Spent Fuel Projections & Considerations

Report
Used Fuel Projections and
Considerations
John Kessler
Manager, Used Fuel and HLW Management
Program, [email protected]
Nuclear Infrastructure Council
Sustainable Fuel Cycle Meeting
9 June 2010
Outline
• Why we got to where we are
• Utility issues related to wet and dry storage
• Commercial used fuel inventories: present and future
projections
• Extended storage R&D
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
2
Re-fabricate/Recycle
Back-end of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle:
Original Plan (before ~ 1976)
Nuclear Power Plant
Reprocessing Plant
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Vitrified Waste
3
Geologic Repository
Key Developments in the 70’s in the U.S.
• Sharp increase in reprocessing costs
• India’s nuclear bomb test
• US decision to forego reprocessing and Pu
recycle
Result: a “once-through” fuel cycle
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
4
The Once-through Fuel Cycle
Dry Interim Storage
10 CFR 71
Used Fuel
10 CFR 50
Transportation
10 CFR 72
10 CFR 60/63
Utility
Licensees
U.S. DOE
?
Geologic Medium
Wet Storage
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
Offsite Storage
5
Current Situation
• No disposal
• No reprocessing
• No fast reactors
• Spent fuel pools are filling up
• No centralized interim storage
• Transportation not available for all used fuel types
• Therefore, nowhere for fuel to go
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
6
Industry Reaction to the Need for Prolonged
On-Site Storage
• Add more storage cells in the spent fuel pools
(“reracking”)
• Move used fuel from pools into dry storage
• Extract more energy per assembly (higher “burnups”)
• Attempt to build a centralized interim storage site
• Work on regulatory permission to transport high burnup
used fuel
• Extend the life of existing dry storage systems
• After January 31, 1998: damages lawsuits against DOE
for failure to start picking up used fuel
– Money coming from DOJ Judgment Fund
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
7
Centralized Interim Storage Example (Private Fuel Storage
Facility, Goshute Indian Reservation, State of Utah)
• Developed by a utility consortium, 40,000 MTU capacity
• 2005: NRC approval for construction, 40-year life
• Artist’s conception of site below:
A: rail line (52 km)
B: cask transfer building
C: concrete pads
D: concrete cask production
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
8
Used Fuel Wet and Dry Storage Technology is Mature
(Used Fuel Pool with Dry Storage Cask: Surry - Final TN-32
Loading)
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
9
On-Site Spent Fuel Dry Storage Systems
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
10
Dry Storage Casks at Connecticut Yankee
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
11
Surry ISFSI - Pad 1
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
12
Surry ISFSI - Pad 2
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
13
Surry ISFSI - Pad 3
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
14
Transportation Systems
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
15
Industry Trend from “Storage-Only” to “Dual Purpose Canisters”
1986 to 1999
Storage - only dry storage systems loaded
2000 to 2009
Dual-purpose Canisters loaded
2009 +
Dual Purpose: storage and transportation (requires two separate licenses)
Multi-Purpose: storage, transportation, disposal (requires three licenses – none exist yet)
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
16
“high” burnup
70000
60000
Average Burnup (MWD/MTU)
50000
40000
30000
Burnup range from the 60s to the 80s
20000
10000
Year
PWR Avg Burnup
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
BWR Avg Burnup
17
20
49
20
47
20
45
20
43
20
41
20
39
20
37
20
35
20
33
20
31
20
29
20
27
20
25
20
23
20
21
20
19
20
17
20
15
20
13
20
11
20
09
20
07
20
05
20
03
20
01
19
99
0
No transportation licenses
Historical and Projected Used Fuel “Burnup”
(megawatt-days per metric ton of uranium, MWD/MTU)
Inventory of Used Nuclear Fuel is Measured
Several Different Ways
• Number of assemblies
– More in a Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) than a
Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR)
• Metric tons of uranium (MTU)
– Similar MTUs in both BWRs and PWRs
• Number of dry storage casks
– Move to larger capacity casks (cheaper per assembly)
• Dry storage: 7 (1980s) to >60 assemblies per cask
today
– Still transportable by rail
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
18
Used Commercial Fuel Inventories
(as of 12/31/09)
• National totals:
– Wet storage: 169,696 assemblies at >50 reactor sites
– Dry storage: 1,232 casks, 51,585 assemblies in 32
states
• Top six states (casks/assemblies in dry storage)
– Illinois
– Pennsylvania
– South Carolina
– Virginia
– Georgia
– California
Data courtesy of ACI Nuclear Energy Solutions
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
19
CUMULATIVE US COMMERCIAL SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL INVENTORY (1986 to 2055)
SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL (Metric Tons Uranium)
160000
Dry Storage Cumulative
140000
Pool Inventory
Projected spent fuel and dry storage inventories after 2007
were projected by Energy Resources International, Inc. using
its SPNTFUEL model.
120000
100000
2055 ~ 70,200 MTU in dry storage
63,000 MTU in pool storage
Dec 2009: ~ 13,400 MTU in dry storage
50,000 MTU in pool storage
80000
60000
40000
20000
By 2055: >485,000 assemblies (per ACI Nuclear Energy Solutions)
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
20
54
20
50
52
20
20
46
48
20
20
42
44
20
20
38
40
20
20
34
36
20
20
30
32
20
20
26
28
20
20
22
24
20
20
18
20
20
20
14
16
20
20
10
12
20
20
06
08
20
20
02
04
20
20
98
00
20
19
94
96
19
19
90
92
19
19
19
19
86
88
0
ISFSI: Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
21
Potential Additional Used Fuel in a
“Renaissance”
800,000
700,000
Total
Inventory
(existing
plants only,
60-year life)
600,000
Total CSNF (MTU)
500,000
Revised total
CSNF from
expanded
nuclear (add
1000 Mwe/yr
from 2015 to
2075)
400,000
300,000
200,000
Revised total
CSNF from
expanded
nuclear
(increase 3%
per year
starting in
2015)
100,000
Current Yucca Mountain legal limit (63,000 MTU)
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Year
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
22
2060
2070
2080
2090
Yucca Mountain Technical Capacity is Much
Higher Than the Legal Limit
800,000
700,000
Total
Inventory
(existing
plants only,
60-year life)
600,000
Total CSNF (MTU)
500,000
EPRI’s projected technical capacity range
(~260,000-570,000 MTU, 4 to 9 times current legal limit)
400,000
Revised total
CSNF from
expanded
nuclear (add
1000 Mwe/yr
from 2015 to
2075)
300,000
200,000
Revised total
CSNF from
expanded
nuclear
(increase 3%
per year
starting in
2015)
100,000
Current legal limit (63,000 MTU)
1990
2000
2010
2020
2030
2040
2050
Year
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
23
2060
2070
2080
2090
Newest Storage Project: Extended Storage
• “Extended”: >>60 years
• Initial dry storage license periods: 20 years
– Was supposed to be long enough
• Existing EPRI work leads to licenses extended to 60 years
• But:
– Cancellation of Yucca Mountain?
• New disposal program could take decades
– New plants’ contracts with DOE: start taking spent fuel
20 years after plant shutdown
• means 80 to 100+ years
• Extended storage is not just a US problem
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
24
Functions of a Dry Cask Storage System that
Must be Maintained
• NUREG-1536 (NRC, 1997) identifies the functions
important to safety that the dry cask systems must
maintain:
– thermal performance
– radiological protection
– confinement
– sub-criticality
– retrievability
• Can the existing and future dry cask systems maintain
these functions for decades to come?
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
25
Temperature-related Dry Storage System
Degradation Mechanisms
• Fuel cladding creep caused by increased cladding
ductility and increased stress
– Due to higher temperatures causing higher pressures inside the
cladding
• Hydride reorientation in the spent fuel cladding
• Corrosion
• Degradation of neutron shielding
• Concrete dry-out and cracking
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
26
Changes as the System gets Older and Cooler
• Mostly good things
– Reduced metal creep rates
– Reduced corrosion rates
– Reduced gamma and neutron radiation
• Potential negatives (mostly related to cladding)
– Additional hydride precipitation
– Decreased cladding ductility
• Potentially more susceptible to breakage
during storage and transportation
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
27
Aging Management Options
• “Initial” activities
– Additional analyses of degradation mechanisms for
longer periods
– Enhanced monitoring and inspection
• “Eventually” (more costly, higher worker dose)
– Canning
– Repackaging
– Over-packaging
• When is “eventually”?
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
28
EPRI Initiated a Joint Effort in a November 2009
Workshop
• Attendees:
– EPRI
– NRC: SFST, RES, NRR
– DOE: NE, EM, RW
– Utilities
– Storage system vendors
– NEI
– NWTRB
• Title: Extended Storage Collaboration Program
– EPRI will be lead organization
– US and international participation
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
29
Purpose of the Program
• Evaluate what we already know
– Existing analyses: how far out in time?
– Existing data
– Existing operational issues (e.g., loading, monitoring,
testing)
• Identify the open items for even longer storage (gap
analysis)
• Suggestions for what needs to be done (and how, if
possible)
• Form a standing group to continue pursuing additional,
appropriate R&D
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
30
Conclusion: Industry Will do What is
Necessary to Keep Plants Running
• Continue cranking out dry storage systems as a stop-gap
measure
– Industry has not (yet) been successful completing a
centralized storage facility
– Will get harder and harder to continue adding to the
on-site storage inventory
• Space, dose, public concern limitations
• Shutdown plants: all that is left is the fuel
• Ensure wet and dry storage systems maintain their safety
functions
• Without an active disposal program, it becomes more
difficult to address the “what about the waste?” concern
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
31
Together…Shaping the Future of Electricity
© 2010 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.
32

similar documents