Infrastructure and Methodologies for the Justification of Nuclear Power Programmes

Agustin Alonso

• Publisher: Woodhead Publishing
• Year: 2012
• Print ISBN: 9781845699734
• eBook ISBN: 9780857093776
• Topic: Technology & Engineering
• Subtopic: Mechanical Engineering
• Index: Technology & Engineering

The potential development of any nuclear power programme should include a rigorous justification process reviewing the substantial regulatory, economic and technical information necessary for implementation, given the long term commitments involved in any new nuclear power project. Infrastructure and methodologies for the justification of nuclear power programmes reviews the fundamental issues and approaches to nuclear power justification in countries considering nuclear new build or redevelopment.Part one covers the infrastructure requirements for any new nuclear power programme, with chapters detailing the role and responsibilities of government, regulatory bodies and nuclear operator and the need for human resources and technical capability at the national level. Part two focuses on issues relevant to the justification process, including nuclear safety, radiation protection and emergency planning. Current designs and advanced reactors and radioactive waste management are also considered, along with the economic, social and environmental impacts of nuclear power development. Part three reviews the development of nuclear power programme, from nuclear power plant site selection and licensing, through construction and operation, and on to decommissioning. Finally, a series of valuable appendices detail the UK experience of justification, nuclear safety culture and training, and the multinational design evaluation programme (MDEP).With its distinguished editor and expert team of contributors, Infrastructure and methodologies for the justification of nuclear power programmes is an essential reference for international and national stakeholders in this field, particularly governmental, non-governmental and regulatory bodies, nuclear power operators and consultants.- Offers a comprehensive analysis of the infrastructure and methodologies required to justify the creation of nuclear power programmes in any country- Provides coverage of the main issues and potential benefit linked to nuclear power- Reviews the implementation of a nuclear power programme with particular reference to the requirements and methods involved in construction

1

Overview of infrastructure and methodologies for the justification of nuclear power programmes

A. Alonso, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain

Abstract:

Nuclear power has passed from a phase of euphoria to a long stagnation in many countries. The economic and environmental advantages of nuclear power have been recognized and a new phase of builds has started in new entrant countries and those with operating plants. In deploying nuclear energy the decision makers need to consider the long commitment, the concerns for safety and security, the high investment, the need for a scientific and technological infrastructure and the long-term management of radioactive waste. The full development of nuclear power requires the establishment of a global nuclear safety regimen based on national and international regulatory activities and on the justification of the desired programme.

Key words

nuclear power development

global nuclear safety regimen

nuclear power sustainability

used fuel management

nuclear power justification

1.1 The past, current and future phases in the development of nuclear power

The development of nuclear power has passed through different phases. There have been countries, notably France, Japan and South Korea, among others, where nuclear development has been maintained steadily through time, while in other countries, notably in Western Europe and in the USA, the first phase of euphoria has been followed by a long period of stagnation. Currently governments in many developed and developing countries have been pondering about the need for nuclear power, and a new euphoria for nuclear power – some call it renaissance – is building up in a more mature and reasonable way than before. This part of the chapter describes the origins and development of nuclear power, as well as current interests in the field.

1.1.1 The beginning and the euphoria of the pioneers (1953–1979)

The historic speech addressed by President Eisenhower in 1953 to the United Nations General Assembly is considered the beginning of nuclear power development for peaceful purposes. It certainly aroused a general enthusiasm, first among the then nuclear countries and later on all over the world. In many opening meetings and inauguration ceremonies, as in Calder Hall, officers said and believed that electricity generated by nuclear power will be so abundant and cheap that it will not be necessary to meter it. This euphoria propagated rapidly around the globe and every country started to think about developing nuclear power to generate electricity.

This first phase of excitement started to decline in the early 1970s, and in the 1980s it was converted into despair. The first large, for the time, commercial nuclear power plants put into operation were not as cheap as it was assumed, the construction times started to grow longer, the capacity factors were not as high as expected, and in many countries subsidies were needed.Moreover, regulatory requirements became more strict and demanding, quality assurance, maintenance and in-service inspection needed advanced technologies that were not always available, and environmental radiological impacts and radioactive waste management were not conducted in the most effective ways. Moreover, first within the industry itself and later on within some social organizations, a strong nuclear phobia started to grow fast within society. In March 1979 the TMI-2 accident erased the primitive euphoria and caused the cancellation of many nuclear power projects, mainly in the USA.

1.1.2 Nuclear phobia and the stagnant phase (1980–2000)

Although the TMI-2 accident did not cause any relevant radiological consequences, it suddenly revealed the vulnerability of nuclear power plants. A never-envisaged core meltdown was possible due to a combination of equipment failure and human error. Moreover, the Governor of Pennsylvania ordered the evacuation of the most sensitive part of the population – children and pregnant women – based on the wrong advice from the Chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC, that hydrogen explosion (impossible in practice, because of the absence of oxygen) within the pressure vessel could occur. These facts had a great impact on the growing nuclear phobia and on the lack of confidence in the industry and the regulator.

The many analyses conducted on the root causes and the development and consequences of the TMI-2 accident discovered the need for improvements in the design and operation of nuclear power plants and, more relevantly, the possibility of accidents producing severe damage in the core of the reactor. Regulatory requirements multiplied; new administrative procedures were promulgated; new instruments to cover severe accidents were required; and a relevant research programme to better know the phenomenology associated with severe accidents was soon initiated by the industry and the regulatory organizations. From that research effort, conducted within international participation, the science associated with severe accidents was understood and made it possible to develop technology to prevent severe accidents and to mitigate their consequences, which was incorporated, up to the maximum possible level, in the current reactors and is fully integrated into the new designs.

Nuclear phobia, enhanced by the TMI-2 accident, was a major factor behind the 1980 Swedish referendum which forced the government to establish a moratorium in the construction of new units and in fixing a programme of closing down the operating units by 2010, which has only partially been completed and is being reviewed. Social and political nuclear phobia, also enhanced by the TMI-2 accident, played a significant part in the decision taken in 1983 by the government of Spain to cancel the advanced construction of five large nuclear units and to establish a moratorium on the construction of new plants, which paralysed the expected development of nuclear energy in the country. Such phobia still exists in some political parties and non-governmental organizations, which are requesting the shutdown of the existing nuclear units, despite their high safety levels and recognized economic advantages.

Although of different design and with less strict operation requirements, the 1986 Chernobyl accident increased nuclear phobia all over the world, which produced a cancellation of nuclear projects, the conducting of referenda and the stagnation of nuclear development. Only a few countries, notably France, the Soviet Union, and some Eastern European and East Asian countries, continued with their nuclear development programmes.

The Chernobyl accident was behind the Italian 1987 referendum, which resulted in the complete disappearance of nuclear power installations in the country. Four nuclear units in operation and two under construction were cancelled. In its intention to renovate the nuclear fleet, the present Italian government has estimated that the cost of the decision to the country amounted to some 50 billion euros. The nuclear phobia shown in Germany against the transportation and storage in the country of high-level radioactive waste – from the reprocessing in France of German used fuel elements – was at the root of the country’s coalition government decision in 2000 to establish a new nuclear law limiting the total power produced in the 17 German operating nuclear units and prohibiting the construction of new nuclear plants.

1.1.3 The current renewed interest in nuclear energy

The increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the depletion of gas and oil resources and the volatility of their prices, the intermittence, low efficiency and high prices of renewable sources of energy, and the economic advantages of nuclear power plants have all stimulated the worldwide interest for nuclear energy, which may start a new renaissance based on the improved designs of water-cooled reactors.

Since 2000, society has become increasingly aware of the potential impacts of climate change, in part induced by the emission of greenhouse gases coming from the combustion of fossil fuels used for electricity production. At the same time, society has started to realize that safety in the operation of nuclear power plants has been constantly improved and new safer nuclear plant designs have been developed by the reactor suppliers. Some of these new designs have also been submitted to a certification process by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (US NRC) and the UK Office for Nuclear Regulation (UK ONR), and there is international interest in harmonizing the new designs through international organizations, such as the Nuclear Energy Agency of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (NEA/OECD) which is driving the Multinational Design Evaluation Programme (MDEP). The MDEP project is described in Appendix 5 of this book. All these factors form the basis of the new interest in nuclear power.

Although some countries in Western Europe still keep their moratoria on the construction of new nuclear power plants, other European countries, Finland and France in particular, have started the construction of new plants, while others, mainly the UK and Russia, have announced ambitious nuclear power programmes for the next two decades. The Asian countries, Japan, South Korea, China and India, that remained active during the stagnant phase have accelerated their nuclear power programmes. Likewise, American countries are also considering building new nuclear power plants, at a slower pace. All these ongoing activities, and many others not mentioned, sustain the idea that a new deployment of nuclear power is on the way.

The Japanese earthquake of 11 March 2011 and ensuing tsunami left the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear station without external power and an ultimate heat sink; despite the efforts made it was not possible to cool the reactors efficiently, and the reactor core in three of the six nuclear units in the site melted, releasing radioactive products to the atmosphere and the sea. These events have prompted the revision of the safety of currently operating nuclear power plants to test their abilities to cope with extraordinary circumstances. Such worldwide studies will serve to improve the safety of current and future nuclear reactor designs; nevertheless the events in Fukushima have increased the social nuclear phobia and created a certain delay in the renewed interest in nuclear power.

It is foreseeable that the new deployment will be based on thermal reactors belonging to the so called Generation III+, fuelled with enriched uranium, and cooled and moderated by pressurized water (PWRs) or boiling water (BWRs). The advanced Canadian heavy water reactors (HWRs/CANDU) will also be built in a few countries. The useful lifetime of these new builds will be 60 years or longer, therefore such new generation will cover the largest part of electricity generation by nuclear power in the twenty-first century. There will be sufficient uranium for a reasonable deployment of such designs; in most countries the fuel cycle will remain open, but the used fuel will probably be stored for future reprocessing, needed to keep nuclear energy sustainable.

To achieve that sustainability it will be necessary to design, test and deploy the so-called Generation IV reactors. There are two international projects to that aim: the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) driven INPRO project, with Russia the major sponsor, and the US Department of Energy (DOE) driven GIF project. Moreover, within the EURATOM framework research programmes there are several projects going on. The objective of this book is centred on current thermal reactors; the connexion with Generation IV reactors is only on the potential utilization of the fuel used in the thermal reactors.

1.2 The main factors shaping the deployment of nuclear power

The deployment of nuclear power is controlled by factors of different kinds that vary country by country. Some of these factors have to do with the decision makers, such as the recognition that nuclear energy implies a long-term commitment; there are also technical and economic limitations related, for instance, to the selection of the site, the technology to be deployed and the capital to be invested; there is also a concern for nuclear safety and security, non-proliferation and management of radioactive waste. The nuclear phobia strongly defended in many countries and society groups is also a hindrance to be considered. In the following paragraphs these issues are analysed.

Although many countries foresee rather large deployments of nuclear power plants, all of them are considering the factors mentioned above that shape such developments. New requirements from the analysis of the Fukushima events, mainly those related to siting and safety under extraordinary circumstances, will also be considered. The IAEA is also advising new countries on the need to judge the impact of such factors in the national development. A relevant ministerial conference was held in Beijing in ...

Table of contents

• Cover image
• Title page
• Table of Contents
• Copyright
• Contributor contact details
• Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy
• Chapter 1: Overview of infrastructure and methodologies for the justification of nuclear power programmes
• Part I: Infrastructure of nuclear power programmes
• Part II: Justification of nuclear power programmes
• Part III: Development of nuclear power programmes
• Part IV: Appendices
• Index