The Nuclear Reactors from a « Natural History » Perspective Bertrand BARRÉ, AREVA President...

The Nuclear Reactorsfrom a « Natural History » Perspective

Bertrand BARRÉ, AREVAPresident European Nuclear Society

Director ANSVice-president INSC

- BB Natural History – Obninsk 2004 IAEA-CN-114/P2-72

The Nuclear Reactorsfrom a « Natural History » Perspective

The ebullient Beginnings

The Drivers of Selection

Today (and to-morrow)

Biotope, Dominance & Selection

From spontaneous Selection to a formalized Process

Conclusion


Darwin’s Life Tree


The ebullient Flourish of the 50s

(Idaho Falls Coffee Shop, 1973)


Chicago Pile #1

Graphite

Natural uranium

(metal & oxide)


Simplified Nuclear Reactors « Phylum »

+ MSR ?

Fermi

w-PuGraphite Magnox AGR

HTR

HWRw-Pu

CanduSGHWR

+SWU LWRRBMK

Naval p.

BWR

PWR

FBR+Reprocessing

+Accél. ? ,ADS


A few Drivers of the Selection

• Excessive ambition

• Technical problems

• Incommodité

• Accidents (or risks)

• Bad « timing »

• Uranium Utilisation

• Independance

• Duality/synergies

• Industrial Strength

• Technical breakthrough

• Waste minimisation


The result of 50 years of « natural » selection :Nuclear Power Plants, end 2000

PWRBWRVVRGCRRBMKCANDUFBR

Operating : 357 GWe

LWR = 87%

Construction : 43 GWe


Evolution

« If any species does not become modified and improved in a corresponding degree with its competitors, it will soon be exterminated »

Charles Darwin. The origin of species, 1859


Some LWR « Weaknesses »

• Inefficient U Ressources Utilisation

• Limits to Pu recycle, not efficient in Transmutation

• Large Units

• Sophisticated Safety

• Mediocre thermal Efficiency

Opportunities for challengers ?


From « Natural » Selection to Formalized Processes

First Failed Attempt : the INFCE

Short Term Selection : URD & EUR

The long View : Gen IV & INPRO


The concept of « Generation IV »

Early PrototypeReactors

Generation I

- Shippingport

- Dresden, Fermi I

- Magnox

Commercial Power

Reactors

Generation II

- LWR-PWR, BWR

- CANDU

- VVER/RBMK

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030

Generation IV

- Highly Economical

- Enhanced Safety

- Minimal Waste

- Proliferation Resistant

- ABWR

- EPR

- System 80+

- AP600

- …

AdvancedLWRs

Generation III

Gen I Gen II Gen III

Gen IV


Generation IV International Forum

Ready for commercialisation >2030 Significant progress in :

Sustainability Safety & Reliability Resistance to proliferation &

physical protection Economy

Competitive on diverse markets

Multipurpose : Power, Heating, desalination, hydrogen…

To develop one or several “generation 4”nuclear system(s)


Nearly 100 technical experts contributing to the R&D planning

NERAC

GEN IV Roadmap NERAC Subcommittee

(GRNS)

Technical Community

Industry

Universities

National Laboratories

DOE-NE

Roadmap Integration Team (RIT)

Evaluation Methodology

Water-Cooled Reactors

Gas-Cooled

Liquid-Metal-Cooled

Non-Classical Concepts

Technical Working Groups:

Fu

el

Cy

cle

Cro

ss

cu

t

Fu

els

& M

ate

ria

ls

Ris

k &

Sa

fety

Ec

on

om

ics

En

erg

y P

rod

uc

ts

Generation IV International Forum (GIF)

Argentina Brazil France

S. Africa Korea Switzerland UK US

Canada Japan

Overall GEN IV roadmap organisation


Generation IV Concepts

GEN IV Concepts Acronym Spectrum Fuel cycle

Sodium Cooled Fast RS SFR Fast Closed

Lead Alloy-Cooled RS LSF Fast Closed

Gas-Cooled Fast RS GFR Fast Closed

Very High Temperature RS VHTR Thermal Once-Through

Supercritical Water Cooled RS SCWR Th.&Fast Once/Closed

Molten Salt RS MSR Thermal Closed


Time sequencing and development phasing

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Viability Performance Demonstration

Fuels, Fuel Treatment,Materials, Safety, Reliability

Fuels, Materials,Recycle, H2 ProductionFuels, Materials, Recycle, Safety

Materials,Safety

Advanced Recycle

Fuels, Materials, H2 Production

MSR

LFR

GFR

SCWR

SFR

VHTR


Different systems for different applications

2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065

Hydrogen

Electricity Generation

Waste Burndown

Fissile Creation

Near-

Term

Systems


INPRO


10 Gtoe per year

Oil

Gas

Coal

Wood,…

Nuclear

Hydro

Renew.

35%

21%

23,5%

6,8%


Reduce CO2 Emissions

while

Producing more Energy

The Challenge of the Climate Threat

Nuclear Power is Part of the Answer

The Nuclear Reactors from a « Natural History » Perspective Bertrand BARRÉ, AREVA President...

Documents

Transcript of The Nuclear Reactors from a « Natural History » Perspective Bertrand BARRÉ, AREVA President...