guarantees for construction and tax credits for the first years of electricity production. p Streamline the licensing framework for design review and approval of construction. p Support R&D for advanced fuels and financial incentives to companies to start manufacturing them. Author NucNet The Independent Global Nuclear News Agency Editors responsible for this story: Dan Yurman & David Dalton Avenue des Arts 56 2/C 1000 Bruxelles, Belgium www.nucnet.org INSIDE NUCLEAR WITH NUCNET 189 Inside Nuclear with NucNet Generation IV | The Key Challenges in the Race for Commercialization
Page 1 and 2: nucmag.com 2020 4 ISSN · 1431-5254
Page 3 and 4: atw Vol. 65 (2020) | Issue 4 ı Apr
Page 7: atw Vol. 65 (2020) | Issue 4 ı Apr
Page 59 and 60:
Kommunikation und Training für Ker
show all

atw International Journal for Nuclear Power | 04.2020

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?