Showing posts with label PHWRs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PHWRs. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

White Paper on Global Nuclear Deployment Draft: Appendix 1: The Indian Nuclear System

Homi J. Bhabha, a Parsi physicist, was the father of the Indian nuclear system. A well regarded cosmic ray researcher, he founded the Tata Institute of Fundamental Research in 1945. Bhabha was a friend of Indian political leader, Jawaharlal Nehru, and in 1946 the two began to collaborate on the creation of future Indian nuclear plans. In 1948 Bhabba became the founding director of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission. Nahru trusted Bhabba to develop a comprehensive nuclear program, and he did until his death in 1969.

Bhabba's quickly realized that India's uranium resources were small, while it had much larger thorium resources. In order to assure indian strategic energy independence, Bhabba decided to build India's long term nuclear future on a thorium fuel cycle, rather than the uranium fuel cycle. There is little doubt that Bhabba envisioned India as not only a nuclear powered state but a nuclear armed state as well. Yet he placed priority on the development of a nuclear power program. India did not truly become a nuclear armed state, until it conducted nuclear weapons tests in 1998, long after Bhabba's 1969 death.

Bhabba envisioned a three stage nuclear plan. In the first stage conventional reactors would produce reactor grade plutonium (RGP) as a bye product of power production. In the United States, RGP is regarded as a nuisance, but Bhabba saw it as an opportunity. When enough RGP had been accumulated, Bhabba saw that it could be used to fuel sodium cooled fast breeder reactors. In the second stage of Bhabba's plan, a fast reactor technology would be developed that would breed both thorium and uranium. Fast reactors run on plutonium, and in Bhabba's plan, the Indians would produce at least on gram of plutonium for every plutonium gram burned. Breeders operate on something called a neutron economy. There have to be enough neutrons available to produce fuel for the continuing nuclear process. In addition extra neutrons can produce surplus fuel that could be used in other reactors. It was Bhabba's plan to use the extra neutrons to convert thorium into U-233. Now u-233 makes excellent fuel for conventional reactors, and indeed in heavy water reactors a pure thorium-U-233 fuel cycle has a very good nuclear cycle. So good that it can at least break even in nuclear fuel production. Bhabba's third stage was to use specially designed Heavy water reactors as thorium converters, that is to produce enough fuel from thorium to keep the process running for along time.

The Bhabba plan committed India to heavy water technology, so early Indian reactor development was based on collaboration with the Canadians who had with the British, developed Heavy Water reactors during World War II. Eventually in 1974 when India tested its first nuclear device, the Indians had a parting of the way with Canada, over proliferation related issues, and the Canadians stopped providing the Indians support for its nuclear power development.

By 1974 the Indians had built one small heavy water CANDU power reactor, and were in the midst of building another. Although they were not entirely prepared to do so in 1974, the Indians took over the design and production of their own reactors. The started with the Canadian small CANDU reactor whose design they had inherited, and gradually modified it to improve it. While doing so, their technology got better and better. In fact by the end of the 20th century, the Indians were producing small PHWRs at very competitive costs. By then they had build a small sodium cooled fast breeder test reactor, which they used to research their combined uranium and thorium fuel cycle. At first they had a lot of problems, but as time passed, they began to master the very challenging Liquid Metal Fast Breeder technology.

Today the Indians are building a mid size commercial fast breeder prototype, which is expected to go on line next year. It is expected to be followed up by six more commercial fast breeders to be completed by 2023. While this is going on, a second generation of Indian commercial fast breeders is under development. Indian plans call for well over 100 fast breeders to be completed by the mid point of this century.

In addition to its very ambitious fast breeder development program, the Indians are developing their third stage Thorium fuel cycle heavy water converter, the AHWR-300. The prototype is expected to go on line in 2018.

In order to supply the plutonium to run so many fast breeders, the Indian plan is to build many foreign reactors. Reactor manufactures are also in the nuclear fuel business, and along with the reactors expect to supply their fuel for a long time to come. Since Indian uranium supplies are limited foreign reactors mean fairly assured fuel supplies. When that fuel has been used, the Indians plan to extract RGP from it, and then use the RGP to start their fleet of FBRs, while using the remaining "depleted uranium" to breed more plutonium in their FBRs. The need to find sources of imported uranium explains why India is buying foreign reactors as if they were going out of style. In fact, Indian PHWRs would probably cost less and require a less expensive industrial base, but uranium supplies would be less certain.. The expansion of the Indian industrial base, required to build foreign reactor has an economic side benefit. India expects to produce large reactor components for the global as well as the local market.

The purchase of foreign reactors does not mean that India has abandoned Homi Bhabha's three stage plan. Quite the contrary, that plan is being expanded and elaborated. It has lead India in the second decade of the 21st century to be among all nations to have the clearest path forward into the post carbon era. However, as good as Homi Bhabha plan was, in the 21st century it is not without its flaws.

The most conspicuous flaw is the plan's complexity. Currently the plan calls for the use of three distinct reactor technologies, each with its own path of development. In addition to its complex reactor technologies, the Indian plan calls for multiple, expensive and complex fuel reprocessing technologies. Although a simpler plan was not possible in the 1950's, this was no loner the case in 1970 after Oak Ridge National Laboratory had demonstrated the potential of Molten Salt Reactor technology. Not only was a thorium breeding MSR possible, but it could be started with RGP and then switched over to U-233, replacing both fast breeder and AHWR in Bhabba's plan. In addition the Thorium Breeding Molten Salt Reactor, the LFTR offered technically superior, less complex, and less expensive fuel reprocessing system, that could take place in the reactors "hot cell," where the diversion of fissionable materials would be completely unlikely. In addition the MSR technology "bag of tricks" offers other potential paths for proliferation avoidance. Those several proliferation avoiding methods could be used individually or simultaneously. A LFTR based plan, would most likely to have proceeded more rapidly, and to cost far less to develop, as well as costing far less to build and manage, than the Bhabba three stage plan.

But there should always be a Plan B, in case Plan A does not work. The argument in this White Paper is that Plan A for post-carbon energy should involve the mass deployment of LFTRs. Plan B would be the Homi J. Bhabha three stage plan.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

Indian Reactor Costs, Further Investigations


I recently received a link to an Indian Government PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
STATUS REPORT covering central Sector projects for the first three months of 2009. This report is part of an ongoing effort by the Indian government to monitor cost and time performances of construction projects. The Report notes seven Indian reactor projects:
1. The Kaiga Power project Units 3 and 4
Both 220 MWe PHWRs
2. The Kudankulam Power Project units 1 and 2
Both are Russian 1000 MWe VVER-1000 light water reactors
At present Russia and India have an agreement to build four more reactors at the Kudankulam site.
3 The Rajasthan Power Project Units 5 and 6
Both 220 MWe PHWRs
4. The Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor
1 Unit @ 500 MWe
Four other production units are planned for construction during the next decade.

Costs:
The reported cost of the two Units of the Kaiga project is Rs.3282 crores, or about $656 Million. (the crores is a unit of 100,000). Thus their capital cost of the Kaiga reactors is $1.49 per watt. The Rajasthan units have an estimated cost of Rs.3072 crores. with a capital cost of $1.40 per watt. Lets review some other recent Indian PHWR costs:
TAPP-3&4 has an approved cost of Rs. 6525 crores, but it is anticipated that the Project would be completed in about Rs.6000 crores. . .,

Or about $1.11 cents per watt. The lower cost can be attributed to economies of scale for the 540 MWe PHWR units. I previously inferred from statements about TAPP costs that the construction cost for 220 MW PHWRs ran about $1.18 per watt. That not appears to be 20 to 30 cents low per watt. it should be noted that the 700 MWe PHWR uses a slightly upgraded variant of the 540 MW PHWR core. If the upgrade is accomplished without any significant cost increases, then the cost of the 700 MWe PHWRs could run as low as $0.85 per watt. I would like to caution that this estimate is not yet supported by data supplied from Indian sources, thus must be considered both tentative and speculative, but this suggests that very careful attention should be paid to future Indian reactor costs.

it would appear then that the cost of mid size indigenous Indian Reactors is quite competitive with that of the Russian reactors now being built in India. The first two VVER-1000 carry an approved cost of Rs.13171 crore, or about $2.6 billion. This gives us an overnight cost of $1.31 per Watt. the Indians may well be motivated to build the higher cost Russian reactors because they bring with them access to Uranium fuel. The indigenous Uranium supply is the Achilles heel of the Indian nuclear industry.

Indian costs compared to Western costs

Indian reactors are built with appropriated funds rather than borrowed funds. The Indian government doers expect a return on its investment, as it should if it intends t0o continue building reactors. Power from Indian reactors currently costs Indian consumers between Rs. 2 and 2.5 per kWh, about 4 to 5 cents per kWh. Thus the price of power produced by Indian reactors is competitive with the process of electricity produced from coal fired power plants.

Thus the Indian nuclear industry, has the potential to be a world beater in the cost of of post carbon electricity. It should be noted that there are potentials to lower the cost of Indian reactors could be extended even further. Large scale reactor construction can utilize factory production of reactor kits, a system being evolved in China. important reactor parts such as pressure tubes and fuel bundles, can be mass produced. And large scale production of parts such as pumps and steam generators can lower costs. Thus the Indian nuclear industry has the potential to build reactors substantially below $1.00 per watt, and possibly substantially below 85 cents per watt. Thus a very real probability exists that by 2050nIndian electricity could cost half of what Chinese electricity costs, and as little as 20% of the cost of electricity in Europe and the United States. Even lower reactor and electrical costs would be possible if India chose to adopt LFTR type reactors, as a move to achieve maximum efficiency from the thorium fuel cycle.

If this analysis is correct, we might find contrary to our present expectations, that India, and not China will energy as the world's most significant economic power by the end of the 21st century.

Invitation: I invite more information on Indian nuclear technology and costs, in order to extend my analysis.

Followers

Blog Archive

Some neat videos

Nuclear Advocacy Webring
Ring Owner: Nuclear is Our Future Site: Nuclear is Our Future
Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet Free Site Ring from Bravenet
Get Your Free Web Ring
by Bravenet.com
Dr. Joe Bonometti speaking on thorium/LFTR technology at Georgia Tech David LeBlanc on LFTR/MSR technology Robert Hargraves on AIM High