Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

UC Berkeley Per F. Peterson Professor Department of Nuclear Engineering University of California, Berkeley March 2, 2008 Nuclear Technology and Energy.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "UC Berkeley Per F. Peterson Professor Department of Nuclear Engineering University of California, Berkeley March 2, 2008 Nuclear Technology and Energy."— Presentation transcript:

1 UC Berkeley Per F. Peterson Professor Department of Nuclear Engineering University of California, Berkeley March 2, 2008 Nuclear Technology and Energy

2 UC Berkeley U.C. Berkeley and Nuclear Science Seaborgium Uranium Neptunium and Plutonium Americium Berkelium Lawrencium Californium

3 UC Berkeley Binding Energy: Why Nuclear Power is Possible The mass of an atom is smaller than the sum of its parts The difference is called the “mass defect” The “binding energy” is the energy required to hold the atom together E =  mc 2 If we split or combine atoms, we can release some of the binding energy

4 UC Berkeley Energy from Nuclear Fission Fission Fuel Energy Density: 8.2 x 10 13 J/kg Fuel Consumed by 1000-MW e Plant: 3.2 kg/day Waste:

5 UC Berkeley Energy from Nuclear Fusion Fusion Fuel Energy Density: 3.4 x 10 14 J/kg Fuel Consumed by 1000-MW e Plant: 0.6 kg/day Waste:

6 UC Berkeley Energy from Fossil Fuels Fossil Fuel (Coal) Energy Density: 2.9 x 10 7 J/kg Fuel Consumed by 1000-MW e Plant: 7,300,000 kg/day Waste: 2005 Global Coal Consumption: 5.4 billion tons

7 UC Berkeley Nuclear has very low life-cycle CO 2 emissions

8 UC Berkeley France closed its last coal mine in April, 2004

9 UC Berkeley California Electricity Consumption 2004

10 UC Berkeley Why renewed interest? Improved performance of existing U.S. nuclear plants

11 UC Berkeley Reliable Power Production * 2005 Preliminary Source: Global Energy Decisions / Energy Information Administration Updated: 4/06

12 UC Berkeley Stable, Low Production Costs Production Costs = Operations and Maintenance Costs + Fuel Costs Source: Global Energy Decisions Updated: 6/06 Cents per kwhr

13 UC Berkeley The major near-term question: can new nuclear plants be built on schedule, for a reasonable cost, and operate reliably, safely, and securely?

14 UC Berkeley Resource inputs will affect future capital costs and competition Nuclear: 1970’s vintage PWR, 90% capacity factor, 60 year life [1] –40 MT steel / MW(average) –190 m 3 concrete / MW(average) Wind: 1990’s vintage, 6.4 m/s average wind speed, 25% capacity factor, 15 year life [2] –460 MT steel / MW (average) –870 m 3 concrete / MW(average) Coal: 78% capacity factor, 30 year life [2] –98 MT steel / MW(average) –160 m 3 concrete / MW(average) Natural Gas Combined Cycle: 75% capacity factor, 30 year life [3] –3.3 MT steel / MW(average) –27 m 3 concrete / MW(average) 1. R.H. Bryan and I.T. Dudley, “Estimated Quantities of Materials Contained in a 1000-MW(e) PWR Power Plant,” Oak Ridge National Laboratory, TM-4515, June (1974) 2. S. Pacca and A. Horvath, Environ. Sci. Technol., 36, 3194-3200 (2002). 3. P.J. Meier, “Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Systems and Applications for Climate Change Policy Analysis,” U. WisconsinReport UWFDM-1181, August, 2002. Concrete + steel are >95% of construction inputs, and become more expensive in a carbon-constrained economy

15 UC Berkeley New nuclear infrastructure will be more highly optimized McGuire Nuclear Station Reactor Building Models. 1000 MW Reactor (Lianyungang Unit 1) 1978: Plastic models on roll-around carts 2000: 4-D computer aided design and virtual walk-throughs 2002 NRC processing time for 20-year license renewal: ~18 months

16 UC Berkeley The new passive light water reactors provide substantial improvements over earlier designs ESBWRAP-1000 Capable of safe shutdown without an external heat sink or AC power supply Large reductions in equipment and building size Reduced security costs

17 UC Berkeley New licensing and construction plans call for a high degree of design standardization Current NRC Construction License Review Plan

18 UC Berkeley The Generations of Nuclear Energy Source: DOE Generation IV Project

19 UC Berkeley Nuclear energy and transportation — Plug-in hybrids and low-carbon fuels

20 UC Berkeley World’s Largest Oil Accumulations: What future role for nuclear energy? NameTypeCountryOOIP (10 9 Bbl) OrinocoX-Heavy OilVenezuela1,200 AthabascaTar SandCanada869 Cold LakeTar SandCanada271 GhawarOil FieldSaudi Arabia190 BurganOil FieldKuwait190 Bolivar CoastOil FieldVenezuela160 MelekessTar SandRussia123 WabascaTar SandCanada119 Source: Roadifer 1987

21 UC Berkeley Canadian tar sands provide a very large resource Red Deer Edmonton Calgary Peace River Alberta Lloydminster Fort McMurray Cold Lake Athabasca Wabasca Production from oil sands in Alberta could be 2.8 million BOPD in 2015, up from 1.2 million BOPD in 2004. Current tar sands carbon intensity is 15 to 40% higher than for conventional oil production

22 UC Berkeley The Pebble Bed Modular Reactor Being constructed in South Africa Helium-cooled modular reactor uses “pebble fuel” Power output options: –200 MWe gas Brayton cycle –136 MWe gas Brayton and 286 MWt process steam production –500 MWt high- temperature process heat –250 MWc hydrogen Can be used to produce low-carbon transportation fuels

23 UC Berkeley ORNL DWG 2001-102R High temperature reactors can make hydrogen directly through for thermo-chemical processes

24 UC Berkeley Nuclear Waste

25 UC Berkeley Major international R&D efforts have improved the current understanding of nuclear waste disposal Broad scientific consensus exists that deep geologic isolation can provide long-term, safe and reversible disposal for nuclear wastes 25 years of scientific and technical study led to a positive site suitability decision for Yucca Mountain in 2002

26 UC Berkeley Geologic Isolation Places Nuclear Wastes Deep Underground Nuclear energy produces small volumes of waste which makes it practical to isolate it from the environment.

27 UC Berkeley Long-term Safety Requirements are Stringent Compared to Those for Chemicals 28 miles 640 miles The potential long-term impact from geologic disposal is limited groundwater contamination, a problem that current public health systems already understand how to manage The potential incremental impact from Yucca Mountain in the next 1 million years is small

28 UC Berkeley Advanced fuel cycles can impact repository performance Yucca Mountain’s current legal capacity limit is 63,000 MT of spent fuel –Current U.S. plants will reach this limit in 2014 Technical limit for the current 2000 acre repository footprint is between 120,000 and 300,000 MT of spent fuel Advanced fuel cycles that recycle the heavy elements in spent fuel would increase this capacity by a factor of ~ 50x. Under advanced fuel cycles, Yucca Mountain could potentially hold 500 kg/m of fission products in 400 km of drifts (2000 acres), equal to 0.5 trillion tons of coal

29 UC Berkeley Repository Licensing Involves Detailed Technical Review The EPA has issued a draft one million year safety standard for Yucca Mountain –Maximum impact to an individual using ground water must be less than 15 mrem/year up to 10,000 years, less than 300 mrem/year up to 1 million years –Average natural background is 300 mrem/year DOE has committed to completing a license application in 2008 –Independent review will be performed the Nuclear Regulatory Commission –A decision on a construction license would be reached by 2011 With a construction license for Yucca Mountain, the U.S. will have an approved technology for nuclear waste disposal

30 UC Berkeley Conclusions Recent activity in nuclear energy has been substantial –Improved performance for existing plants –Waste repository site selected in United States »Future remains uncertain –2005 Energy Bill provisions for new nuclear construction and R&D –New research to demonstrate high-efficiency electricity and hydrogen production

31 UC Berkeley Fusion Energy

32 UC Berkeley Thermonuclear fusion reaction rates vary strongly with temperature

33 UC Berkeley Progress in D-T fusion

34 UC Berkeley MFE magnet configurations:complex to simple Stellarator Tokamak Planar coils with nested sets 3-D coils RFP Low-field external coils Spheromak No toroidal or poloidal coils FRC No toroidal field Externally Controlled Self Organized

35 UC Berkeley Inertial fusion uses the rocket effect to compress fusion fuel “Direct” drive: lasers directly heat outside of capsule “Indirect” drive: lasers or heavy ions (shown) heat inside of a hohlraum, indirectly heating capsule surface

36 UC Berkeley NIF is designed as the first ICF driver to achieve ignition and substantial gain The National Ignition Facility is a 1.8- million joule laser under construction at LLNL NIF Target


Download ppt "UC Berkeley Per F. Peterson Professor Department of Nuclear Engineering University of California, Berkeley March 2, 2008 Nuclear Technology and Energy."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google