Advanced Reactor R&D

Craig Welling

Deputy Director, Office of Advanced Reactor

Technologies

U.S. Department of Energy

U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council and Argonne National

Laboratory – Economics of Advanced Reactors

January 27-28, 2014

2

Role of U.S. Department of Energy for

Sustainable and Innovative Nuclear Energy

Conduct Research, Development, and Demonstration to:

� Reduce regulatory risk

� Reduce technical risk

� Reduce financial risk and improve

economics

� Manage nuclear waste

� Minimize the risks of nuclear

proliferation and terrorism

� Foster international and industry collaboration

ANL AFR -100

3

Nuclear Reactor Technology R&D

Key areas:

� Advanced Reactor Technologies

• Advanced Reactor R&D

• Advanced energy conversion R&D – Super Critical CO2

Brayton Cycle

� Light Water Reactor Technologies

• Light Water Reactor Sustainability

� Small Modular Reactors (SMRs)

• SMR Licensing Technical Support Program – cost-shared development of

innovative SMR designs

�Space and Defense Power Systems

• Innovative nuclear power and propulsion system technologies

GE PRISM

4

Advanced Reactor TechnologiesFor Sustainability, economics, safety, and

proliferation resistance

� Fast Reactor Technologies•For actinide management and electricity production

•Current focus on sodium coolant

� High Temperature Reactor Technologies•For electricity and process heat production

•Current focus on gas- and liquid salt-cooled systems

� Advanced Reactor Generic Technologies•Common design needs for advanced materials,

energy conversion, decay heat removal systems

and modeling methods

� Advanced Reactor Regulatory Framework•Development of licensing requirements for

advanced reactors

� Advanced Reactor System Studies •Analyses of capital, operations and fuel costs

for advanced reactor types

General Atomics EM2

5

Technical Risk Reduction

Partnering with Industry

�Technical Review Panel (TRP) Process to inform R&D decisions for

Advanced Reactor Concepts

• Established in FY12 to improve engagement with industry

• TRP comprised of experts from industry, academia, and national labs

• Assessed viability of industry submittals and identified R&D needs.

• Output from TRP:

– Identification of R&D needs

– Identification of need for an Advanced Reactor Licensing Framework

• DOE/NE is using TRP results to Inform R&D activities

�Public Private Partnerships to share cost and risk

DOE is funding industry-led R&D for advanced reactors

• GE – EM pumps

• GA – Silicon Carbide R&D Testing

• Gen4 Energy – Lead Bismuth natural circulation

• Westinghouse - Modeling and Validation of Sodium Plugging

for Heat Exchangers in Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Systems Gen4 Energy

6

TRP Concepts Received and

Future Plans

7

Reducing Regulatory Risk

Licensing Strategy Initiative for

Advanced Reactors

� During 2012 DOE and NRC noted in the TRP report and a Report

to Congress respectively the need for regulatory guidance for

non-light water reactor designs

• Existing licensing guidance is written for light water reactors.

• A regulatory framework is needed to support reasonable timelines for

design certification and licensing.

� NE and NRC have initiated a joint project for development of

General Design Criteria (GDC) for non-light water reactor

concepts

� Key elements of this initiative:

• Categorize the existing GDC – Nov. 2013

• Prepare draft GDC / conduct workshops - March and July 2014

• Complete the GDC and Report – Dec. 2014

• Issue Report to the NRC for consideration for a Regulatory Guide or

Policy Statement

8

� Current reactors use a steam Rankine cycle to

convert core thermal energy to electricity

� The sCO2 Brayton Cycle Energy Conversion

System has potential to dramatically improve

nuclear power economics

• Smaller and simpler than Rankine Cycle

• More efficient

– 40-50% with S-CO2 Brayton compared to ~33%

efficiency for steam Rankine cycle

• Very good materials compatibility at high

temperatures

• Can operate at high temperature (up to 750 C)

• Can be built with existing technologies

• Modular construction technologies can be used

Supercritical CO2

Brayton

Conversion Cycle (sCO2)

Sandia National Lab

Brayton Cycle Test Loop

9

Comparison

Greatly reduced cost for

sCO2

compared to the

cost of conventional

steam Rankine cycle

sCO2

compact turbo

machinery is easily

scalable

Supercritical CO2 Brayton Cycle (sCO2)

Tech Team Summit/January 7, 2014

1 meter sCO2

(300 MWe)

(Brayton Cycle)20 meter Steam Turbine (300 MWe)(Rankine Cycle)

5-stage Dual Turbine

Lo Hi

3-stage Single Turbine

Hi Lo

Lo

10

International Reactor

Collaborations

�Multi-lateral collaborations

• Generation-IV International Forum – 13 Countries, 6 Reactor Types

– VHTR - Fuels and Fuel Cycle, Materials, Hydrogen Production

– SFR - Advanced Fuels, Component Design, Safety and Operation,

System Integration and Assessment

• Sodium Fast Reactor (SFR) Trilateral Agreement (US, Japan, France)

�Bilateral collaborations

• China - Fast Reactor Safety , High temperature reactors, including helium and

liquid salt

• Russia - Multi-purpose fast research reactor (MBIR) International User Center,

High temperature gas reactors (HTGRs) and SMRs

• France - Reactor and Safety Analysis for the ASTRID SFR

• Japan - R&D on fast reactor materials and metal fuel, modeling and simulation,

and HTGRs

11

SMR Licensing Technical Support

� In 2012, DOE initiated the SMR Licensing Technical Support Program

�Accelerate commercial SMR development through public/private

arrangements

• Deployment as early as 2022

• Currently 6 years/$452 M

�Provide financial assistance for:

• Design, Design Certification, and Licensing of promising SMR concepts

�Funding provided to industry partners though cost sharing

�Potential Benefits

• Enhanced safety and security

• Shorter construction schedules due to modular construction

• Improved economics and quality due to factory-setting work

• Electricity generation can be expanded incrementally

• High domestic job creation potentialmPower

12

A Possible Approach for

Advanced Reactors

How did we get where we are in the U.S.?

�We started with small reactors.

� Initially the U.S. explored LWR and SFR technologies.

� The Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program tried both a PWR concept and a

sodium cooled reactor concept in submarines. It selected PWRs.

� The commercial industry built increasingly larger PWRs and BWRs.

�With Three Mile Island and changing economics we, with some

exceptions, stopped new builds of Gen 2 plants several years ago.

�We started building new more passively safe large plants and are now

looking to deploy SMRs.

�Natural gas prices have caused utilities to relook at their generation

development plans.

13

A Possible Approach for

Advanced Reactors

Clear Requirements for a Concept:� Safety – Inherently safe, extended station blackout times

� Proliferation resistant

� Security – meet existing regulations with smaller security force

� Few or no major R&D hurdles

Key Driver: Significantly reduced Capital and Operating Costs� Greater fuel burn-up, less waste – may need phased development

� Greater energy conversion efficiency – Use of sCO2 Brayton Cycle

� Capital Costs- significantly less $/MW than LWRs

• Gains from use of modular construction and factory builds, learning from SMR manufacturing

• Reduced cost to obtain monetary capital – possibly by pursuit of smaller projects or incremental

projects

� Operational Costs-notable reduction

• Use of Brayton Cycle

• Central Engineering Staff

• Smaller security Staff

• Greater use of equipment monitoring capability

• Use of in-house maintenance personnel for staggered outages for multiple reactors at sites

14

A Possible Approach for

Advanced Reactors

Design and Licensing

�An Advanced Reactor Licensing Framework is needed

• Development of General Design Criteria is in progress in

2014.

�$300 - $800 Million is needed per concept to get a concept

licensed

�Options – Prototype, Test Reactor, or Licensing Technical

Support Program for Advanced Reactors

• Economic conditions and budgetary considerations will

impact available options.

�R&D is still needed for most known concepts

15

A Possible Approach for

Advanced Reactors

Concerns:

� There are many potential technologies:

• SFRs

• LFRs

• HTGRs

• GFRs

• FHRs

• Molten Salt (fuel in coolant)

� There is too little funding available from Federal, corporate or venture

capital sources

• DOE engagement would necessarily result in a narrowing of the field

�DOE funds principally limit R&D to HTGRS and SFRs

� Some concepts have considerable R&D challenges

• Materials testing and fuel qualification takes years

� There is still concern that Fast Reactors are a proliferation issue

16

� U.S. Advanced Reactor R&D is focused on technology

innovations and licensing issues in order to reduce

technical, regulatory and economic risk

• Advanced Fuels and Structural Materials

• Advanced Energy Conversion

• Licensing Initiative for Advanced Reactors

� Substantive international collaborations are an important

aspect

• Leverage R&D work

� U.S. reactor vendors are proposing advanced reactor

concepts

� A long term vision is needed to foster the potential to

actually deploy an advanced reactor in the United States.

Conclusion