1 / 25

Indian experience and capabilities in energy planning studies

Indian experience and capabilities in energy planning studies. R.K. Sinha Director, Reactor Design & Development Group Design Manufacturing & Automation Group Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India.

aderyn
Télécharger la présentation

Indian experience and capabilities in energy planning studies

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Indian experience and capabilities in energy planning studies R.K. Sinha Director, Reactor Design & Development Group Design Manufacturing & Automation Group Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India

  2. The three stages of the Indian nuclear programme incorporate the strategy for most optimum utilisation of indigenous nuclear fuel resources PHWR FBTR AHWR Th 300 GWe - Year U fueled 42000 Th Electricity Nat. U PHWRs GWe - Year Dep. U Electricity 155000 Pu Fueled GWe - Year Fast Breeders Pu 233 U Electricity U Fueled 233 Reactors Pu 233 U Expanding power programme Thorium utilisation for Power generation primarily by PHWR Building U inventory 233 Sustainable power programme Building fissile inventory for stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 1 Stage 2

  3. A problem for scenario building • Specific question: What is the optimum strategy (reactor and fuel cycle combinations with dates of deployment) for achieving a nearly fastest rate of growth to a desired target power level, with given nuclear fuel resources? • The question is relevant not only for India, but in all regional and global contexts.

  4. We tried three different tools for answering the question • Dynamic Energy System Atomic Energy (DESAE) • BARC (Basak) • Nuclear fuel cycle code (developed by Basak, BARC) • Not being presented here. • Tool for Energy Planning Studies (TEPS) (developed by Kelkar, BARC) • Being presented here. • Mohapatra, IGCAR will separately present experience with DESAE.

  5. Experience with DESAE code (v1.2) for optimisation of scenarios.

  6. Most of the capabilities of DESAE Code were explored

  7. DESAE Code has several very good capabilities for use in the context of INPRO • Combinations of different types of reactors and fuel cycles. • Estimation of nuclear fuel resources and their optimization • Estimation of infrastructure needed for various aspects of fuel cycle • Estimation of overall economics • Investments required in nuclear plant building, in fuel recycling, in fuel fabrication etc. • Estimation of amount of important material needed • Graphical user interface makes execution of the code very easy • At a glance one can compare nuclear scenario of different countries

  8. Some difficulties faced: Input Interface for reactor (NPP) and fuel cycle (NFC) types • Difficulty in combining several NPP to particular NFC type • Difficulty in linking fuel made from reprocessed fuel of a particular type of NPP to other NPP as input fuel

  9. Input Interface needs linkage between reprocessed fuel and reactors to show their utilization This will help in better planning and control of the reprocessed fuel Such linkages are desirable

  10. Input Interfaces for reactor characteristics and fuel cycles should be flexible. ? ? Natural Reactor life Staff • The characteristics of the reactors will differ from reactor to reactor • They will also differ for different fuel cycles such as Thorium fuel cycle • The code can become more useful if there is a flexibility in introducing characteristics for individual reactor type, different fuel cycle and materials

  11. DESAE Code – Needs for additional features development (based on BARC experience with v1.2) • Flexibility for making user defined inputs for any reactor specific / fuel cycle characteristics. • Flexibility to include user defined objectives for the study, and include the definition of key indicators relevant for meeting the objective. • Flexibility to incorporate studies relevant for non-electricity generating plants

  12. Experience with Tool for Energy Planning Studies (TEPS)

  13. Tool for Energy Planning Studies (TEPS) • TEPS has been developed with an aim to predict an optimised installation plan that, while satisfying constraints such as material resources available and requirements placed by the various reactor systems etc., will help in achieving a given target power level at the earliest time • The input parameters include the various material requirements of the individual reactor systems, power levels at which each system will be operated and the capacity factor of operation • User is provided with a choice to delay the installation of a particular type of reactor till he desires • A preliminary analysis to study the options for deployment of thorium has been carried out using TEPS

  14. Sample studies using TEPS • Studies on options for utilisation of thorium • Scope of the study in progress: • To look for the best technically feasible options for deploying available nuclear fuel resources. • Objectives: • To reach a given target power level in the shortest possible time. • Sustenance at the target power level for at least 100 years. • Comparison of energy and specific energy produced by different combination of reactor systems for different initial inventories of natural uranium and thorium for different options. • To understand the impact of deployment of thorium based reactor. systems, and the time frame when large scale thorium utilisation should begin. The results presented are only a sample and it does not represent the Indian situation

  15. Assessment of options for using 233U • A chain of reactors consisting of PHWR, FR(Pu-U), FR(Pu-Th), FR(Pu-Th)RB, AHWR and MSR is considered. • The priority for installation of new reactors is decided based on plutonium breeding, 233U generation and 233U utilisation. • Parametric calculations were carried out by varying the initial natural uranium and thorium inventory for different target power. • A large number of cases have been run, only a few indicative ones are presented. Some of the physics studies need to be updated for more recent nuclear data, and new physics designs worked out to explore more options. • Most of the reference cases presented are based on the availability of 50000 te U, and 150,000 te Th at time zero.

  16. Indicators for assessing the performance of full reactor system chains Time for which the target power can be sustained (Years) Target power level (GWe) Time required to achieve target power (Years) Total energy produced (TWe-Year) (given by area under curve) In this study we aim to achieve the target power level at the fastest possible rate

  17. Some results of the sample case study

  18. Introduction of thorium without plutonium breeding in fast reactors results in insignificant energy production from given nuclear resources 18 GWe (Peak) PHWR 50000 te NU Pu PHWR (Pu-Th) 150000 te Th 233U MSR Energy produced: 2.4 TWe-year <2500 t Thorium can be utilised, Peak power: 18 GWe in 40 years Use of Molten Salt Reactors (CR=1.0)

  19. Putting all PHWR-generated-Pu in Pu-Th FRs will yield peak power of 11.6 GWe for 17 years, energy potential 0.54 TWe/Yr. Chain: PHWR540-FR(Pu-Th) The energy produced in this chain is 0.54 TWe-yr Power GWe Residual material (tonnes) Plutonium : 16.48 Rep. Uranium : 45221.12 Thorium : 149615.2 Uranium-233 : 190.81 Nat. Uranium : 3282 Year

  20. Only with fast breeders and thorium utilisation desired target power level can be achieved and sustained PHWR 50000 t NU Pu, U FR (Pu-U) 300 GWe PHWR 50000 t Nat. Uranium Pu, U Pu FR (Pu-Th) FR (Pu-U) 150000 t Th 233U 174 GWe (Peak) MSR Reactor systems with thorium Reactor systems without thorium 270 Years Energy produced: 21.3 TWe-year Energy produced: 144.8 TWe-year Thorium introduction – 54 years Time to reach 300 GWe – 65 years

  21. Contribution of power from different reactors to the total capacity – first 150 years U : 50,000 te Th: 150,000 te Reprocessed Uranium Constraint FR (Pu-Th) as needed to consume Pu and reach target power level MSR as needed to reach target power level 7.56 GWe in PHWR for 40 years Nat. Uranium Exhausted

  22. Number of reactors under construction Thorium based reactors under construction Total number of reactors under construction

  23. Thorium can be introduced earlier starting with radial blankets (RB) of FRs, and utilisation in advanced thorium reactors 300 GWe PHWR 50000 te NU Pu, U Pu, U FR (Pu-U) Pu, U FR (Pu-U-Th) Pu, 233U AHWR 233U 233U 150000 te Th MSR Example - Thorium is introduced in FR(Pu-U-Th(RB)) at 31 Yrs 270 Years Energy produced: 147.4 TWe-year Time to reach 300 GWe: 68 years

  24. Effect of early introduction of thorium 50,000 te U, 150,000 te Th, 300 GWe target The width of the plateau is around 270 years.

  25. Conclusion • The DESAE code has very advanced capabilities. • The Indian codes were developed to answer some specific questions. We have no immediate plans to make these codes more general. • We suggest that the capabilities of DESAE code are extended, if not already done so, to address the needs described and illustrated in this presentation. • India will be glad to provide any inputs and specifications in this regard.

More Related