[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
CANDU in the US and "using water economically"
The following from Jaroslav Franta
> From: "Franta, Jaroslav" <frantaj@aecl.ca>
> To: "Radsafe (E-mail)" <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
> Subject: CANDU in the US and "using water economically"
> Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2002 12:31:01 -0400
>
>
> New Reactor Could Make Nuclear Power As Economical As Gas in U.S.
> Knight-Ridder Tribune Tue 25 Jun 2002
> By Marie Beaudette, The Washington Times
>
> Jun. 25--AECL Technologies yesterday announced its plans to introduce a
new
> nuclear reactor into the U.S. market that company representatives say is
> economical enough to rival natural gas as a source of power.
>
> The Ontario, Canada-based company is in the process of licensing its
ACR-700
> reactor --which AECL says is cheaper and faster than most U.S. reactors --
> in the United States and abroad.
>
> "Our confidence in this product and this technology we're bringing to the
> market is very high," said Robert Van Adel, chief executive officer of
> Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., the parent of AECL Technologies.
>
> The company is in negotiations with several U.S. companies interested in
> breaking into the nuclear energy market. However, little can be done until
> the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approves the reactor's design for use in
> the United States.
>
> AECL has already started going through the licensing process with the NRC,
> Mr. Van Adel said.
>
> AECL's plans come at a time of heightened concern about the safety of
> nuclear reactors, and some question whether the company's reactor is
really
> more economical than what is already in place in the United States.
>
> Mr. Van Adel said this reactor is both more economical and safer than
other
> reactors. It uses a more cost-efficient cooling system and is a
700-megawatt
> construction, rather than the 1,000-megawatt reactors that are now common
in
> the United States, he said.
>
> The ACR-700 could be built for $1,000 per kilowatt and will operate for
$30
> per megawatt-hour, which is comparable to gas-fired technologies, he said.
>
> AECL predicts its ACR-700 technology will be competitive in price with
> natural gas by 2010.
>
> "We believe that the ACR-700 is the first reactor on the market that has
the
> right combination of cost, safety, security, size, reliability and
> environmental advantages to meet the needs of generators selling into
> competitive markets," Mr. Van Adel said.
>
> David Lochbaum, an expert in nuclear safety for the Union of Concerned
> Scientists, said the company could face problems selling new reactors,
> because at least 85 percent of the existing reactors in the United States
> are expected to be relicensed.
>
> "As those reactors get relicensed, that delays the period of time they
have
> to be replaced," he said.
>
> Since September 11, many have questioned the vulnerability of nuclear
power
> plants to attack and the wisdom of building more reactors. There are 103
> licensed nuclear plants in 31 states, according to the Nuclear Energy
> Institute.
>
> Nuclear energy, which generates about 20 percent of the country's
> electricity, is considered to be a cleaner alternative to power generated
by
> natural gas, oil and coal. However, there have always been concerns about
> how to store the 2,000 metric tons of spent radioactive fuel produced each
> year in the United States.
>
> This high-level radioactive waste can be very dangerous, but according to
a
> survey by the Nuclear Energy Institute, about 66 percent of Americans
> believe nuclear power is a safe option.
>
> Despite the increasing public acceptance, there are no known plans to
build
> more nuclear power plants in the United States, and this could pose
problems
> for AECL in marketing its new reactor, Mr. Lochbaum said.
>
> It also costs more to get a nuclear plant up and running, and it is
unlikely
> that nuclear power's share in U.S. power generation will grow, he said.
>
> Mr. Lochbaum also questioned the company's use of a water-based cooling
> system, which he says is being dismissed in most of the world in favor of
> more economical gas cooling models under development.
>
> "It doesn't look like anyone in the U.S. has been able to find a way of
> using water economically," Mr. Lochbaum said.
>
> But AECL is confident of its chances in the United States. He said the
> company is working with several major U.S. utilities to bring this reactor
> to the country.
>
> There are 31 of AECL's CANDU reactors in place worldwide and six more
under
> construction. AECL is owned by the Canadian government.
> ============================
>
> Canada's Government-Owned AECL Targets US Nuclear Market
> By Bryan Lee
> 24 June 2002 Dow Jones Energy Service
>
> WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Despite increased concern about nuclear power
> safety after Sept. 11, a Canadian government-owned company has formed a
U.S.
> subsidiary to pursue what it called the first available competitively
priced
> next-generation nuclear reactor design.
>
> That can-do attitude is being brought to the U.S. electricity market by
AECL
> Technologies Inc., a new unit of Atomic Energy Canada Ltd., maker of the
> CANDU nuclear power reactor.
>
> "We think the U.S. market is particularly appropriate for the CANDU
> technology," said Robert Van Adel, AECL's president and chief executive.
>
> The company filed last week a request with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
> Commission for a pre-application license review of its ACR-700 reactor.
ACR
> stands for "advanced CANDU reactor." The NRC will hold public meetings in
> July and a two-day technical conference in September as part of its
review.
>
> Licensing steps also are under way in Canada and the U.K., said Van Adel.
> The company expects the first plant of this next-generation design will
come
> on line in Canada in 2006.
>
> The modular-design reactor achieves significant cost efficiencies over the
> original CANDU heavy-water reactor upon which it is based, said Van Adel.
>
> For best cost efficiency, AECL plans to pair the 700-megawatt capacity
> reactors in its plant design. The ACR-700 still employs a heavy
> water-moderated reactor core, like the traditional CANDU reactor.
>
> But it replaces the heavy-water cooling system with a light-water cooling
> system, shaving "several hundred million" off the cost of building a
> twin-unit generating plant, or about $120 million per unit, Van Adel said.
>
> Other cost-savings are derived from the off-the-shelf design, which allows
> for the compact units to be built at a central factory and shipped to
> generation sites, rather than designed and built at the plant site, he
said.
>
>
> The result is a plant that is cost-competitive with state-of-the-art
natural
> gas-fired generating units, Van Adel said. The plant's total capital costs
> are $1,000 per kilowatt, excluding interest. The levelized cost is $30 per
> megawatt-hour, which compares favorably to gas.
>
> The AECL-700 is "the first of a new generation of reactors to meet the
cost
> target of industry," said Roger Gale, a partner with the consulting firm
GF
> Energy LLC. AECL is a client of Gale's firm.
>
> "The new build of nuclear will not happen unless the economics are
> attractive," said Van Adel.
>
> The design is also compact, Van Adel said, allowing for a far smaller
> "footprint" at the plant site, a desirable attribute since most if not all
> new U.S. nuclear development is expected to occur at existing nuclear
power
> plant sites.
>
> Other benefits include the ability to refuel without shutting down the
> plant. The uranium fuel is also cheaper than that typically used in
existing
> light-water reactors in the U.S. While the old-generation CANDU used
natural
> uranium fuel, the ACR-700 design calls for a fuel that is enriched 2%.
U.S.
> reactors typically use a fuel enriched to 3.5%, said David Torgerson, vice
> president of technology for Atomic Energy Canada.
>
> The plant also is more readily refurbished to allow an extension of the
> plant's operating life, Torgerson said.
>
> AECL is promising to build an operational plant within four years of
> licensing, and is offering to mitigate the investment risk by providing
> various guarantees.
>
> Van Adel said the plant's design is being changed in the wake of the Sept.
> 11 terrorist attacks, but he declined to elaborate on the improvements to
> what he described as a "robust" design with redundant safety features.
>
> The AECL-700 has received enthusiastic interest from three U.S.
utilities -
> Dominion Resources (D), Entergy Corp. (ETR) and Exelon Corp. (EXC) - that
> have announced their intent to pursue new nuclear power development, said
> Gale, AECL's consultant.
>
> In pending NRC filings, the three companies are expected to name the
> AECL-700 among a suite of possible technologies to be the basis for new
> nuclear power projects, Gale said.
>
> While competition is growing to be the technology of choice in the
expected
> wave of next-generation nuclear power plants, "We don't see others near
> deployment," Van Adel said.
>
> -By Bryan Lee, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-6647; Bryan.Lee@dowjones.com
> =============================
>
> Canadian firm unveils new design for U.S. nuke plants.
> By Chris Baltimore
> 24 June 2002 Reuters News
>
> WASHINGTON, June 24 (Reuters) - A Canadian firm on Monday unveiled a
> smaller, cheaper type of nuclear power plant that it says will help U.S.
> utilities build new nuclear capacity by the end of the decade, a goal set
by
> the Bush administration.
>
> AECL Technologies Inc., a unit of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., wants to
end
> a two-decade construction hiatus on U.S. nuclear plants with a new design
it
> has proposed for approval by U.S., Canadian and British nuclear
regulators.
>
> The design would allow utilities to build nuclear capacity at prices
> competitive with natural gas, the fuel of choice in recent decades for new
> electricity plants, AECL said.
>
> Because they are relatively compact and clean, natural gas plants have
> attracted the lion's share of new plant construction dollars, mostly from
> the new breed of merchant power companies who independently finance them.
>
> Nuclear plants, which supply about one-fifth of the country's electricity,
> emit almost none of the smog or soot spewed from by coal-fired power
plants.
> But no new U.S. nuclear plants have been built since the 1979 Three Mile
> Island accident, in which there was a partial meltdown of a reactor core.
>
> AECL hopes to reverse that trend.
>
> "This is the first viable option for utilities looking to develop nuclear
> generation capacity today," AECL President Bob Van Adel said in a
> presentation to reporters.
>
> The firm filed a pre-application for its design with the U.S. Nuclear
> Regulatory Commission (NRC) last week.
>
> AECL's design calls for a nuclear reactor powered by smaller, individual
> pressure tubes that contain fissionable uranium, which drives the reactor.
>
> It has a modular design that can be centrally produced in a factory, and a
> compact "footprint" to replace reactors at existing nuclear plant sites.
> Operators can replace individual fuel modules in the plant without
shutting
> it down entirely.
>
> EXELON, DOMINION, ENTERGY
>
> In addition to starting construction on plants in China and Romania, AECL
> wants to sell its design to Exelon Corp. , Dominion Resources Inc. and
> Entergy Corp. . The three utilities are preparing to apply for early site
> permits for possible new nuclear reactors.
>
> The firms say they want to keep their options open, but they have no plans
> to build new nuclear plants at present.
>
> "We're listening, but it's not like we're champing at the bit to do
anything
> there," said Richard Zuercher, a Dominion spokesman. Dominion said AECL
made
> a presentation on its new design earlier this year.
>
> Exelon in April dropped out of an international consortium developing a
> smaller, cheaper kind of nuclear plant, the pebble bed modular reactor. It
> will compete with AECL's design.
>
> At a cost of about $1,000 per kilowatt of generation, the 700 megawatt
AECL
> plants would cost about $700 million to build, excluding financing costs.
> That is about double the cost of a combined-cycle natural gas turbine
plant.
>
>
> Most nuclear plants generate over 1,000 megawatts. One megawatt is enough
to
> power about 1,000 homes.
>
> Once constructed, the new nuclear plants would be able to produce power at
> $30 per megawatt-hour (mwh), which is competitive to a gas-fired plant's
> cost of $35-$40 per mwh. Nuclear plants are insulated from price swings in
> the natural gas market that can push costs up when demand rises.
>
> "We don't see any other designs ready for near-term deployment," Van Adel
> said. "The new building of new generation will not take place unless the
> economics are attractive."
>
> US FUNDING FOR APPLICATIONS
>
> Separately, the U.S. Energy Department announced it would help the three
> utilities pay for their applications to the NRC to obtain an early site
> permit.
>
> Dominion will seek a permit for its North Anna site in Virginia, Entergy
for
> its Grand Gulf site in Mississippi, and Exelon for its Clinton site in
> Illinois, the Energy Department said. The permits do not commit a company
to
> building a plant.
>
> The utilities will submit applications by the autumn of 2003 with the aim
of
> winning early site permits by mid-decade.
>
> The Energy Department said it will pay for up to 50 percent of the cost of
> each early site permit, spending about $17 million in total to help the
> three companies.
>
> Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said the projects are the "first major
> elements" of the administration's plan to help industry build at least one
> new nuclear power plant by 2010.
>
> The administration aims to spend $38.5 million in fiscal 2003 on permit
> applications and nuclear technology research to help the industry.
> =============================
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/