Introduction to Nuclear Power
Ideas today about what to do about global
warming go in several different directions
Should we build new nuclear power plants?
- is it safe?
- do you have a logical
site to build it
- how does it affect the
community?
- environmental impact
- cost
- how did we get where we
are?
Some of the scientists who had built the first
atomic bomb put their energy into the arms race, others saw
the only way to make it all worthwhile to be to develop
peaceful uses for atomic energy
- power was most promising, although a
variety of other schemes were discussed
- the only interest of the Atomic Energy
Commission was more bombs until about 1947, and even after
that military needs were first priority. The AEC was
worried about shortage of uranium. However, they did
develop some reactor technology to produce plutonium, as at
the Savannah River Plant.
- When the AEC first started planning
for nuclear power in 1948 they stressed breeder reactors:
produce both power and plutonium. Dec. 20, 1951, a
fast breeder reactor became the first reactor to generate
significant power.
Light bulbs lit by first US reactor to supply electricity
- Meanwhile more practical reactor technology
was being developed for the Navy. Admiral Hyman
Rickover was assigned by the Navy to Oak Ridge to study
reactors. He became a true believer and in 1948 became
head of a joint Navy-AEC project to develop a nuclear
submarine. He singlehandedly pushed the project
through, and the first nuclear powered submarine was tested
in prototype by Nov. 1952
first nuclear submarine
A number of technologies were possible for
nuclear power plants
- light water uranium reactors were picked
for the submarine project because they took advantage of
existing facilities for uranium separation and had features
(such as lack of exotic or dangerous cooling fluids)
particularly useful for submarines
- Westinghouse, who was working on the Navy
project, proposed using the same kind of reactor as a power
plant--the first reactor for commercial power generation was
a 60 MW plant built by Westinghouse with AEC funding in
Shippingport, Pennsylvania. It began operation in
1957, at an operating cost ten times the standard for
electricity generation at the time. The best reactor
for a submarine wasn't necessarily the best for power
plants.
- A number of experimental reactors were
built, including liquid sodium breeder, boiling water,
pressurized water. By the end of 1957 the AEC had 7
experimental reactors and 11 cooperative or independent
industry projects.
Experimental Breeder Reactor
Period of slow development of commercial use
- The problems of developing nuclear power
were legal as well as technological. In 1954 changes
in the Atomic Energy Act (in response to a call by
Eisenhower for peaceful uses in 1953) for the first time
allowed private industry to owner reactors under AEC license
and allowed AEC to exchange technical data on nuclear power.
- Industry found that private insurance
company would only come up with $60 million in insurance for
commercial nuclear power plants--not nearly enough.
The federal government stepped in with the 1957
Price-Anderson Act, to allow the industry to get off the
ground. The Price-Anderson
Act solved the insurance problem by releasing everyone
involved in building and operating a nuclear power plant
from liability. Damages up to a specified amount would
be paid from a pool first provided by the federal government
and insurance companies and then funded by the
industry. That meant that in the case of an accident
all damages above the limit--set initially at $560
million--would not be compensated (unless the federal
government decided to provide more disaster aid).
- the AEC started subsidizing private
industry construction of reactors--which did not look
economically feasible without subsidy. The Democrats
and the scientists pushed the AEC to do more through the
50s, and the AEC by the 1960s did more promoting than
regulating of atomic power
- But private industry was worried about
whether costs could be brought low enough. At the time
coal powered generation was becoming more efficient--the
average cost of coal in 1964 was $5 per ton, delivered, so
the lower fuel cost for nuclear power wasn't that big an
advantage.
- worries about safety were also growing:
- An Experimental
Breeder
Reactor in Idaho had a core meltdown in 1955.
The accident was contained, but since EBR-1 was a breeder
it could have turned into a nuclear bomb (unlike
conventional reactors).
- It led to the first important outside
safety study, WASH-740, which estimated that a serious
accident was no more likely than one chance in 100,000 per
reactor year. However, it also estimated that a
serious accident at a planned breeder reactor in Detroit
would cause 3,400 deaths, 43,000 injuries, and $7 billion
in property damage. (This was not the most negative
prediction--another scientific study of the same breeder
accident scenario estimated 133,000 prompt deaths, 181,000
likely or possible long-term fatalities, and 245,000
massive somatic and genetic injuries).
- The reactor near Detroit was built and
quickly suffered an accident whose seriousness is
debated--one journalist wrote a book titled We Almost
Lost Detroit with some fairly convincing evidence.
- progress was maintained by concentrating on
less ambitious designs.
- By the end of 1962, the AEC had spent $1
billion and private industry $500 million. The
operating costs had dropped from 50 mills/kwh or 10
mills/kwh, and was expected to drop quickly to 5 mills/kwh,
compared to 4.1 to 6.2 for conventional power generation
(they also predicted that costs would drop to 3.8 mills/kwh
by 1980--in fact the cost in 1980 was 2.3 cents).
1971 Robinson plant near Hartsville SC
The period of enthusiasm
- Glen Seaborg, the chairman of the AEC,
predicted that nuclear power would be the leading energy
source in most of the world by the end of the century.
- the companies that built nuclear power
plants offered fixed cost deals, probably the first six of
which were priced below cost. Large numbers of orders
were placed based on optimistic assumptions about how costs
would continue to fall.
- Arab oil embargo of 1973 and the resulting
600% increase in oil costs (between 1970 and 1973) gave a
further boost, but even with low fuel and operations costs
nuclear power was still not very competitive because of the
very high and unpredictable construction costs (in which
interest rates played a key role, and the oil crisis led
indirectly to higher interest rates).
- By Dec. 1976 60 reactors were completed
The beginning of the decline
- Only six new reactors were started between
1975 and 1980, and there were 50 cancellations of previous
orders and about 100 deferrals. Many of these were
caused by cost issues even before the accident at Three Mile
Island, March 28, 1979.
- public perception was increasingly negative
- after Three Mile Island many new
regulations were issued, increasing the cost of plants
Example Oconee
Nuclear Plant relicensing (first given a 40 year
license in 1973-4)
- Oconee Nuclear was the
second nuclear power plant in the U.S. to be given an
extension of its operating license for an additional 20
years
- very little opposition
- zone
map
- South
Carolina
Energy
Sources
Issues:
- Design life
- old technology (eg. welds
containing copper and nickel)--cracks were discovered a
few months after relicensing
- Oconee already has over 1500
metric tons of radioactive waste on site
- financial: what are the
different kinds of costs to be considered?
- construction costs (and
how accurately those can be predicted)
- operating and maintenance
costs
- changing costs of
alternative approaches
- regulatory costs
- increasing costs due to
public pressure for increasing safety standards
- decommissioning costs
New nuclear power plants
- There are currently 103
reactors in the U.S. generating about 20% of the nation's
electricity
- six U.S. companies are
proposing to build new nuclear power plants
- on March 16, 2006 Duke Power proposed
two at a site in Cherokee
County (10 miles outside of Gaffney) next to where earlier
plans to build a nuclear power plant had been
abandoned in the 1980s
- A license application
was filed in 2007 with a decision expected in 2012
- they have also
considered Oconee Nuclear for an additional reactor
Advantages:
- reduce global warming
and acid rain (the most economical fuel for electrical
generation is coal)
- less dependent on
foreign oil
- all other alternative
power sources would be more expensive
- improved technology (failsafe
nuclear power plant design is possible)
Disadvantages
- accident risk is of
large accidents causing long term contamination
- potential terrorist
targets
- nuclear waste problem is
not solved--Yucca Mountain is supposed to open in 2017
- Yucca mountain has
been costing $500 million a year but when construction
begins in earnest will go over $1 billion a year
- strong political
opposition in Nevada