Global Nuclear Energy Partnership

1
Global Nuclear Energy Partnership

• Paul Lisowski
• GNEP Deputy Program Manager and
• Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fuel Cycle
  Management
• Office of Nuclear Energy
• U.S. Department of Energy

National Governors Association Federal
Facilities Task Force, Augusta, GA May 23, 2007
2
Outline

• Global Energy Demand and GNEP
• What is GNEP?
• GNEP
• GNEP
• Approach

3
Why do we need a Global Partnership?

• Rising Energy Demand
• World energy consumption is projected to increase
  by 71 (2003-2030)
• U.S. electricity consumption is projected to
  increase by 40 (2004-2025)
• Environmental Concerns
• Climate change
• High Level Waste/Spent Nuclear Fuel disposal
• Proliferation Concerns
• Accumulation of plutonium
• Terrorists, rogue states

Source "Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity
Generation Systems and Applications for Climate
Change Policy Analysis," Paul J. Meier,
University of Wisconsin-Madison, August, 2002.
4
Electricity and Economic Development go Hand in
Hand
Human Development Index
Human Development Index Life expectancy Education
GDP
80 of population is below 0.8 HDI
Source Pasternak, Global Energy Futures and
Human Development A Framework for Analysis
Annual per Capita Electricity Use (kWh)
5
Electricity Consumption is Primarily Concentrated
in a Few Nation States
Electricity consumption per country in million
kWh, (CIA factbook, April 2006)
6
There is a Great Opportunity for Civil Nuclear
Energy to Make a Difference
Wikimedia
7
Outline

• Global Energy Demand and GNEP
• What is GNEP?
• GNEP
• GNEP
• Approach

8
GNEP is a Strategy to Support Civilian Nuclear
Power Expansion Worldwide

• Expand use of nuclear power
• Minimize nuclear waste
• Develop and deploy recycle technology
• Develop and deploy advanced recycle reactors
• Establish reliable fuel services
• Support grid-appropriate exportable reactors
• Enhance nuclear safeguards technology

The goal of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership
(GNEP) is the expansion of nuclear energy for
peaceful purposes worldwide in a safe and secure
manner that supports clean development without
air pollution or greenhouse gases, while reducing
the risk of nuclear proliferation. - GNEP
Statement of Principles
9
Outline

• Global Energy Demand and GNEP
• What is GNEP?
• GNEP
• GNEP
• Approach

10
Key International Elements of GNEP Augment and
Support Nonproliferation Efforts

• Establish supply arrangements among nations for
  reliable fuel services to avoid the need for
  enrichment and reprocessing technologies.
• Develop, demonstrate, and deploy advanced,
  proliferation resistant nuclear power reactors
• Develop, in cooperation with the IAEA, enhanced
  nuclear safeguards
• Over time, promote ending separation of
  plutonium, eventually eliminating excess stocks
  of civilian plutonium

11
GNEP International Engagement Pathways

• Policy Engagement
• Establish bilateral and multilateral partnerships
  based on GNEP principles, including fuel
  supplier, fuel recipient and prospective
  recipient countries
• Framework Development
• International fuel assurance system that
  includes
• Reliable fuel leasing mechanisms between fuel
  suppliers and users
• Emergency fuel banks/reserves in the event of an
  interruption in supply.
• Technical Collaboration
• Advanced fuel cycle cooperation (only with
  established fuel cycle countries)
• Grid-Appropriate Reactors (small and medium size,
  10-350 Mwe)
• Infrastructure development for countries
  interested in nuclear power

12
GNEP International Engagement and Partnership
Development Activities

• Engaged with advanced fuel cycle countries,
  reactor and candidate reactor countries since
  February 2006 announcement.
• (E.G., Russia, China, France, UK, Japan, South
  Korea, Canada, Australia, Germany, Argentina,
  Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, Ukraine,
  Nigeria, Ghana, South Africa, Vietnam, Malaysia,
  Poland, Bahrain, Jordan, Mexico).
• US and 5 other supplier nations proposed a
  reliable fuel supply initiative at the IAEA in
  September 2006.
• Developed and circulated Statement of Principles
  for GNEP
• US, Japan, France, Russia, and China with UK and
  IAEA observers met in Ministerial meeting with
  the Secretary of Energy on 5/21/2007 in DC to
  state commitment to GNEP

13
Outline

• Global Energy Demand and GNEP
• What is GNEP?
• GNEP
• GNEP
• Approach

14
Nuclear Energy Provides 20 of U.S. Electricity
Nuclear Share of Electricity Generation 2005
104
Source NEI
http//www.nei.org/
Slide from P. Dehmer http//www.sc.doe.gov/bes/pre
sentations/
15
The Last Permit for U.S. Reactors Was Issued in
1979, but we expect that to Change
300
Units Ordered
8.23 quads of Nuclear Electric Power is produced
by 104 operable nuclear power plants in the U.S.
(i.e., average nuclear power plant 0.08 quads)
250
200
Construction Permits Issued
Number of Units
150
Full-power Operating Licenses
100
Operable Units
50
Shutdowns
0
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Slide from P. Dehmer http//www.sc.doe.gov/bes/pre
sentations/
16
The Domestic Elements of GNEP and NP2010 Can
Advance Nuclear Energy in the U.S.

• Expand nuclear power to help meet growing energy
  demand in an environmentally sustainable
  manner.
• Develop, demonstrate, and deploy advanced
  technologies for recycling spent nuclear fuel
  that
• Do not separate plutonium, and
• Simplify the disposition of nuclear waste,
  thereby helping to ensure the need for only one
  geologic repository in the United States through
  the end of this century.
• Develop, demonstrate, and deploy advanced
  reactors that consume transuranic elements from
  recycled spent fuel.

17
At Present the U.S. Has a Once-Through Fuel Cycle
Once-Through Fuel Cycle

• Spent Nuclear Fuel disposed after a single pass
  through nuclear reactors in a geological
  repository
• If nuclear power increases at the anticipated
  rate, the U.S. will need between 5 and 11
  repositories by the end of the century

Closed Fuel Cycle
18
GNEP Will Move the U.S. from a Once Through to a
Closed or Recycling Fuel Cycle

• Spent nuclear fuel would be separated into
  useable and waste materials
• Residual waste would go to a geological
  repository or long-term storage
• Useable components would be recycled in fast
  reactors called Advanced Burner Reactors

19
GNEP Baseline Scenario for the U.S. - Nuclear
energy provides 33 of electricity by the end of
the century
33 of electricity supply LWR 588 GWe FR 122 GWe
23 of electricity supply LWR 198 GWe FR 33 GWe
Based on Conversion Ratio of 0.5
20
GNEP Will Build on Waste Management Technologies
Already in Place Worldwide
Waste from 1 GWe reactor operating for 1 Year
Fission Products and Minor Actinides in Glass
Compressed fuel bundle cladding and hardware
Reprocessing Waste Storage Facility at La Hague,
France
21
Potential Benefits of Closed Fuel Cycle Include
Improved Waste Management

• Certain elements (plutonium, americium, cesium,
  strontium, and curium) are primarily responsible
  for the decay heat that limits repository
  performance
• Large gains in repository space are possible by
  processing spent nuclear fuel to remove those
  elements
• The recovered elements must be treated
• Cesium and strontium must be stored separately
  for 200-300 years
• Plutonium, americium, and curium can be recycled
  for transmutation and/or fission
• Irradiation in reactors

22
Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Products
Typical Spent PWR Fuel Assembly in the United
States today 50 GWd/MTHM burnup Mass 460 kg
Initial Heavy Metal plus 141 kg cladding and
structural material Geologic Disposal uses about
0.65 m3 of available repository volume per
assembly
Structure 141 kg
Uranium/ Plutonium/ Neptunium 19.7 kg , 0.004 m3
as oxide
Technetium/ TRU Losses/ Zr Hulls Structure 154
kg , 0.035 m3
Cs/Sr Alumino- Silicate 14.7 kg , 0.006 m3
Fission Prod./ U/TRU Losses In Borosilicate Glass
50 kg , 0.018 m3
Gases on Molecular Sieve 0.45 kg , 0.00026 m3
Curium 0.027 kg , 0.0000022 m3 as oxide
Americium 0.64 kg , 0.000048 m3 as oxide
Uranium 499 kg , 0.12 m3 as oxide
Storage / Permanent Disposal lt 10 of the
Repository Space
Recycle as Fuel
lt 1 of the Radiological Hazard
23
Radioactive Waste Management with GNEP

• Process waste has 1 of the radiological hazard
  compared to spent nuclear fuel
• High Level Waste volume reduced by at least a
  factor of 10 compared to the direct disposal of
  spent nuclear fuel
• All repository design and licensing requirements
  are still maintained
• Process waste disposal greatly reduces heat load
  on the repository
• Enables different options for geologic waste
  disposal
• Reduced potential exposure ( 1/100 or less) for
  waste from the same amount of spent fuel
• Same potential exposure, but for waste from a
  greater amount of spent fuel ( waste from 100
  times or more spent fuel)
• Combinations of both, reduced potential exposure
  and waste from a greater amount of spent fuel
  (e.g., 1/10 of the potential exposure or less and
  waste from 10 times or more spent fuel)
• Opportunity for further improvement with research
  and development of more robust waste forms

24
Outline

• Global Energy Demand and GNEP
• What is GNEP?
• GNEP
• GNEP
• Approach

25
Initially GNEP Envisions Three Facilities
Nuclear fuel recycling center (CFTC)
Transmutatuon Fuel
Advanced recycling reactor (ABR)
Advanced Fuel Cycle Facility (AFCF)
Laboratory Led, Industry, University, and
International Collaboration Support
Industry Led, with Laboratory, University, and
International Collaboration Support
26
The GNEP RD Program Uses Resources Across the
Nation

• RD mission
• Support for technology development needs of GNEP
  facilities
• Long-term development of advanced separations,
  transmutation fuel and recycle technologies along
  with validated simulation and computational
  techniques to advance the development and
  approval of fuel cycle technology.

• Ten national laboratories are engaged in the GNEP
  RD program

• A university supporting research program started
  in FY07

27
The GNEP Strategic Plan Calls for Specific
Actions for the Near Term

• Obtain input from U.S. and international
  industries and governments on how best to bring
  the needed GNEP facilities into being, what
  technology and policy issues must be resolved,
  and what business obstacles must be overcome.
• Develop a detailed GNEP technology roadmap for
  demonstrating solutions to the remaining
  technical issues in order to support commercial
  GNEP facilities.
• Pursue industry participation in the development
  of conceptual design and other engineering
  studies that support both a nuclear fuel
  recycling center and an advanced recycling
  reactor.
• Prepare a programmatic GNEP Environmental Impact
  Statement.
• Prepare a decision package for the Secretary of
  Energy for a 2008 decision

28
National Environmental Policy Act Analysis

• GNEP Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement
  (PEIS)
• assess reasonable alternatives
• analyze potential environmental impacts
• assist DOE decision-making
• GNEP Siting Studies
• Stakeholder interest in hosting one or both
  commercial-scale facilities
• 14 grant applications received
• 9 states (ID, IL, KY, NM, OH, SC, TN, UT, WA)
• Both DOE and non-DOE sites proposed

29
Purpose of the GNEP PEIS

• Assess reasonable alternatives that
• encourage expansion of nuclear energy production
  
• reduce nuclear proliferation risks and
• reduce the volume, thermal output, and
  radiotoxicity of spent fuel before disposal in a
  geologic repository

30
GNEP PEIS Environmental Issues

• Land Use
• Visual Resources
• Air Quality
• Water Resources
• Biological Resources
• Cultural Resources
• Waste Management

• Site Infrastructure
• Socioeconomics
• Environmental Justice
• Human Health
• Accidents/Terrorism
• Transportation
• Geology and Soils

31
Domestic Programmatic Alternatives

• Alternative 1 No Action
• Continue once-through fuel cycle
• Continue status quo in which commercial reactors
  generate and store spent fuel until DOE can
  dispose of it in a geologic repository
• Continue ongoing nuclear fuel cycle research and
  development
• Alternative 2 GNEP Proposed Action
• Broad implementation of a closed fuel cycle that
  could include one or more nuclear fuel recycling
  centers and one or more advanced recycling
  reactors
• With respect to Alternative 2, DOE is conducting
  a project-specific analysis to site, construct,
  and operate any or all of the three GNEP fuel
  cycle facilities

32
GNEP Site Alternatives Examined as Part of the
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

• DOE Sites
• Argonne National Laboratory (IL)
• Hanford (WA)
• Idaho National Laboratory (ID)
• Los Alamos National Laboratory (NM)
• Oak Ridge Reservation (TN)
• Paducah (KY)
• Portsmouth (OH)
• Savannah River National Lab (SC)

• Non-DOE Sites
• Atomic City, ID
• Barnwell, SC
• Hobbs, NM
• Morris, IL
• Roswell, NM

33
Global Nuclear Energy Partnership / Advanced Fuel
Cycle Initiative Budget
34
Our Approach is to

• Engage with industry and form international
  partnerships
• Advance relevant research and development using
  national laboratories, international
  collaborations, universities, and industry
• Demonstrate competence
• Involve the foremost national and international
  expertise
• Achieve a Secretarial decision that will put in
  place the cornerstone for the future of nuclear
  power through approval and continuation of a
  program that will develop and foster
• A vibrant domestic nuclear electrical generation
  industry with adequate paths to deal with the
  spent nuclear fuel and that will over time close
  the fuel cycle
• A successful global collaboration that will
  address the expansion of nuclear power and
  nuclear weapons proliferation