Atomic Insights

Atomic energy technology, politics, and perceptions from a nuclear energy insider who served as a US nuclear submarine engineer officer

GE-Hitachi and DTE announce additional ESBWR detailed design work

By 32 Comments

GE-Hitachi issued a press release on October 5 indicating that they will be working with DTE to determine the resource requirements and schedule for performing the detailed design work necessary to build an ESBWR (Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor) as Fermi Unit 3.

Though DTE has not announced a decision to build the facility, it received its COL (construction and operating license) in April 2015.

Cooperating with GE-Hitachi on detailed design work would enable DTE to move more quickly into a construction project if it decides that the facility’s production capacity is needed and that the ESBWR represents the best available choice to fill the need. That decision is a complex one that takes into account many factors in addition to the projected levelized cost of electricity from the completed nuclear power plant.

My assumption is that DTE’s reluctance to commit to building the plant is related to the intensive political discussion in Michigan regarding the future structure of the electricity market.

Though Michigan initially deregulated its wholesale market in 2000, the legislature revised the law in 2008 to implement a hybrid system that limits participation in a customer choice program to 10% of the total load of any of the existing monopoly utility companies. Because the choice program was most beneficial for larger customers, the 10% load cap means that about 0.5% of the customers currently participate.

There is an 11,000 customer-long waiting list and some pressure on the legislature to increase the portion of the market subject to competition. On the other side of the discussion, utility suppliers like DTE are in favor of eliminating the hybrid system and going back to a fully regulated market. They point out that the current law allows choice customers to change their selection without much notice.

That complicates long range capacity planning. It allows lucky customers to take advantage of an over-supplied regional market up to the point where the excess capacity disappears and prices begin to climb. If a substantial portion of the choice customers switch their selection, the utilities that are required to serve them would not have included their demand in their capacity planning. The choice customers would not have paid their share of the capacity additions.

As a result of the slowly accelerating economic recovery and dramatic drop in the price of oil, the regionally important automotive industry is growing and adding its demand to the increasing need for new capacity. There are a number of relatively small, old coal fired power plants that are likely to be shut down instead of retrofitted to meet increasingly stringent air pollution control requirements.

The treatment of new nuclear power plants under the Clean Power Plan provides additional support for a decision to build Fermi 3; states get credit for the emission free nature of nuclear energy. A single project that can produce close to 10 billion kilowatt-hours of clean electricity each year will make a large impact on Michigan’s ability to comply with the plan.

If the legislature provides more clarity about the future of electricity regulation, the likelihood of DTE making a final investment decision to build Fermi Unit 3 will increase.

That means there is a reasonably high probability that Fermi Unit 3 will remain the lead ESBWR and that my speculation about North Anna Unit 3 moving into the lead role was premature.

That project is still about two years behind Fermi Unit 3; according to the currently published review schedule, the final Safety Evaluation Report (SER) issuance is targeted for April 2017 and the final Commission decision on issuing a COL does not yet have a scheduled target date.

The North Anna 3 COL review schedule page was last reviewed on September 28, so it is only a little more than a week old.

Steam generators are an option, not a necessity

By

The US Nuclear Regulator Commission (NRC) recently posted a blog written by Kenneth Karwoski, Senior Advisor for Steam Generators that attempts to help people understand a little more about steam generators. The blog post was titled Where There’s Steam, There’s … a Steam Generator.

Aside: Many of my colleagues would immediately point to the title as misleading. Their professional experience includes plants that produce a large quantity of steam without using steam generators. End Aside.

Since Mr. Karwoski’s job is to be a senior advisor for steam generators at the NRC, I understand why he would make the following parochial statement:

Steam generators provide vital technical and safety functions at many U.S. nuclear power plants.

My direct experience with nuclear power plants is limited to those that include steam generators, but I am aware that my experience in the specialized application of using nuclear energy inside sealed submarines full of people breathing in the same limited air space where the reactor operates is not representative of the whole range of design options.

In the mid 1950s, a series of experimental reactors called BORAX-1, BORAX-II and BORAX-III were built at a facility in Idaho then known as the National Reactor Testing Station. Those reactors proved that the radioactivity that was introduced into the water used to cool light water reactors was low enough to allow the water to boil in direct contact with nuclear fuel rods, producing steam to turn turbines without the need for expensive heat exchangers.

Vallecitos Boiling Water Reactor

Vallecitos Boiling Water Reactor

GE followed up on those experiments with the Vallecitos Boiling Water Reactor and then developed a series of boiling water reactors that use primary coolant to directly drive steam turbines.

Boiling water reactors continue to be a safe and cost-effective design choice. They have the potential to be far more cost competitive than pressurized water reactors under regulatory regimes that impose radiation dose and dose rate rules that are based on actual, vice imaginary health effects.

It is in the full knowledge of the existence of boiling water reactors that I assert that classifying steam generator u-tubes as performing a “vital safety function” is an exaggeration. All heat exchangers should be built carefully. They are worth maintaining in order to keep the system functioning as designed. They are worth repairing if any of the heat exchange surfaces begins leaking and allowing mixing of fluids that the designers prefer to keep separate.
[Read more…] about Steam generators are an option, not a necessity

Radiation probes indicate NO melt through at Fukushima Unit 1

By

Tepco has recently released measurements that provide convincing evidence that virtually all of the corium in Fukushima Daiichi unit #1 remains safely stored inside an intact reactor pressure vessel. Despite all claims to the contrary, no substantial quantities of that material have melted through the pressure vessel to fall onto the concrete floor of the […]

The Atomic Show #057 – Boiling Water Reactors

By 4 Comments

Shane and Rod discuss boiling water reactors, one of the two types of established light water reactors. There are two main types of light water reactors, pressurized water reactors (PWR) and boiling water reactors (BWR). They share some characteristics, but also have a number of differences. There are plenty of sources of information on the […]