THORIUM AS AN ENERGY SOURCE - OPPORTUNITIES FOR NORWAY - REPORT BY THE THORIUM COMMITTEE DIETER RØHRICH UIB AND CERN (FROM 1.3.08)
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Thorium as an energy source – opportunities for Norway Report by the Thorium committee Dieter Røhrich UiB and CERN (from 1.3.08) 1
Thorium as an energy source – opportunities for Norway The mandate: Concluding remarks: “The Committee’s work and • The current knowledge of the resulting Report shall thorium based energy establish a solid knowledge generation and the geology is base concerning both not solid enough to provide a opportunities and risks final assesment regarding the related to the use of thorium potential value for Norway of a for long-term energy thorium based system for a long production. The work should term energy production. be conducted as a study of • The Committee recommends the opportunities and that the thorium option be kept possibilities (screening), open in so far it represents an based on a review of interesting complement to the Norway’s thorium resources uranium option to strengthen and the status of key the sustainability of nuclear technologies.[...]” energy 2
Primary energy consumption • World energy flows at the end of the last century 53% 37% 26% 8% 5% 22% = 150% oil coal gas hydro nuclear other electricity generation 12% Residential and Transportation 24% Industry 38% commercial 38% = 100% 3
Energy situation in Europe • Status 2004 – 152 nuclear reactors -> 31% of electricity consumption – Nordic countries » Sweden: 10 units » Finland: 4 units, one nuclear power plant under construction • The EU Climate and Energy Package - Targets by 2020 – Reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 20% compared to 1990 level – Reduction of energy consumption by 20% compared to 1990 level – Increase the share of renewable sources in the EU energy mix to 20% – Increase the share of biofuels of transport petrol and diesel to 10% 5
Cumulative natural uranium demand and reserves Nuclear Energy Agency’s Reference Cumulative Natural Uranium Demand and Reserve Levels Scenario 6 200 • Continued nuclear 180 5 growth Million Tonnes Natural Uranium 160 • Reported uranium GtCO 2 Equivalent 4 140 120 reserves last until 3 100 about 2040 80 • Reported reserves 2 60 depend on demand – 1 40 might increase 20 • Breeder reactor 0 0 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050 technology would Reserves (US$80/kgU) Reserves (US$130/kgU) Nat. U demand (Million t U) change this development 6
Energy situation in Norway • 100% hydro power • Production matches the consumption • Large fluctuations in production due to weather variations • Import/export via power cables to Sweden, Finland, Netherlands 7
Thorium as nuclear fuel • Thorium has been used as nuclear fuel since the 1960s • Preparation of thorium fuel is more complex and expensive than that of uranium fuel • Thorium as a nuclear fuel is technically well established and behaves remarkably well in various reactors • Reprocessing thorium fuel is complicated and will require a substantial effort for the development of a commercial plant • Waste management will in principal follow known procedures and methods • Radiation protection requirements for the thorium cycle might be lower than those of the uranium cycle • Technically, one of the best ways to dispose of a plutonium stock pile is to burn it in a thorium-plutonium MOX fuel 9
Nuclear reactors for thorium fuel • U-233 has some very attractive properties as fissile material – U-233 emits so many neutrons per fission that they can sustain a chain reaction AND breed new U-233 from Th-232 number of neutrons = produced per neutron captured 10
Nuclear reactors for thorium fuel • Advantage – Practically NO production of longlived transuranic elements -> reduced radiotoxicity of waste • Disadvantage – Smaller percentage of delayed neutrons -> more difficult to control in extreme situations – Management of parasitic Pa-233 -> difficult reactor operation (online re-fuelling, special seed-blanket geometry) 11
(Industrial) experience with thorium in nuclear reactors Country Name Type Power Operation Germany AVR HTGR 15 MWe 1967 - 1988 Germany THTR HTGR 300 MWe 1985 - 1989 UK, OECD-EURATOM also Norway, Sweden & Dragon HTGR 20 MWth 1966 -1973 Switzerland USA Fort St Vrain HTGR 330 MWe 1976 – 1989 USA, ORNL MSRE MSBR 7.5 MWth 1964 – 1969 Shippingport & LWBR 100 MWe 1977 – 1982 USA Indian Point PWR 285 MWe 1962 – 1980 KAMINI, 30 kWth India CIRUS & MTR 40 MWth In operation DHRUVA 100 MWth 12
Shippingport light water reactor • Light water breeding reactor – Fuelled with U-233 and Th-232 – Produced 1.4% more fuel than it burned Pennsylvania, USA 13
Status of thorium projects today • Most projects using thorium were terminated by the end of the 1980s • Main Reasons – The thorium fuel cycle could not compete economically with the well-known uranium cycle – Lack of political support for the development of nuclear technology after the Chernobyl accident – Increased worldwide concern regarding the proliferation risk associated with reprocessing of spent fuel • Except for India – long term energy plan which includes a complicated scheme of plutonium and thorium fuel 16
Future nuclear energy systems using thorium • Goal – self-sustaining thorium fuel cycle (no U-235, U-238 or plutonium) • Two potential reactor types (conceptual level) – Molten salt reactor » One of the reactor types of the roadmap of the Generation IV International Forum » Not specially designed for thorium » 20-30 years of R&D – Accelerator Driven System (ADS) » Proton accelerator + spallation target + subcritical reactor core » Very versatile and flexible concept » Part of the EURATOM FP6 roadmap (MYRRHA project in Belgium) » Considered at the moment for the transmutation of waste (and not for energy production) » 20-30 years of R&D 17
Thorium market • There is no market for thorium as of today • By-product of rare earth element mining • Total amount of thorium produced worldwide: 37 500 tonnes (US, Australia, China, India) 22
Thorium in Norway World Thorium Reserves and Reserve Base (Resources) 700 000 US Geological Survey claims that: 600 000 • Norway has one of the major thorium 500 000 reserves in the world. Tonnes 400 000 300 000 Reserve Base 200 000 Reserves 100 000 0 Norway The Geological Survey of Norway: Brazil India United Malaysia States countries Africa Canada South Australia Other • Thorium has never been specifically explored for • Fen Complex most promising • Low concentration 0.1 – 0.4 wt% • Volume estimates are uncertain • Grain size too small for the traditional flotation processes • Norway has a potential resource • More investigations necessary to define as a reserve 23
Conclusions and recommendations (1) The potential contribution of nuclear energy to a sustainable energy future should be recognized. • Volume estimates of Norwegian thorium resources are uncertain; the grain size is too small for traditional extraction processes. It is essential to assess whether thorium in Norwegian rocks can be defined as an economical asset for the benefit of future generations. • The development of an ADS using thorium is not within the capability of a Norway working alone. Joining the European effort in that field should be considered. 24
Conclusions and recommendations (2) Norway should strengthen its international collaboration by joining the EURATOM fission programme and GIF programme on Generation IV reactors suitable for the use of thorium • The proliferation resistance of uranium-233 depends on the reactor and reprocessing technologies. Due to the lack of experience with industrial-scale thorium fuel cycle facilities, similar safeguard measures as for plutonium are considered mandatory until otherwise documented. 25
Conclusions and recommendations (3) • Any new nuclear activity in Norway, e.g. thorium fuel cycles, would need strong international pooling of human resources, and in the case of thorium strong long-term commitment. In order to meet the challenge related to the new nuclear era in Europe, Norway should secure its competence within nuclear sciences and nuclear engineering fields. 26
You can also read