05 edf.ppt[読み取り専用]

EDF / Fuel Division International Seminar on MOX Utilization Tokyo - February 18-19, 2002 1

INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR ON MOX UTILIZATIONMaking better understanding towards effective use of atomic energy

Tokyo - February 18-19, 2002

MOX UTILIZATION IN FRANCE AND

FUEL CYCLE PERSPECTIVE

Michel DebesElectricité de France (EDF)

Fuel Divisionemail: [email protected]


• France, like Japan, has no domestic fossil fuel resources : --> ensuring long term energy independence is a fundamental policy--> with a major role of safe, competitive and long term nuclear power --> along with energy saving and diversification of energy supply

• Reduction of greenhouse gases emission (Kyoto protocol) : --> strengthens the role of nuclear as clean energy resource

• Electricity production in France, in the context of market opening : --> 10% fossil , --> 15% renewable (hydro..) --> 75% nuclear generation : --> 400 TWhe in 2001

main objective: safe and competitive operation in the long run

NUCLEAR POWER IN FRANCE..


NUCLEAR POWER IN FRANCE

--> 58 standardized PWRs 34 * 900 MW (20 loaded with MOX)62500 MW 20 * 1300 MWin operation 4 * 1450 MW

--> Fast Reactors :Phénix (250 MW), experimental Super Phénix (1200MW), shut down for non technical reason--> role of Fast Reactors as an option in the far future…

--> Nuclear generation safety, effectiveness and competitiveness, • along with preservation of nuclear energy resources• and nuclear high level waste treatment (1991 back end R&D law...),

--> are essential for clean, economic, and sustainable development in France, now and in the long term


• Spent fuel represents a valuable energy resource ( 1%) plutonium as long term energy resource, under safeguard rules (95%) recovered uranium, still sligthly enriched ( 4%) fission products and minor actinides (Am, Cm, Np) to be treated as waste.

• Reprocessing of spent fuel has been implemented in France from the beginningto enhance energy independence, along with a fast breeder reactors program and with the prospect of an increasing worldwide demand...

• The recycling of valuable material and high level waste vitrification remain the main options for the back end of the fuel cycle

--> decision in 1984 to recycle plutonium in the PWR 900 MW units, by using a mixed uranium and plutonium fuel (MOX),

--> first MOX loading in 1987 at Saint Laurent B, --> gradually extended to 20 units 900 MW

• The choice for reprocessing - recycling was made by other developed countries Belgium, Switzerland, Japan, Germany (until 2005…) …

A MATURE CLOSED FUEL CYCLE..


• Nuclear production (total) : 400 TWhe/year

• Nuclear fuel : UO2: ≈ 1050 HMt/yr, burn up : average 45 GWd/t, max 52 GWd/tMOX: ≈ 100 HMt/yr, burn up : average 38 GWd/t , max 42 GWd/t;

average Pu content 7%

• Transportation of spent fuel : TN casks , after 2 years cooling ....

• Reprocessing at Cogema - La Hague : 850 HMt/yr , 6/8 years after unloading

• MOX fabrication at Melox plant : recycling of separated plutonium , along with reprocessing 100 HMt/yr or 220 MOX assemblies/yr , AFA-3G Framatome-ANP design loaded on 20 reactors, 30% of the core --> MOX fuel electricity production : ≈ 30 to 40 TWhe/yr



Reactors --> ≈ 400 TWhe/yr(from MOX fuel : 30 to 40 TWhe/yr)

Spent Fuel cooling poolsNPPs and La Hague

UO2 and MOX spent fuelas valuable resources

Reprocessing PlantCogema La Hague

≈ 850 HMt/yr

• HL Waste : Fission products,actinides --> Vitrification--> CSDV glass canisters (120m3)

• hulls and shells : compacted --> CSDC hulls canisters (180m3)

• storage, final disposal when available...

MOX Fuel fabricationMelox ≈ 100 HMt/yr≈ 220 fuel assemblies/yr

loaded in 20 reactors

Recovered Uraniumstill enriched 0,8% to 0,9%

valuable resource --> storage

UO2 fuel fabrication≈ 1000 HMt/year

Uranium and conversion≈ 8000 t/year

Enrichment≈ 5,5 MSWU/year

Plutonium

• fabrication ≈ 40 HMt/yr• enrichment



7 UO2 fresh fuel

Reprocessingand MOX fabrication

Vitrified HLwaste ( 0.4 m3 )

Reactors --> ≈ 1.25 TWhe

Reactors --> ≈ 0.15 TWhe

1 MOX fresh fuel (Pu 7%) -->1 MOX spent fuel (Pu 5%)

7 UO2 spent fuel (Pu 1%)

cooling pools

reduction of total spent fuel

quantity : factor 7

Pu concentrated in MOX spent fuel : a long term energy resource--> fast reactors...--> future fuel... --> other open options...

recovered uranium

Pu



The closed fuel cycle strategy, along with reprocessing and MOX recycling, enables today, with existing facilities :

• Vitrification of high level nuclear wastea safe and long-lasting confinement, internationally recognized

• Recycling of Plutonium as a valuable energy resource30% Pu is consumed, produces 30 to 40 TWhe/yr (8 to 10% of nuclear production)

• Reduction of spent fuel quantity : 7 UO2 --> 1 MOX

• Preservation of long term energy resourcesconcentration of Pu in MOX spent fuel under a reduced volume, providing full safeguard, leaves open the possibility to reuse Pu in future fast reactors or new fuels.....

• Separation of recovered uranium, sligthly enriched, for recyclingcurrently 40 t/yr, 2 reloads on 2 dedicated 900 MW units Cruas 3/4, fuel equivalent to UO2 3.7%



MOX UTILIZATION IN EDF NPPs..

First MOX loaded in 1987 at Saint Laurent B Gradually implemented first on 16 units of 900 MW series

• Dampierre 1/2/3/4, Gravelines 1/2/3/4, Tricastin 1/2/3/4, Saint Laurent 1/2, Blayais 1/2authorized by initial decree and after a safety review by French Safety Authority

• minor adaptations of the plant :4 additional control rods, boron concentration, enhanced security procedures …

• core management: UO2 3,25%, 30% MOX, Pu 5%, (36 UO2 + 16 MOX), 3 cycles

--> average burn up UO2 and MOX : 36 GWd/t

• MOX fuel assembly of Framatome-ANP design AFA - 2Gfabricated first at Dessel, Cadarache and then at Melox --> no fuel failure

• licensed transportation cask for fresh MOX fuel, safeguarded convoy

--> A proven experience feedback : no difference with UO2 fuel, no difficulty, no fuel failure....



Extension of MOX use on 20 reactors in 1997 : Chinon B 1/2/3/4 after local public enquiry and new authorization decree

--> Progressive improvement of UO2 / MOX core management • 1993: optimised hybrid reloads UO2 3.7% by 1/4, 30% MOX, Pu 5% (25 kg) by 1/3, (28UO2+16MOX)

reduction of the vessel neutron fluence (40% improvement compared with UO2)

• 1998: increase of total Pu content : 5% --> 7% to match Pu fissile isotopic composition --> UO2 average burn up 45 GWd/t , MOX average burn up 38 GWd/t

As of today : MOX use extensive experience feedback • 20 reactors loaded with MOX, more than 150 reactor.years

and more than 1500 MOX assemblies loaded, --> no fuel failure• MOX fuel with advanced AFA-3G Framatome design • reactors with MOX are autorized for load following • --> same operating and safety conditions as for UO2 fuel



SAFETY : SAME LEVEL AS UO2 FUEL • neutron spectrum --> 4 additional control rods, boron concentration increase • 3 zones of different Pu content (interface MOX / UO2)• fuel rods internal gas pressure: lower initial pressurization, larger free volume.... • power ramp test : no PCI rupture, good behaviour; RIA test : no difference with UO2 • technical specifications for primary water activity: same as UO2• transportation of spent fuel in TN12 cask, resin for neutron protection : 4 MOX + 8 UO2

OPERATING EXPERIENCE FEEDBACK : NO DIFFICULTY, SAME AS UO2 • same authorized operating range, lower Xenon effect • authorization for load following and stretch, same as for UO2

LIQUID AND GAZEOUS RELEASES, DOSIMETRY : NO IMPACT• gamma and neutron dosimetry for fresh fuel and spent fuel transportation

adressed by ALARA approach


QUALITY OF FABRICATION OF MOX (Quality Assurance) :Fabrication control is the vendor responsibility,under overall quality surveillance by EDF, focusing on key points :

• surveillance of qualification tests and files• surveillance program of fabrication stages, on a sample basis• acceptance of assemblies fabrication files• organizational and technical audit, follow up... • application of RCC-C ( Design and Construction Code for PWR Fuel Assemblies )

FUTURE PROGRESS FOR MOX : MOX PARITY 52 GWd/t in 2004 Good behaviour of MOX fuel with higher burn up Feasibility of MOX fuel management improvement, 3 cycles --> 4 cycles like UO2 --> "Parity MOX" project : max 52 GWd/t with 8.65% Pu content, --> average burn up 48 GWd/t for MOX, equivalent to UO2 enriched at 3.7% • minor adaptations (4 more additional control rods, boron adjustment): preparation of safety file• along with loading 100 HMt/yr MOX --> possibility to recycle all the separated Pu• implementation in 2004/2005 , after instruction and approval by Safety Authority

MOX UTILIZATION IN EDF NPPs


PUBLIC INFORMATION..

• No difference for public information concerning UO2 and MOX

• Public inquiry for MOX extension at Chinon B 1/2/3/4 in 1997 : no specific question, good local acceptation but questions and political debate at national level …

• Meeting with local information committee around NPPs (CLI) local mayors and elected representatives, media, associations, local authorities ...

• Public information and visitor centers, schools and educational information…

• A policy of enhancement of transparency and public information

• Use of INES scale for reactors events

--> no specific question at local level concerning MOX use MOX experience is now well established, no difference with UO2 fuel


• Debate at national level: reprocessing and MOX use opposed by "Green" Party, some associations... share of nuclear in future energy mix…

• A recent hearing at French National Assembly (november 2001) : --> major political leaders have expressed the need to continue and develop

nuclear energy and long term energy resources policy

• A governmental study on economy of nuclear energy in France has stressed : --> the major importance and economic robustness of nuclear energy and fuel cycle, --> the economic importance for long term operation of existing plants and facilities

• Draft laws under discussion : future electrity investments program, transparency and nuclear information, control of safety and radiological protection…

PUBLIC INFORMATION


FUEL CYCLE PROSPECTIVE : THE PROGRESS TO COME..

Constant progress on assembly structure, cladding and pellets, and on methodology leads to increased safety margins :

- Pellets: plant manoeuvrability (reduction of PCI), fission gas releases and internal pressure, fuel behavior

- Cladding : reduced creeping, corrosion and irradiation growth.

- Structure: reduced strain, grids buckling resistance, thermo-hydraulic (mixing grids...), fretting wear...

- Methodologies: behavior knowledge, mechanical and thermo-hydraulic margins assessment.

PROGRESS IN FUEL PERFORMANCES

--> POSSIBILITY TO ENHANCE NUCLEAR PRODUCTION ECONOMY :

• improvement of fuel efficiency with higher average burn up : --> less spent fuel for more energy produced ....

• improvement of nuclear energy production system management : --> longer operating cycle, higher availability and reduction of outages .... --> flexibility of reloads…


THE OBJECTIVES FOR NUCLEAR FUEL IMPROVEMENTSToday :

UO2 average burn up : 45 to 48 GWd/t, max 52 GWd/tMOX average burn up 38 GWd/t (3 cycles)

MOX Parity in 2004 : 4 cycles, equivalent UO2 3.7% , 48 GWd/t average, 52 GWd/t max,

2005 to 2010 : progress in two steps for UO2

• step 1 for UO2 : 4.5% , average burn up 54/57 GWd/t, max ≈ 60/63 GWd/t,

• step 2 for UO2 : 4.95 %, average burn up 64 GWd/t, max ≈ 70 GWd/t

MOX : future improvements around 2010 ( 55 GWd/t , ≈ 10% Pu … )

Flexibility of fuel reloads

NB : fuel management studies : 1/4 ou 1/3 or mixed




IMPACT OF HIGHER BURN UP FUEL ON FUEL CYCLE MANAGEMENT

Necessity to analyse : - the impacts of higher burn up on fuel cycle facilities :

safety, radiological protection, waste... - the overall fuel cycle consistency and adaptations if necessary....

--> An overall safety file has been drawn up by EDF with Cogema,Framatome-ANP, Transnucléaire and Andra the feasibility has been established both for UO2 and MOX fuel

--> Reviewed by French Safety Authority


BURN UP INCREASE AND REPROCESSING RECYCLING

==> OVERALL FUEL CYCLE CONSISTENCY AND NUCLEAR MATERIAL STABILIZATION

WITH EXISTING FACILITIES OPERATED IN THE LONG RUN

A progressive increase in average burn upbetween 2006 and 2015

Burn up increase==> equilibrium in spent fuel management , around 2015 :

Q reprocessed / year ( 850 tHM) = Q spent fuel / year


Mean Burn up for UO2 fuel GWd/t

0

20

40

60

20

01

20

03

20

05

20

07

20

09

20

11

20

13

20

15

20

17

20

19

20

21

20

23

20

25

20

27

20

29

20

31

GWd/t

Average Burn Up for UO2 fuel

loading sequence of nuclear fuel with increased average burn up

57

44

Spent fuel annual flow tHM/year

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

2025

2027

2029

2031

tML/year

UO2 spent fuel MOX Recycling Reprocessing

410

TWhe/year:spent fuel équilibrium :

UO2 unloaded = UO2 reprocessed



1/ STABILIZATION OF SPENT FUEL INVENTORY in interim storage UO2 and MOX

2/ PLUTONIUM FLUX ADEQUACY for separated Pu, quantity and qualityMOX parity in 2004, adjusted hold up (3 years for Am), 100 tHM/year MOX in 20 PWR 900 MW

--> FUEL CYCLE EQUILIBRIUM

Inventory of Spent fuel UO2 and MOX tHM

0

5000

10000

15000

2000020

01

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

2015

2017

2019

2021

2023

2025

2027

2029

2031

tHM

UO2 spent fuel volume MOXI spent fuel Total UO2I + MOXI

410

TWhe/year :



Studies for each step :

• Verification of global consistency with existing fuel cycle facilitiesand industry process, possibly adapted

• No new investments : existing plants and fuel cycle facilitiesoperated in the long run

• Anticipation of safety studies and administrative authorizations

• Preparation of future adaptations …

--> FUEL CYCLE CONSISTENCY


CONCLUSION..Nuclear generation plays a major role in France, as a safe, clean, competitive and independent energy resource. The closed fuel cycle strategy implemented in France, involving reprocessing of spent fuel and MOX recycling, has gained an extensive and good experience feedback and has reached a mature stage with existing plants.

The MOX fuel, loaded since 1987, has been extended on 20 units PWR 900 MW and shows an excellent record and experience feedback.More than 1500 MOX fuel assemblies have been fabricated at Dessel and Melox plant and loaded in EDF reactors, with no fuel failure.

Use of MOX fuel does not make any difference with UO2 fuel, with the same safety level and authorized operating range, including for load following. Current studies show the possibility to increase the energy output for MOX up to the same level as UO2 fuel.

Open information and good operating record for nuclear plants, both with UO2 and MOX fuel, is essential for public confidence at local level.


CONCLUSIONThe current fuel cycle as implemented in France enables future progress • to increase fuel performances and burn up, both for UO2 and MOX fuel, • and to enhance the economy and competitiveness of nuclear generation.

In a long term prospective, the reprocessing-recycling policy and the possibility to increase fuel performances and burn up enable, with existing fuel cycle facilities:• a safe management and a stabilization of nuclear material along fuel cycle, in order to reach a global equilibrium both for separated plutonium and for spent fuel;• preservation of future energy resources with the plutonium concentrated in MOX spent fuel, under safeguard rules;• a safe and long term confinement for High Level Waste by vitrification, leaving open the various long term back end options under R&D studies according to 1991 law.

It is fundamental to reach a mutual better understanding between industry, authorities, political elected representatives and the public, and throughout the world, regarding long term nuclear energy and fuel cycle issues, which are essential for clean, sustainable and economic development.

05 edf.ppt[読み取り専用]

Documents