MEHB 513 Introduction on nuclear technology assignment GROUP MEMBERS:ID: SEEH CHONG CHIN ME088280 YEE QIAN WAHME087980 TING DING PINGME087970 LIM JIA YINGME087912.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
NuScales Passive Safety Approach Update September 2011 Contact Information: Bruce Landrey Chief Marketing Officer Dr. Jose N.
Advertisements

Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant Event Summary and FPL/DAEC Actions.
FUKUSHIMA RESPONSE George Attarian 1/21/2013. Fukushima Response Timeline: March 11: Event occurred March 18: INPO IER 11-1 issued (April 15) March 23:
Presented by: Muhammad Ayub Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority Safety Enhancement at Nuclear Power Plants in Pakistan Prospects of Nuclear Energy in.
Assessing the Challenges Resulting from the Events at Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station A Preliminary Discussion March 25, 2011 Walter L. Kirchner.
Vermont Yankee Presentation to VSNAP 7/17/13 VY/Entergy Fukushima Response Update Bernard Buteau.
Safety Implications of the Fukushima Nuclear Accident Sheldon L. Trubatch, Ph.D., J.D. Vice-Chairman Arizona Section American Nuclear Society.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA Outline Learning objectives Introduction Functions of Regulatory Body (RB) on EPR Appraisal guidance: Part.
LFR plant assessment against a Fukushima-like scenario Technical Workshop to Review Safety and Design Aspects of European LFR Demonstrator (ALFRED), European.
Status of ANS Standards Presented to NESCC 3/1/2011 Donald J. Spellman Vice Chair, ANS Standards Board.
MODULE “PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL” EMERGENCY PLANNING SAFE DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS Project BG/04/B/F/PP , Programme “Leonardo.
Overview of Incident at Fukushima Daiich Nuclear Power Station (1F) (Informal personal observations) April 2011.
The Harnessed Atom Lesson Eight Concerns. What concerns do people have about nuclear power plants: Safety at nuclear power plants – Design features –
Nuclear Energy. How does a nuclear reactor work? Is it a major energy source worldwide? Is it Green? Problems – Waste Disposal – Accidents Future – Research.
STRAGEGY FOR ENHANCING SHARE OF NUCLEAR ENERGY – Ensuring Safety & viability S.S. Bajaj Chairman, AERB 6 th Nuclear Energy Conclave, New Delhi 14 Oct 2014.
Sea Fukushima Dai-Ichi: Status before the Earthquake Units 1, 2, and 3 operate at full power. Steam produced by water boiling in the reactor vessel flows.
THE FUTURE OF FUKUSHIMA Can nuclear energy overcome its bad rap? CHAPTER 27 NUCLEAR FUTURE.
1 © 2013 Westinghouse Electric Company LLC. All Rights Reserved Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 David Cliff UK Licensing Manager AP1000 Westinghouse.
CHAPTER 2 LIVING WITH TECTONIC HAZARDS Risk or Opportunity?
Nuclear Energy General Concept. In 2001, total US generation of electricity was 3,777 billion kilowatt-hours.
Japanese Nuclear Accident And U.S. Response May 17, 2011.
Technical Meeting on Evaluation Methodology for Nuclear Power Infrastructure Development December, 2008 Nuclear Safety in Infrastructure Building.
Fukushima Incident Preliminary Analysis, Consequences and Safety Status of Indian NPPs Part-1 Dr. S.K.Jain Chairman & Managing Director NPCIL & BHAVINI.
Overview of Conventional 2-loop PWR Simulator. PCTRAN Dr
1 OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE at JAPANESE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS in 2005 October 12, 2006 Shigeyuki Wada Safety Information Division Japan Nuclear Energy Safety.
How they work and what happened at Fukushima Daiichi Plant.
Chapter 4 Nuclear Energy. Objectives Describe how nuclear fuel is produced. List the environmental concerns associated with nuclear power. Analyze the.
Outcome of the EU Nuclear Safety Stress Tests Andrej Stritar Chairman, ENSREG.
What about Japan?. Unit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4 Unit 5 Unit 6.
Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Team 07: Belsheim Joshua Francis Travis He Jiayang Moehling Anthony Ziemkowski Micah 1.
Fukushima Nuclear Disaster Team Alpha Student1 Name, Student2 Name, Student3 Name, Student4 Name, Student5 Name.
Nuclear Accident at the Fukushima Dai-ichi NPP June 2, 2011 Embassy of Japan in Bulgaria.
Fukushima Dai-ichi - LinkLink. Boiling Water Reactor – Video LinkVideo Link.
1 BREI Conducted Comprehensive Independent Reviews of Passive Heat Removal Systems with Ejectors-Condensers Euratom DEEPSSI Project for the design and.
Kevin Burgee Janiqua Melton Alexander Basterash
Nuclear Thermal Hydraulic System Experiment
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant Event Summary and FPL/DAEC Actions.
Nuclear Power Plant Meltdown Zach, Luke, and Nick.
March 11, 2011 to Present. Presentation Overview Reactor Design and FeaturesChronology of EventsCurrent Status of Each ReactorRecovery Actions Kashiwazaki-Kariwa.
Fukushima Power Plant – Japan Post March 11, 2011
INDONESIA NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR NUCLEAR POWER PROGRAMME INFRASTRUCTURE AND STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION Dr. A. Sarwiyana Sastratenaya Director, Center for.
IAEA Training Course on Safety Assessment of NPPs to Assist Decision Making Workshop Information IAEA Workshop Defence in Depth Safety Culture Lecturer.
Nuclear Power Plant How A Nuclear Reactor Works.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE FOR NUCLEAR POWER IN VIETNAM DEVELOPMENT OF THE NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE FOR NUCLEAR POWER IN VIETNAM Vuong Huu.
Fukushima I nuclear accident, March 11, 2011 What happened, why and a better design.
MEHB 513 – INTRODUCTION TO NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY GROUP ASSIGNMENT TITLE: Impact Evaluation of Fukushima Nuclear Accident on Technology Development of New.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Occupational Radiation Protection during High Exposure Operations Lecture 2-2 Lessons Learnt from Occupational.
THE FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR ACCIDENT ON THE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT OF NEW NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS 1.IRSHAD NURHAKIM BIN NORAHIM (ME088151) 2.LEE SZE TENG (ME087909)
By Annick Carnino (former Director of IAEA Division of Nuclear Installations Safety) PIME, February , 2012.
Enhancing Safety at America’s Nuclear Energy Facilities U.S. Industry’s Fukushima Response Joseph Pollock, Nuclear Energy Institute Christopher H. Mudrick,
UNIVERSITI TENAGA NASIONAL MEHB513 Introduction to Nuclear Technology SEM /2015 Group Assignment Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident GROUP MEMBERS:
Enhancing Safety at America’s Nuclear Energy Facilities U.S. Industry’s Fukushima Response Joseph Pollock, Nuclear Energy Institute Christopher H. Mudrick,
The March 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami in Japan: A Nuclear Perspective Mary Lou Dunzik-Gougar, PhD Associate Chair of Nuclear Engineering and Health Physics.
FLEX Mitigation Strategies Overview (Rec 4.2) Fukushima Regulatory Response Workshop April 5, 2012.
Japanese Nuclear Accident And U.S. Response April 20, 2011.
INTRODUCTION TO NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY MEHB513 SEM 2,2014/2015 GROUP PROJECT : EVALUATE THE IMPACTS OF THE FUKUSHIMA NUCLEAR ACCIDENT ON THE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT.
Nuclear power plant Performed by Zhuk A.D.. Purpose of this presentation is to show importance and danger of nuclear power plant. My opinion: I think.
Approaches and measures aimed at ensuring safety, preventing severe accidents in new RF NPP designs Gutsalov N.A. 10/03/2016.
FUKUSHIMA DAI-ICHI NUCLEAR DISASTER Organizational accident analysis
9.5 Nuclear Power Although nuclear power does not come from a fossil fuel, it is fueled by uranium, which is obtained from mining and is non-renewable.
Regulatory Control Training Workshop
Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant Event Summary and FPL/DAEC Actions
Fukushima Lessons Learned
Moving Forward From Fukushima Near-Term Task Force EP Recommendations
Presentation to the EPREV Lessons Learned Workshop
Session Name: Lessons Learned from Mega Projects
Summary of the Earthquake and Situation of the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa NPP
Japanese Nuclear Accident And U.S. Response
Approaches and measures aimed at ensuring safety, preventing severe accidents in new RF NPP designs Gutsalov N.A. 10/03/2016.
New Regulatory Requirements in Japan
Presentation transcript:

MEHB 513 Introduction on nuclear technology assignment GROUP MEMBERS:ID: SEEH CHONG CHIN ME YEE QIAN WAHME TING DING PINGME LIM JIA YINGME POO CHUAN HANME087568

Introduction on Fukushima accident  Occurred at 12 march 2011  Start with 9.0 earthquake at 11 march 2011  Caused 11 reactor to shut down (9377MWe) but 3 reactor at Fukushima failed to shut down (2 BWR-4 and 1 BWR-3).  Following with15m tsunami flooded disabled 12 of 13 backup diesel generator and also heat exchanger.  The reactors SCRAMmed but still continue to release 6.5% decay heat  battered-powered cooling system used but can only last till 12 march 2011  On day 4 to 6 of the event total of 940PBq radioactive release, which lead to the event rated 7 on INES scale.  The purpose of this assignment was to identify the changes in nuclear industry occurred after the accident.

Reactor Site Selection  Protection against natural disaster  Away from sea to protect against tsunami  Control tower to activate cooling system was destroyed  Distance of nuclear reactor from residential area  Reduce the radioactive exposure into public  Large evacuation cause great impact on economy

Reactor Site Selection  Increase height of the site level  Fukushima built at low sea level, easily attacked by tsunami  Reduce damage from floods  Geometrical conditions  Should build on hard rock foundations  Reduce impact from earthquake

Reactor Design Generation III+ Nuclear Reactor Passive Safety System

EPR Passive Cooling System Natural Convection

AP1000 Passive Cooling System

ESBWR Passive Cooling System

Plant Design

OSART (operational safety review team)  To evaluate the safety features of the NPP  Focus on operational procedures and cultures of management  42 missions done after Fukushima accident, 21 missions planned in the future

IRRS (Integrated Regulatory Review Service)  To review the nation regulation of safety  Advice and suggestion will given to the nation to improvised on the NPP conducting regulation  Follow up after 4 years  15 missions and 6 follow up is done.

INIR (Integrated nuclear infrastructure review mission)  evaluate the progress of development NPP of member states and the safety of existing NPP in terms of infrastructure  Service upon request  NPP expert will sent to requested member states to evaluate their infrastructure status by interview, site visit and document studies

EPREV (emergency preparedness review)  Review on how well a NPP can response to a emergency event such as natural disaster  Experts give services upon request.  Providing a basis to the member states so that they can come out with a long-term programme to strengthen their respond ability.

Mitigation Strategies to Prevent Nuclear Disasters

Prevention of AC Power Loss  AC Power is important to the safety of the nuclear power plant:-  To cool the nuclear fuels in the reactor and spent fuel pools.  To maintain radioactive containment systems.  To provide ventilation systems to minimize release of radioactive materials.  Will cause Station Blackout (SBO) if AC power is stopped.

Prevention of AC Power Loss  To prevent damage to nuclear reactor by SBO:-  Maintain a highly reliable AC electric power system.  Develop procedures / training to restore offsite and onsite emergency AC power when unavailable.  Ensure that the nuclear power plant can cope with SBO for a period of time and capability of restoring AC power on site as soon as possible.

Providing Cooling to Nuclear Fuel without on site AC Power  Pressurized Water Reactors (PWRs)  Additional sources of coolant water for the reactor and steam generators.  Methods to reduce pressure in and feed cooling water to the steam generators  Methods to cool the reactor core and minimize release of radioactive materials from containment.

Providing Cooling to Nuclear Fuel without on site AC Power  Boiling Water Reactor (BWRs)  Additional sources of coolant water for the reactor.  Methods to reduce reactor pressure and feed cooling water to the reactor.  Methods to cool the reactor core and reduce releases of radioactive materials from containment.

Providing Cooling to Nuclear Fuel without on site AC Power  For spent fuel pools:  Additional sources of coolant water for and methods to inject or spray to the spent fuel pools  Methods to control leakage from damage to the spent fuel pools  Methods to reduce releases of radioactive materials from the spent fuel pools

Conclusion Three changes in reactor site selection:  Position of nuclear plant  Ground height  Geometrical condition Changes in plant and reactor design:  Introduction of Generation III/III+ reactor  Plant anti-tsunami safety increased from 8 meter to 15 meter Effort in safety by IAEA:  Various group form with specific roles which were OSART, IRRS, INIR, EPREV and DSARS.

Conclusion continues.. Mitigation of accident  Effort from TEPCO in filter contaminated cooling water and delivery of water tank to store contaminated water during cooling down the hot nuclear fuel. The changes moving NPP toward better future with enforcing new safety rules and higher safety qualification.