UK in SMR Seminar Report - V2 · 2016. 1. 20. · UK IN SMR SEMINAR SUMMARY REPORT 3 Seminar Welcome & Introduction Tim Chittenden - President, Nuclear Institute Dame Sue Ion - Vice

UK IN SMR SEMINAR SUMMARY REPORT 1

UK in SMR Seminar Report Daniel Walton, Hugh Allen, John Barton-Ancliffe 25 September 2014


Introduction Nuclear power plans in the UK may gain a new dimension with SMRs (small modular reactors), a scalable, emissions-free power generation technology suitable for a range of applications and sites. 'What role can the UK play in SMRs? What is needed to build an SMR in the UK?' The leading NI conference in 2014 addressed these questions, and other important factors regarding Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) in the UK.

Highlights:

• SMR Design & Operation • SMR Feasibility Study from HM Government and the Nuclear Innovation and Research

Advisory Board (NIRAB) • Manufacturing and Supply Chain • Economics • Licensing


Seminar Welcome & Introduction Tim Chittenden - President, Nuclear Institute Dame Sue Ion - Vice President, Royal Academy of Engineering

08:30 - 08:50

Tim Chittenden • Opening remarks • Submarine programme shown that SMRs can be designed, built and licensed • Thank you to the organising committee and sponsors • Special thanks to Nuclear Innovation and Research Office, and Dame Sue Ion Dame Sue Ion • Why SMRs? High capital costs and financing associated with traditional LWRs • SMRs attractive proposition - low capital cost and financing • Capital costs slowing down development of traditional reactors • Capital costs and financing over 50% of PWR development cost • SMRs - opportunity to enhance security, utilise 21st century manufacture, flexibility,

through life opportunities • Good window of opportunity in the UK • Good prospect to generate IP • UK is in a position to catch up and overtake other nations • Opportunity to use UK sites • Government support required - long term risks, limited supply chain engagement

without Govt. • SMRs will be built mainly in factories - good opportunity to create jobs • Economies of scale need to come into play • Topics of the day: Overview of the HMG funded feasibility study, economics, design

and operation, manufacturing and supply chain, licensing


HMG and SMRs Dame Sue Ion - Vice President, Royal Academy of Engineering

08:50 - 10:00

• HMG SMR Feasibility Study Overview - Gordon Waddington • HMG SMR Feasibility Study Market Assessment- Miranda Kirschel, Atkins • Welsh Government View - Ron Loveland, Welsh Government • Discussion - Dame Sue Ion HMG SMR Feasibility Study Overview - Gordon Waddington • Opening remarks • SMR feasibility - if they cannot make economic sense, they will not happen - the

finances must add up, and environmental aspects must be acceptable • There is a market, but only at the right price

• The SMR Study • Objective - is there a significant global market? Can SMRs provide economic power?

Can the UK participate at the reactor vendor level with another country? What will be the IP capability results? What can the Government do?

• It is important to note that not everyone is an SMR convert, the economics and environmental aspects must line up

• 'Unless we create an environment where talented youth want to come into Nuclear, the industry will die'

• SMR and reactor development provides industry excitement • 'Is this a once in a generation opportunity to bring the UK back on to the nuclear front

foot?' • Can we find a way for this to be the case? • Study involved discussions with nearly all SMR vendors • Not clear in anyone’s head what role the UK can play • Will market forces alone achieve SMR aims? Is SMR development possible without

Government intervention? • Thank you to SMR feasibility study consortium: KPMG, NAMRC, Rolls-Royce,

Manchester University, NNL, Atkins, AMEC, Lloyd’s Register

• Challenges • No certainty that SMRs will be developed in the UK at all • We do not know much about SMR development and deployment • Unknown technical challenges • Unknown financial challenges • Unknown licensing challenges • Public perception is fickle with regards to nuclear power - the waste issue continues to

concern the public • Global market must consider world wide public perception, not just in the UK

• 'Hinkley C has shown us how difficult it is to produce a new reactor in the UK' • Other energy sources should be assessed as competitors • What is the industrial appetite for SMRs


• What should you take away from today?

• Don't assume SMR development is inevitable • Don't assume if they are developed, they will be expansive • Should the UK tackle SMRs alone or, within a partnership? • What role is the UK best able to play? • Be biased, but realistic HMG SMR Feasibility Study Market Assessment- Miranda Kirschel, Atkins

• Introduction • Opening remarks • Feasibility study still underway • What might the global market look like? • Why SMRs? • How big might the market be? • How might the market be addressed?

• What is the SMR market? • IAEA define SMRs as advanced reactors that produce up to 300MWe, which can be

built in factories and shipped to utilities for installation • There are already small reactors under operation and construction worldwide - many

however, are not modular • The innovation in small reactors comes from their modularity • Many SMR designs well advanced worldwide, many close to construction, many could

become commercial in the near future • There are also many which are not ready to market • Many different types of design under development, all SMRs, but different types:

PWRs, BWRs, SFRs etc. • There is a window of opportunity in the market • Global trends

• North America - recent downward turn due to shale gas and other natural gas market developments

• South America - moving forward, construction undergoing, not much confidence in delivering and buying

• Europe - interested in owning, selling and buying, upward trend in interest • Russia - SMRs currently being deployed, upsurge in SMR industry, developing for

land and sea applications • Middle East & North Africa - clear interest, further SMR applications being

assessed, desalination, remote power production etc. • Asia - construction started and on-going

• World Energy Outlook - population increasing, energy demand increasing • Global demand dynamics - Massive projected demand in Non-OECD countries • Electricity production today - 4.8TWe • Total Nuclear - 500GWe • Anticipated global energy need in 2035 - 9TWe • Nuclear currently producing 11% of world’s electricity • Global nuclear drivers (general) - energy needs, low carbon sources, caseload supply,

diverse energy mix, population growth, energy poverty, plant replacements • Global nuclear drivers (SMRs) - decentralisation, desalination and other applications,

weak national grids, affordability, modularity, customer proximity, replacement capacity

• Who are the customers? - Utilities, Investors, Governments, Industry, Consumers, Energy Intensive Industry, Desalination Industry, District Heating Industries, On Site Generation Users


• Why now? Why in the UK? • Climate change • Innovative and capable nuclear workforce • Once in a generation opportunity to lead and participate in the industry

• How big might the market be? • Over 430 commercial reactors currently operating • IAEA nuclear technology roadmap shows large projections • If we assume 30% of nuclear is SMRs, market could equate to almost 2000 SMRs at

500MWe or, 20000 at 50MWe • Numbers may be higher due to some countries not being able to support traditional

reactors, and niche markets

• Dependencies which must be overcome • Number and scalability of modules, staffing, construction, fuel costs, decommission

costs, constructions costs, regulatory processes (GDA - big investment), site specification, grid infrastructure, public acceptability, volatility of gas, cost of carbon, indigenous competition, policy changes

Welsh Government View - Ron Loveland, Welsh Government • Most people agree: Global civilisation needs affordable, reliable, clean, and low

carbon sources of energy, as smartly and efficiently as possible – But how? • The Energy Trilema – Affordable, clean/low carbon, Secure. These three criteria bound

by diversity and resource efficiently smart living anchors. • 'We need low cot, low carbon technology. Hopefully SMRs fit in that space.' • On Nuclear: Modern well-regulated nuclear plants do have low environmental impact. • Smaller capital cost upfront: financing SMRs fit that box quite nicely

• With regards to the range of SMRs being proposed: 'if you believe in diversity you want all of them'

• 'We need that public debate around large scale energy generation and climate change' • The IET are due to release a public paper on electricity grid infrastructure by the end of

the month. • Smart living is the future: Smart buildings, smart energy distribution and storage, local

integration. All this provides great opportunities for new technology. • Multiple SMRs co-located can emulate a large single plant. • Between local and central generation, 20-200MW plants are required. • This is ideal for open cycle marine and SMR technologies. • Trawsfynydd has a relatively small lake that is used for cooling. Whilst this may not be

best suited for a new large scale nuclear generating plant it would be well placed to host SMRs

• Geographically good, it has existing local support for nuclear, existing electricity infrastructure.

• Welsh Government interested in exploring the role of SMRs • Welsh sites conveniently placed for new nuclear build, including SMRs • Welsh nuclear sites declared as enterprise zones - encourages new developments Discussion - Dame Sue Ion • Feasibility study designed to answer why Governments should support SMRs. How

many UK jobs will be created? How low will the cost of power be? • Electricity cost must be much lower than that achievable by Hinkley


• Question FAO Miranda Kirschel, - Are SMRs going to be cheap, or are they going to be niche products with a sizeable price tag? • Miranda Kirschel, - SMRs appear to look competitive with large-scale reactors.

Vendors have indicated this • Gordon Waddington - The economics and size of the market are connected, if the

economics can work, market size will increase. If we can’t make SMRs economically viable, they will only be applicable for niche applications

• Ron Loveland - US DOE looked at feasibility and decided to invest, likely not just a niche market, at least in the USA’s eyes

• Question FAO Gordon Waddington - How will you advise Government to proceed with

regards to reactor choice? There are many designs to choose from and only one GDA slot at a time. • Gordon Waddington - this will be based on demand for electricity primarily

• Not only one size reactor will appear preferable • If there is a success in economics geared towards a particular type, this will aid

the decision • Not making the choice is worse than making the no choice

• Question - Sensitivity of Government to price of electricity but not focused on price to

consumer. Is flexibility of SMRs being taken into consideration when costing SMRs? • Gordon Waddington - We are taking this into account

• Grid infrastructure can be a large part of the capital cost • The case must be made to Govt. as a stand alone electricity generating unit,

additional process heat benefits are a bonus • Grid issues will in essence help to promote SMRs, as they overcome these

• Ron Loveland - grid infrastructure is a political matter


Economics & Business Case Darryl Murphy, KMPG

10:00 - 11:10

• Economic Assessment - Darryl Murphy - KPMG • Economies of multiples - do they really exist? - Dr Giorgio Locatelli • Economies of Scale versus the economies of Volume – LWRs - Tony Roulstone -

Cambridge University • Discussion - Darryl Murphy - KPMG Economic Assessment - Darryl Murphy - KPMG • Do SMRs solve the financing issues for new nuclear? • Nth of a kind large nuclear is in a league of its own on an nth of a kind basis. Gas is

competitive, but doesn't account for carbon production • Low carbon energy production - 'do nothing' is the worst scenario for future energy

prices • Planned global investment - many Non-OECD countries are developing SMRs, how is

this being paid for? • Actual construction is much less than planned construction and is being undertaken by

all kinds of country • China, India, Korea, Russia and the US all have nuclear fleet programmes

• Challenges in new build • Funding (how it is paid for), financing (how you move the money around), licensing,

planning, decommissioning, potential risk. • Financiers see nuclear as a high risk investment • Empirical evidence is not strong for nuclear in the eyes of the financier • Political risk is also eminent

• Challenge comparisons • To cost and programme - large scale reactors have a bad track record, no track

record for SMRs • Shorter construction periods could be attainable for SMRs • Revenue uncertainty similar for large scale reactors and SMRs • Regulatory uncertainty - no reason why SMRs couldn't follow large scale regulation and

the GDA process • Planning - Should be easier to plan for SMRs rather than large scale plants • Decommissioning - Not as hard to do for SMRs and as such, cheaper to undertake

• Costing’s • It has been difficult to come up with a definitive answer on SMR costing’s - estimates

vary greatly • Can we bring first of a kind cost down? • Some companies are in a position where their existence relies on the success of failure

of a new nuclear plant

• Summary • Potential from financing perspective

• Potentially more attractive than large scale nuclear


• We must start to build SMRs and deliver confidence to financiers • First build debt financing will be on balance sheets • Government backing may be required • However, SMRs appear to be out of line with Governments current policy on nuclear

financing and backing • This may change if the industry can develop experiential arguments and empirical

evidence • This will be quicker to do with SMRs rather than large scale reactors

• Economies of scale are important Economies of multiples - do they really exist? - Dr Giorgio Locatelli • Nuclear market investor dilemma

• Lots of choice • Economy of scale - increasing unit size, decreases cost of electricity (in principal…) • Large reactors favoured in the past for this reason • Trade off is not between small and large reactors - the trade off is between lots of

SMRs, and one large scale reactor - with roughly the same power output on each side

• Industrial Learning & Co-Siting • Industry learned that the cost and time taken for a new build decrease exponentially

after a first of a kind reactor - this is shown by the learning curve of a given product or project • There is much industrial experience supporting this hypothesis

• In the power industry, the learning curve for nuclear is not as favourable in comparison to many other projects

• However, modularisation and the production line set up associated with SMRs involves moving workers from the site, to the factory • This will aid heavily in bringing time and costs down after the first of a kind reactor -

improving the learning curve

• Case studies: • USA - 132 reactors, 59 sites - construction costs have increased drastically after the

70’s: TMI, Chernobyl, lack of skills, many projects coming in over budget, costs hard to control, difficult to justify against low cost of gas

• France - fleet standardisation - cost management and construction time better than USA, but costs and time increased drastically as France progressively increased reactor size - economies of scale did not come into play!

• Japan - demonstrated learning from PWR and BWR development and standardisation • Korea - many reactors at few sites - significant industrial learning, reducing costs and

timescales drastically • The conclusion is that standardisation, and co-siting improves industrial learning,

leading to reductions in cost and timescales, in line with the traditional economies of scale ideology.

• Key success factors - standardisation, leveraging international knowledge, governmental roles, focus on constructability, workforce education, interdisciplinary (engineers, business leaders, physiologists) • These have been demonstrated in South Korea

• Take home messages

• Identical or similar plants built on the same site bring massive economic advantages • Benefits of earning and co-siting are not speculative • Learning must link to front end design • Standardisation is a key aspect, in both physical design and supply chain


• SMRs would be able to take advantage of these proven effects, and would be the perfect candidate to benefit from industrial learning and co-siting - the more units, the better

Economies of Scale versus the economies of Volume – LWRs - Tony Roulstone - Cambridge University • Economy of scale - physical size of plant (MWe) • Economy of volume - number of units • Capital cost - represents approx. 60% of lifetime levelled costs • Traditionally within industry, specific costs fall with increasing unit size • Standardisation is a key factor in running down nth of a kind costs • For SMRs, it will be necessary to undertake: design simplification, co-siting, production

learning, standardisation, short build schedule, finance savings • It is likely that as the economies of scale curve does not apply to large scale nuclear, it

will not apply to SMRs - this is a concern • Larger reactors have higher specific costs - as reactor power increases, so do design

and regulatory aspects, leading to a anti economy of scale effect • Scaling laws determine by how much cost and time can be scaled to predict future

values for nth of a kind reactors

• 'The idea that simply scaling is important is just wrong' • Safety and quality standards necessary for nuclear often negate the effects of

traditional scaling laws, which would generally apply to other industrial projects • Data from nuclear projects around the world- suggests that scaling is negligible, low or

negative scaling effects observed • Reasons for low or negative scaling - variations in site, technological advancements,

constantly changing supply chains due to local mandates, learning is never achieved due to variations in site, quality requirements very high for nuclear, difficult to attain necessary quality whilst on site, long periods between nuclear projects so learning is forgotten

• Expert estimates of SMR costs - large variations and uncertainty in estimates however, some indication to cost and economy of scale has been given

• The higher the learning rate across nth of a kind unit production, the lower number of units required to 'break even'

• 'The key to applying learning is volume; 50 -100 units not 5' • To achieve positive scaling: simplify the design process, operate with proven

technology, design plants for manufacture - not just construction, manufacture all components and systems - not just the reactor, global standardisation - capable of satisfying regulators worldwide, alignment of design code standards

• To achieve positive learning - design for factory manufacture and site assembly, standardise jobs for workers, engage global suppliers to ensure DFM, manufacture tools as well as components and systems, launch and forward order profile, encourage global supply chain which promotes learning by doing.

Discussion - Darryl Murphy - KPMG • Question - Interesting data form the nuclear industry, is there anything we can learn

from data in other industries? • Giorgio Locatelli - Aerospace industry provides some crossover, they have

employed standardisation in design, production and supply chain to achieve positive results and as such, taken advantage of learning and scaling

• Tony Roulstone - Aerospace industry realised economy of volume’s importance and as such, ensured enough units were being produced to yield learning and scaling


SMR Design and Operation John Molyneux - Rolls-Royce Plc.

11:30 - 12:55

• UK Energy System Requirements - Mike Middleton - Rolls-Royce & ETI • SMR Generic Design Issues - Kevin Hesketh - NNL • SMR Operational Issues - Martin Goodfellow - Rolls-Royce • NuScale SMR Technology – Thomas Mundy - Executive Vice President, Program

Development, NuScale • Westinghouse SMR Technology - Simon Marshall - UK Business & Project

Development Director, Westinghouse John Molyneux - Rolls-Royce Plc. • Opening remarks • Reminder for delegates to think about key themes for the purposes of discussion

• 'It is easy when looking at macroeconomics to believe that we are hostages to fortune. I do not believe this'

UK Energy System Requirements - Mike Middleton - Rolls-Royce & ETI • Opening remarks • Introduction to ETI - Energy Technologies Institute - operates on a system planning

level, conducts research and develop knowledge, as well as assisting with project delivery • Uses ESME - systems modelling / scenario modelling tool

• CO2 modelling conducted - shows that in order to reduce the effects of climate change, the power industry must play a key role, as it is easier to de-carbonise than many highly polluting industries such as transport, aviation and shipping

• Nuclear power necessary to address this, and is required to play a key role in electricity generation in decades to come

• Constraints in deployment of new nuclear • Suitable sites • Expansion capability • Programme delivery experience

• Site availability • Additional 25 Hinkley size sites required • Scottish have a no nuclear policy • Sites also required for traditional energy production methods • How do we find suitable sites?

• 'Siting will be even more difficult when we consider new thermal plants with CO2 capturing technologies, These may be based around the north see so could see real competition for coastal sites' need for cooling large scale plants'

• 'We shouldn’t be pitching large nuclear against small nuclear, both are attractive as part of a mix, and both must satisfy all stakeholders'

• Electricity production flexibility is essential for future power stations - dynamic grid integration


• ETI working on power plant siting study, and alternative nuclear technologies scoping study

• 'In my opinion, it is public opinion that will make or break SMRs' SMR Generic Design Issues - Kevin Hesketh - NNL • Aiming to highlight generic design issues, not judge specific designs, focus on

SMPWRs • NPPs have historically increased in size

• 'Small size does not necessarily equate to safer, each design will need to be assessed on its own merits'

• SMR design features

• Passive safety - no pumps during loss of coolant accident • Integral pressure vessels • Large coolant masses - high thermal intro • High vertical heights to ensure natural convection • Low specific ratings • Natural convection to manage decay heat • Small size does not necessarily improve safety • Multiple units in close proximity • Underground siting - may improve protection • Long refuelling cycles

• Integral PWR • All components within a single pressure vessel • Much integral plant testing may be required • Integral reactors changes inspection and maintenance procedures - radiological

protection • Core design is different to a typical PWR - some SMRs: use single batch fuel loading

strategy, have natural circulation, use no burnable poisons for reactivity control • Design issues • Single batch cores less fuel efficient • PWR reactivity control difficult with no soluble Boron system in place • Natural circulation yields strong coupling between thermal hydraulics and neutronics,

making design more difficult

• Multi-Module SMRs • Module independence required • How would the ONR’s basic safety level be defined, and how would the basic safety

objective be determined? • Containment - small vessels, management of pressure • Footprints - individual units have small footprints however, a multi-module set up

carries a considerable footprint, leading to questions regarding access to cooling water and grid connections, the same as with large scale nuclear

• 'Footprint of individual units are small, but 10 together are quite big and begin to look like the footprint of a large plan, so grid and water access issues become similar'

• UK requirements - ONR justification, consent, GDA, PCSR, POSR, COSR etc. • 'A lot of designs are at an immature stage of development so it is difficult to make

meaningful judgments until a high level of design security is achieved'


SMR Operational Issues - Martin Goodfellow - Rolls-Royce • Opening remarks

• Operational challenges • Changing operator and plant staffing requirements, how many control rooms? How

many operators? • 'Can we have a single control room for multiple cores? One controller for one core?

SMRs have some difficult regulatory questions, if we don't meet those challenges it may be difficult to bring costs down’'

• 'How do we deal with fuel transportation and spares, regional centres? This is In context of multiples sites'

• Novel maintenance and refuelling operations - how do we train operators? • Will operating regimes be changeable between different modules within the same

plant? • Fuel cycle, security and safeguards

• 'How can we take large scale operating operational experience and translate that across projects and across boarders?'

• Monitoring, inspection and maintenance

• Operational opportunity • Implement a fleet management approach - economies of scale and volume, industrial

learning, standardised services, frameworks and logistics

• Summary

• 'The operator and operations are key aspects of the design process' NuScale SMR Technology – Thomas Mundy - Executive Vice President, Program Development, NuScale • Introduction to NuScale - developing SMR technology since 2000, based in Portland,

Oregon, first applicant to engage NRC on SMR development, 115 patents in 17 countries

• Receiving funding from DOE ($217m) - used to undertake engineering, testing, and proceed through the regulatory process

• Plant design overview

• Highly modularised • NRC certification being sought for facility which can house 12 modules (600MWe) • Each module fully transportable, ship, rail or truck • Each module factory fabricated and assembled by standard factory equipment • Modules and containment building partially below ground • Modules are integral • High pressure steel PV surrounding integral components • The entire steam plant is also modular, made in the factory, and easily transportable • It is possible to install modules into a facility as and when required - capital costs can

be incurred in stages • Pool lined with stainless steel lining • Size comparison - a large PWR could fit approximately 126 NuScale SMRs • Approx. dimensions 15x76ft • Natural circulation - no reactor coolant pumps required


• Helical coil SG used - maintained efficiency due to relatively low thermal flow - large surface generator in SG

• Complete facility has a relatively small footprint - everything is self contained on site • NuScale design has achieved the 'Triple Crown' of nuclear safety, can shut down and

indefinitely cool with: no operator action, no AC or DC power, no additional water • Safety valves align to their safest configuration during loss of coolant scenario • During station blackout:

• Initial period - SG continues to be removed by SG • Water begins to boil in the pool surrounding the module - in line with a reduction in

decay heat • Once water has completely boiled, decay heat is low enough to undergo passive air

cooling • Risk - frequency of failure is relatively low and so are the consequences - probability of

core damage very low

• 'Emergency planning zones could be much smaller than typical requirement. This is important when looking at reusing of existing fossil fuelled sites'

• Many systems associated with traditional reactors simply not necessary with the NuScale SMR design - simplifies design greatly

• Fewer systems - lower likelihood of SCRAMS


SMR Design and Operation Cont. John Molyneux - Rolls-Royce Plc.

13:30 - 14:15

• China Nuclear Power Engineering SMR Technology - CNNC Representative - CNNC • URENCO SMR Technology - Paul Harding - Advisor to CEO URENCO Ltd • Discussion - John Molyneux - Rolls-Royce Westinghouse SMR Technology - Simon Marshall - UK Business & Project Development Director, Westinghouse • Opening remarks

• 'It is disappointing that the UK has moved from a maker of technology, to a taker of technology'

• Westinghouse overview

• 50% of the nuclear plants worldwide are based on Westinghouse technology • In the UK, run Springfields, and work with many reactors around the country • Planning to bring 3 AP1000 to the UK • Founded in 1886, sole business today is civil nuclear power • Heritage of reactor development, licensing and deployment • Experience with licensing technology overseas • Keen to transfer Westinghouse IP to the UK nuclear industry

• Westinghouse SMR • 800MWt > 225MWe Integral PWR • Relies on natural convection for indefinite cooling during loss of coolant scenario • Bolted closure flange allows for removal of SG and pressuriser assembly • Reactor vessel housed in a large containment vessel, containing heat removal system

and other auxiliary systems • The containment vessel is housed in water, below grade, to aid with natural convection

during loss of coolant scenario • 1/25th the size of an AP1000 • 1/5ht power output of an AP1000 plant • Small size, large power • Plant cost correlates directly with nuclear island volume - power density of the

Westinghouse SMR is high • Power density can mitigate the potential loss of economy of scale for SMRs • Nuclear island power density differentiates Westinghouse from other SMRs • Designed for 100% modularity • 100% of components capable of delivery • Each module is self contained • GDA of AP1000 has informed the design of the WEC SMR

• 'WEC would be willing to license the SMR in the UK first' China Nuclear Power Engineering SMR Technology - Stand in speaker from CNNC

• Overview of China National Nuclear Corporation CNNC • Established in 1958 • Recently opened a UK office


• Developing ACP100 and ACP100+ reactors

• ACP100 • Integral PWR • Passive safety design - no operator required within 72 hours • 310 MWt • 100MWe • Large primary coolant inventory • Efficient decay heat removal features • Low decay heat compared to large PWR

• Testing & experimentation • CRDM hot and cold testing • Passive ECC • Internal vibration testing • Fuel assembly critical heat flux testing

• Licensing • Preliminary assessment completed

• Site selection • South of China, near Putian • Two 310MWt units to be tested here •

• ACP100+ • R&D is currently on-going on the next iteration of the ACP100, the ACP100+ • Improves safety, increases potential for heat and electricity cogeneration • 385MWt, 120MWe • Coolant contains burnable poison • Fully flooded containment • More modular than ACP100 URENCO SMR Technology - Paul Harding - Advisor to CEO URENCO Ltd • ‘We think U-Battery should be a third prong of nuclear development in the UK' • Presents opportunity for UK to develop IP • Would allow UK to prove the concept of U-Battery

• U-Battery overview

• 'Intrinsically safe source of low carbon source of process heat (800oC) and power' • Uses TRISO type Uranium fuel • Developed by Delft and Manchester Universities • Design based on known components and principals previously demonstrated in

prototype reactors such as the DRAGON reactor • 10MWt, 4MWe • Volume for one module and generating set of approx. 2 squash courts • AMEC, Atkins and URENCO working on front end engineering design and safety case

work • Possible site scoped at URECNO UK, Capenhurst • Entirely modular, built in a factory • Current economics favour a twin unit • Primary coolant = helium • Gas/gas, gas, helium/nitrogen • Operational target - 2023


• Work can only proceed so quickly from AMEC, Atkins and URENCO initial investments • Funding from Government would progress the design drastically • Aiming to build first of a kind to prove concept viability

• Fuel • TRISO fuel • Ceramic coated • High melting point • 10% enriched • Encapsulated Uranium spheres • Can’t melt under any conceivable circumstance • Will be able to fit in standard fuel transport cask

• Costs • First of a kind estimated at £130m (£100m) capital) • Low up front capital costs

• Target market • May be best placed on existing nuclear sites • Could serve as back up power to large nuclear sites • Can provide power and heat for heavy industrial sites

• 'U-Battery could be used to replace current diesel backup generators including those at large scale nuclear generation sites'

• Could be used in remote locations • Desalination applications • Transport - making hydrogen for hydrogen fuelled cars • Could power 'smart cities' • Market study indicates potential UK market growing to tens of units per annum • Potential global market is hundreds of units pa • Development in the UK could support 20000 direct jobs

• 'Opportunity to develop UK owned IP' • 'A real opportunity for the UK to catch up and overtake the rest of the world in the field

of micro nuclear generation'


Manufacturing and Supply Chain Mike Tynan - Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (NAMRC)

14:15 - 15:35

• Manufacturing Philosophy - Nigel Hart - Rolls-Royce • Manufacturing Technology - Alan McLelland - NAMRC • SMR Impact on Supply Chain - Alan Thompson - Welding Technology Manager, Tata

Steel Europe • Discussion - Mike Tynan - NAMRC Mike Tynan - Nuclear Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre (NAMRC) • Nuclear development in the UK must be economically viable, provide security of

supply and create jobs • Route to market for SMR will be dominated by the economics of that unit • Additional wealth is generated however, in terms of capability and employment Manufacturing Philosophy - Nigel Hart - Rolls-Royce • What will a Civil Nuclear SMR factory of the future look like?

• The challenge • Must be cost competitive, volume will not solve the problem • SMRs must be manufactured using a different philosophy, drawing on viable

approaches executed in other industries • Comprehensive approach required - design for manufacture, advanced manufacture,

flow line assembly methods

• Design for ‘X’ (DFX) and design for manufacture (DFM) • 80% of component cost spent during the design phase • DFX provides a holistic view of the design process to ensure that all phases of the

design life are optimised

• 'The majority of cost is locked in in the design phase, its never too early to consider how a component is manufactured'

• 'SMRs bring the opportunity to develop advanced manufacturing techniques to the UK'

• Factory considerations • Flow line methodology, currently used for civil aerospace, could be implemented in the

production of SMRs • Virtual factory planning and modelling software used to understand operation of a

hypothetical production facility - aids in capital cost reduction

• Product quality planning • Rolls-Royce has developed rigorous quality methods • Standardisation and validation - enhances productivity and improves workforce

familiarity


• SMR factory of the future will include automation, part tracking, online assembly software, visual management; flow line times, traffic light control assembly lines, tooling; flexible workstations, air float heavy lifting systems

• Integration of supply chain - modularity of SMRs have the potential to simplify supply chain management

• Summary

• Change in philosophy required • SMR needs to be designed for the modular manufacture process • Investment required to minimise time consuming and costly manufacturing techniques • Quality built into the assembly process • Infrastructure to support flow line Manufacturing Technology - Alan McLelland - NAMRC

• Techniques being developed by the NAMRC • Electron Beam Welding (EBW) - can weld sections up to 25mm thick, clean, low heat,

no filler, single pass, local potential with a vacuum. Can reduce welding time of a large vessel from 2 weeks to 2 days due to amount of time required for cooling with traditional welding methods

• Diode Laser Cladding - low dilution, high deposition rates, laser smoothing, lack of thermal damage in comparison to traditional cladding techniques. Again productivity step change from previous timescales associated with traditional methods

• Hot Isostatic Pressing - bonding process, design freedom, allows for novel geometries, homogeneous structure, isotropic properties and 100% density, gives greater confidence in NDE results

• Manufacturing bottlenecks in nuclear

• Advanced filtering and tooling • Non destructive testing • Metrology, virtual reality can help reduce bottlenecks • UK potential - technology positioning, modular experience, can learn from automotive

and aerospace industries in the UK • Code cases need to start early SMR Impact on Supply Chain - Alan Thompson - Welding Technology Manager, Tata Steel Europe

• Tata Steel overview • One of the worlds most geographically diversified steel producers • Operations in 26 countries, commercial offices in 35 countries • High integrity workshops in Workington Cumbria • Tata projects - Multi-disciplinary design and engineering consultancy, Test rigs,

Gamma gates, Control panels, Shield doors, Bespoke systems

• How do we meet the manufacturing challenge associated with new nuclear components?

• ‘Nuclear safety culture important in manufacture - components are not easily accessible and cannot fail, this must be understood right down to the shop floor’

• Must have a robust quality control system

• 'We as suppliers need to embrace the nuclear culture and communicate well with those above and below us in the supply chain'


• Must work closely with designers

• ‘We must understand every detail behind nuclear codes and standards’ • Rigorous document control Discussion - Mike Tynan - NAMRC • Question - How do we validate these processes and techniques without an order

book? • Alan McLelland - many things referenced today are not necessarily for nuclear,

these could be trailed in other industries • Nigel Hart - Many of the technologies discussed exist at high levels of maturity in

other industries, important to leverage other industries investment to validate methods outside of nuclear where possible.

• Mike Tynan - Manufacturers say that supply chain must show ambition and demonstrate to developers that they are prepared to invest and take risk with regards to developing technologies. Suppliers are OK with this, although require some orders before investment. What role might government play to bridge this gap?

• Question - How do we produce evidence that applying new and novel techniques will

result in significant cost savings? • Alan McLelland - We are already looking at the benefits of these techniques, the time

savings given are not projected, they are measured, the economic basis has already been created. We are currently building up the data required for a code case.

• Question - How do you, in lean manufacturing, maintain a high safety culture?

• Nigel Hart - It is achievable, different sectors have different drivers but in nuclear the focus is highly on safety.

• Alan Thompson - Within the nuclear safety culture, time pressure is often and should be avoided.

• Mike Tynan - Legislation and defined standards can help drive a good nuclear safety culture. Understanding how people perform in any environment is key to ensuring a compliant culture amongst the workforce.

• Question FAO Alan McLelland - What could we be doing to ensure manufacturing and

modularisation is being applied to all functions of a nuclear site? • Alan McLelland - Focus on intervention at the design stage will aid modularisation.

Focus on engineering and module boundaries.


Introduction to SMR Licensing Kevin Allars

15:55 - 17:00

• Regulator's View – claims, arguments and evidence - Bob Jennings - ONR • Industry View - Simon Franklin - AMEC • The use of the graded approach in regulation- Marcel de Vos - Canadian Nuclear

Safety Commission • SMR Deployment and related international activity – Kristiina Soderholm - Fortum • Chaired Discussion - Kevin Allars Regulator's View – claims, arguments and evidence - Bob Jennings - ONR • ONR covers safety, security, transport and safeguards • Work closely with the Environment Agency

• Approach to new build regulation in Great Britain - the GDA process • GDA developed by ONR in 2006 • Aim to assess new nuclear designs in advance of site specific proposals • Focuses on nuclear safety, security and environmental impact • Helps to de-risk the site specific licensing process • Promotes early engagement to maximise influence • Identify key issues before build • Maximise value of pre-application • Gives insight into investment decisions • Process is open and transparent • Step 1 - initial proprietary phase • Step 2 - real assessment • Step 3 - Looks at arguments • Step 4 - detailed assessment of evidence • Process takes approximately 4 years • Outcomes: Not content, partially content, content • ‘SMRs must be further developed before they attempt to proceed through the GDA’ • ‘Public domain PCSR is the tip of the iceberg in terms of safety case justification’ • Safety assessment principals are being reviewed in the light of Fukushima - publication

expected Nov 2014 • International context - ONR are part of an international programme involving regulatory

authorities from 13 countries Industry View - Simon Franklin - AMEC • Licensing may be less of a risk than it may otherwise appear

• AMEC’s nuclear heritage


• Involved in many UK AGR reactors • Works with WEC on PWRs • Consultancy involves supporting regulators, vendors and utilities, across the board • How can we engage with SMR vendors? • AMEC could: increase the TRL, navigate licensing, verifying technology, producing

prototypes, facilitate regulatory interface, act as engineer, act as architect etc. • What would a consultant look for before investment? Safety justifications, codes and

standards used, probabilistic justification and engineering judgment applied to stringent safety cases

• We need a global standard to determine a 'complete design' • We need to do more to look at the aircraft and automotive industry and look at lessons

for the purpose of SMR production • Challenge for industry - we have an opportunity to take SMRs through licensing in

different countries, we should design them to be fit for purpose - mass market • Much work on human interfaces required - training of operators etc. • The licensing process for SMRs in rural locations will look very different to the process

of licensing SMRs in urban locations, such as the ACP100 • Owners and licensees must become an intelligent customer, they must understand the

design and safety case • Pre-licensing process could ease the transition into the GDA - would ensure safety

case and licensing team are fit for purpose • Instead of just responding to regulatory changes, industry should grasp the

opportunity to shape the future of licensing • We should be capable of developing and responding to our own guidance • There are some challenges surrounding SMR licensing, although there is no reason

SMRs couldn’t follow the licensing processes already in place successfully • Hopefully, a common market will be defined, the license risk will be mitigated, a

prototype SMR will be developed in line with UK industry The use of the graded approach in regulation- Marcel de Vos - Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) • CNSC have been following the SMR process for some years • Seeing slightly more interest in SMRs rather than large scale reactors • CNSC are being asked to regulate a range of reactor type and size • CNSC use a graded approach, Similar to the UK process, less prescriptive than in the

USA • Risk informed decision making - benefits can be derived if risks are effectively

managed • When making a decision its important to understand 'why' and whether or not

mitigation is appropriate • The licensee is responsible for safety and is held accountable through their license - in

line with IAEA principals • Characteristics of suitable information/evidence - experimental or field derived data,

operating experience, computer modelling. Uncertainties should be characterised and accounted for. Information demonstrated should be relevant to the specific proposal. All evidence should be present, and documented as to tell a story, before it is brought to the regulator.

• ‘A technology is deemed proven only if it has been proven in reference to the activity for which it is intended’

• P-229 - regulatory fundamentals - policy document that directs CNSC activities. Bases regulation on levels of risk, leading to the graded approach undertaken by CNSC


• Size of reactor is not important to regulatory principals applied - defence in depth is still prominent regardless

• Not much SMR presence in current codes and standards • Relaxing requirements for SMRs - no such thing, requirements are in cases applied

differently, but in no way relaxed • Graded approach is a set of decision making tools as part of a larger toolbox • The more complex the risk characteristics, the more decisions need to be made which

are traceable and accountable SMR Deployment and related international activity – Kristiina Soderholm - Fortum • Safety culture - Design changes prescripted by the regulator essentially mean reactors

of the same design built in different countries, are first of a kind designs • Would a reactor of the same design be safe in the UK and Finland? - It should be • WNA is proposing that for the licensing process, only the reactor module and primary

safety systems should be considered, in order to reduce challenges when moving technology into different countries

• International activities should be standardised and harmonised, as should the designs of the SMRs themselves

• How can international organisations ensure that regulatory processes become standardised? To allow for 'freedom of movement' for reactor designs across different countries

• Nuclear has a role in the future as part of an energy mix along with renewables - how will nuclear fill this role? Traditional nuclear? SMRs? Fusion?


Summary Dame Sue Ion - Vice President, Royal Academy of Engineering

17:00 - 18:00

• Public Perception and SMRs - Andrew Sherry - University of Manchester • UK Opportunities Panel Session – Dame Sue Ion • Summary of Seminar – Dame Sue Ion Public Perception and SMRs - Andrew Sherry - University of Manchester • Introduction • It is clear that the industry needs a long term strategic approach to public engagement

• Why is public engagement so important? • Provides the political mandate • Underpins economic growth - public perception has an economic impact • Underpins nuclear skills development - public opinion affects the attractiveness of

careers in nuclear

• Public perception of nuclear energy • Thee industry started out with the public on board - thoughts were that it would

produce electricity too cheap to meter • The 1980’s saw a change in public perception. Links to nuclear weapons and harmful

radiation caused doubt. • Attitudes to nuclear can change very quickly, and are influenced by world events • Fukushima did not affect public opinion in the UK drastically - in part thanks to Fiona

Fox and her approach to nuclear and scientific communication • Public attitudes are complex - and they can change quickly with time and events • Public engagement programs need to be flexible and dynamics

• How to undertake public engagement • A number of principals have been developed • Principal 1 - clarity - build an appreciation for basic scientific principals • Principal 2 - trust - determine who the public trust, scientists come out on top • Principal 3 -Dialogue - promote listening as well as speaking • Principal 4 - Consultation - the public want their views to make a difference and

contribute to the process

• Recommendations • A charter for public engagement should be established, and best practice in principals

of communication should be deployed throughout organisations • Strategic nuclear narrative necessary - what are the key messages and how do we

communicate them effectively? • Integrate and commission research - add to the availability of good nuclear research

available Final Discussion - Dame Sue Ion • Question - The public appreciate the benefits of local power stations due to the

associated job creation but since SMR manufacturing is partly done off-site in factories could this make local public perceptions less favourable?


• Answer - Too early to say whether this will have an impact, important that the industry maintains an open and honest position.

• Question – How and when does the supply chain for delivery of SMRs need to be

identified? • Answer – This will depend on where the reactors will be situated amongst other

factors. • Question - Can you recommend any tips for using social media to promote the

industry? • Answer - Kirsty Gogan has a Twitter feed that covers nuclear industry issues and is

very popular so that would be a recommended example • Remark - Being able to make a strong case for successful regulatory engagement for

SMRs is similar to the challenge of making an economic case (for which job creation opportunities is a key factor for the government)

• Remark - Most of the tone of the day has been very optimistic apart from the NNL

presentation on design challenges. However, it is worth noting that the SMR developers are already aware of these issues and are addressing them. • Answer - Worth reinforcing that this is a once in a lifetime opportunity for the UK

nuclear industry. In 20-30 years the UK will be in a similar position to where it is now in terms of declining power generation and so provision of SMRs could fill the gap in a way that we are currently unable to.

• Remark - In a growing market for electricity from nuclear SMRs may not be able to

compete with larger scale plants. However, fast reactor SMRs may be a valuable means of recycling fuel such as the UK plutonium stocks.

• Question - If regulations in the UK aren't prescriptive, how can codes and standards

be effectively harmonised to support delivery of SMR technology across the globe? • Answer - The ONR simply asks that vendors effectively demonstrate how they have

abided by the codes and standards that they claim to have followed and it is failure to do this, which leads to delays. There is more commonality between the three European EPR designs than people realise and the ONR has learned a lot from the NRC and ASN reviews.

• Answer - Harmonisation of codes and standards has been attempted for pressure vessels and proved to be incredibly complicated.

• Answer - Public acceptance of SMRs will be enhanced if SMRs are subject to the same regulatory processes as conventional nuclear power plants - creating exceptions for them will create suspicion.

• Remark - The barriers to SMR development seem significant but has anyone posed the

question of 'if not SMRs, then is the alternative any better?' • Answer - Major backing from the government will make the road to success much

easier. The prohibitive scale of the level of financing required to deliver just one large scale reactor makes SMRs much more attractive by comparison. Once the first SMR can be built successfully it will pave the way for the rest, however it will be very challenging to realise that first plant.

Close of Conference - Dame Sue Ion • Closing remarks and thanks

UK in SMR Seminar Report - V2 · 2016. 1. 20. · UK IN SMR SEMINAR SUMMARY REPORT 3 Seminar Welcome & Introduction Tim Chittenden - President, Nuclear Institute Dame Sue Ion - Vice

Documents