the licensing procedure of iter has now started in …€¦ · · 2006-08-10iaea technical...

IAEA technical meeting on fusion power plant safety, Vienna July 2006 1

The licensing procedureThe licensing procedureof ITER has now started in Cadarache, the purpose of ITER has now started in Cadarache, the purpose

of this paper is not to interfere with the onof this paper is not to interfere with the on--going going process and will concentrate on lessons learnt that process and will concentrate on lessons learnt that

could be of interest for the future fusion could be of interest for the future fusion plantsplants


Lessons learnt during the Lessons learnt during the preparation for ITER licensingpreparation for ITER licensing

Jean-Philippe Girard & Neill TaylorITER International Team

[email protected]& [email protected]



Focus on safety impact

Good things / things we should work on



Jean-Philippe Girard & Neill TaylorITER International Team

[email protected]& [email protected]







“Licensing” means safety and licensing of ITER, as nuclear facility, since the generic

site studies to the first year of site adaptation

“Licensing” means safety and licensing of ITER, as nuclear facility, since the generic

site studies to the first year of site adaptation







•Non-technical areas: organization & education

•Inputs to the project: licensing framework, regulations & evolutions

•Technical areas: passive safety features, inventories at risk, loads and energy, maintenance

•Non-technical areas: organization & education

•Inputs to the project: licensing framework, regulations & evolutions

•Technical areas: passive safety features, inventories at risk, loads and energy, maintenance

☺/ /


NonNon--technical areas:technical areas:☺/• Organization

– ITER, an international project• Integrate cultures, distance, languages, ways of thinking,

communication

– Fusion, a wide range of scientific and technologic knowledge

• Plasma science• From zero to 100 000 000 °K• From zero (vacuum) to few tens of bars• Neutron, thermal, magnetic fluxes and fields• Nuclear facility know-how


ITER an international projectITER an international project


NonNon--technical areas:technical areas:☺/• Organization

– ITER, a central team for integration, specification, interface management

– ITER an omnipresent Work Break-down Structure– Communication and Document management

system– As far as safety related

components are concerneda strict control by thecentral team

10 ITER Safety and licensing, meeting with the regulator, May 29, 2006ITER

The way to fusion energyITER

ITER-PTs QA working group, Cadarache, March 2006ITER

••

ITER-orgOwner

Operator

ITER procurement agreement

ITER procurement agreement

In-kind procurements

through Domestic Agencies

In-kind procurements

through Domestic Agencies

Supplier/providers

ITERITER OrganizationOrganization


NonNon--technical areas:technical areas:

• Education– Inside the team: training for a

common culture, safety culture– Outside, partners, contractors,

Regulator, public• What is fusion, plasma, cryogenic magnets,

heating, etc.• Tritium, neutron, beryllium• Wording

☺


Inputs to the project:Inputs to the project:• Licensing framework

• Regulations & evolutions, Codes & Standards

– Understand the cascade of recommendations and regulation

• From ICPR to EU rules to French orders compulsory for ITER

ICPE facilities Nuclear facilities (INB)

ITER is a INB facility classified as a « Labs and fuel plants »according to the set of design advice rules to use

(RFS : règles fondamentales de sûreté)DGSNR 4 July 2002

Inventory and geometry may induce long uncontrolled nuclear

reaction

Nuclear power plants

Only limited nuclear reaction and low impact for worst reference

accident

Labs and fuel plants

370 MBq 370 TBq

Regulatory framework since 1963

~106 TBq

45 ITER-EU meeting on tritium plant and ventilation Apr 2006ITER

9 / 3 / 2 0 0 5

• Tritium compared to other radionuclides– Compare Codes & Standards

• It is difficult• It is not always possible

☺/





• From ICPR to EU rules to French orders compulsory for ITER





reaction



accident


370 MBq 370 TBq


~106 TBq


9 / 3 / 2 0 0 5 in the past (Euratom 2102/ICPR 30) 109 Bq for one year, assuming a 50mSv maximum year exposure, we had 1.67 10-11Sv/Bq

in the new ICPR60 and EU regulation (EEC 96/29)1,8 10-11Sv/Bq, transformed in a French regulation since 13 Nov 2003

in the past (Euratom 2102/ICPR 30) 109 Bq for one year, assuming a 50mSv maximum year exposure, we had 1.67 10-11Sv/Bq

in the new ICPR60 and EU regulation (EEC 96/29)1,8 10-11Sv/Bq, transformed in a French regulation since 13 Nov 2003

☺/









reaction



accident


370 MBq 370 TBq


~106 TBq


9 / 3 / 2 0 0 5

• Tritium compared to other radio nuclides

France has issued a new rules for nuclear pressure vessel (following an up-grade of the EU regulation for pressure vessels) that states that 370GBq of tritium in a .5 bar overpressure equipment is a “nuclear pressure vessel” with specific requirements on design , procurement and operation. It seems the threshold and the requirements are different for different EU countries.

France has issued a new rules for nuclear pressure vessel (following an up-grade of the EU regulation for pressure vessels) that states that 370GBq of tritium in a .5 bar overpressure equipment is a “nuclear pressure vessel” with specific requirements on design , procurement and operation. It seems the threshold and the requirements are different for different EU countries.

☺/


Technical areas:Technical areas:• Passive

safety features

– Power– Vacuum

Vesselcooling

– VVPSS(Pressure suppression system)

☺


Technical areas:Technical areas:• Passive

safety features

– Power– Vacuum

Vesselcooling

– VVPSS(Pressure suppression system)

•Only .1 gr of tritium in the plasma at any time

•Tritium processed on site (no transport needed), in the future tritium produced on site

•Few active safety components

•Design to strictly prevent ingress of air in the VV

•Only .1 gr of tritium in the plasma at any time

•Tritium processed on site (no transport needed), in the future tritium produced on site

•Few active safety components

•Design to strictly prevent ingress of air in the VV

☺


Technical areas:Technical areas: /• Inventories

at risk– tritium– dust– hydrogen

• estimation• removal


Technical areas:Technical areas:• Loads and energy

– .5MW to 15MW/m2 Thermal Load– Neutron load and material (see

IFMIF programme)• In vessel components• Future blanket to produce tritium

– Plasma and magnet energy from 1 to few 10's of GJ

– Chemical energy (hydrogen and dust)

• Avoid/control air ingress


Technical areas:Technical areas:• Maintenance/ORE

– Remote handling and roboticmaintenance is compulsorydue to high dose rate in the VV

– Nevertheless dose on operator is estimated to be a few 100 person.mSv/y

– It is an issue as these value are close to fission reactor maintenancedoses (specific experimental natureof ITER, should be improved withtime and experience)

•Choice of material•Choice of material



Some open questionsSome open questionsFocus on safety impact




•Is the vacuum vessel a pressure vessel?

•Do we need a high stack?

•Is 1000 fusion plants acceptable for man and environment?

•Is the vacuum vessel a pressure vessel?

•Do we need a high stack?

•Is 1000 fusion plants acceptable for man and environment?


Is 1000 fusion plants acceptable Is 1000 fusion plants acceptable for man and environment?for man and environment?

In the very long term, the most significant environmental impact of fusion could be C-14.

C-14 may be produced through 14N(n,p)14C reactions in nitrogen- in water coolant; in steels (although it should be possible to

reduce the nitrogen content).

C-14 has potentially long-term impact because of its rather long half-life (5730 years); may enter global carbon cycle. Note that most of the B type waste are few tens of years as half time. Note that this is “neutron” dependant and not specific to fusion.

European fusion socio-economic studies (SERF) showed C-14 to be the dominant contributor to “external costs” of fusion [1].[1] G. Borrelli et. al., “Socio-economic research on fusion”, EFDA report EFDA-RE-RE-1, July 2001.

In the very long term, the most significant environmental impact of fusion could be C-14.

C-14 may be produced through 14N(n,p)14C reactions in nitrogen- in water coolant; in steels (although it should be possible to

reduce the nitrogen content).

C-14 has potentially long-term impact because of its rather long half-life (5730 years); may enter global carbon cycle. Note that most of the B type waste are few tens of years as half time. Note that this is “neutron” dependant and not specific to fusion.

European fusion socio-economic studies (SERF) showed C-14 to be the dominant contributor to “external costs” of fusion [1].[1] G. Borrelli et. al., “Socio-economic research on fusion”, EFDA report EFDA-RE-RE-1, July 2001.

the licensing procedure of iter has now started in …€¦ · · 2006-08-10iaea technical...

Documents