Explains in detail how nuclear power works, its costs, benefits as part of the electricity supply system and examines its record. This book covers the nuclear power debate.
Inspec keywords: nuclear power; cost-benefit analysis; electric power generation; fission reactor safety
Other keywords: nuclear power; electricity supply system
Subjects: Nuclear energy; Nuclear power stations and plants; Fission reactor protection systems, safety and accidents
- Book DOI: 10.1049/PBPO052E
- Chapter DOI: 10.1049/PBPO052E
- ISBN: 9780863416682
- e-ISBN: 9780863419881
- Page count: 256
- Format: PDF
-
Front Matter
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
(1)
-
1 The history of nuclear fission
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
1
–18
(18)
Uranium is the key to the exploitation of nuclear energy. As such, it has developed an exotic reputation, but it is in fact a very common element as common as tin. It is present in rock and soil, and in water in trace amounts and, in much the same way as other minerals like tin, is found in various concentrations in different types of deposit. Rocks such as uraninite, autunite, uranophane, pitchblende or coffinite can be as much as 2 per cent uranium, but it also exists at a few parts per million in granite and many other rocks and at much greater concentration in deposits mined for uranium fuel. Uranium oxide was used to give colour to ceramic glazes as far back as the first century AD, but it was not until the 18th century that it was isolated and named. It was separated from pitchblende (the so-called black mineral) in 1789, by a German chemist named Martin Klaproth, and named after the recently discovered planet Uranus, which in turn had been named after Urania, the muse of astronomy and geometry. Uranium metal was first produced from uranium oxide by Eugene-Melchior Peligot in 1841. It is a silver-white metal, denser than lead. The metal that had been so little known for so many centuries was the centre, over the next few decades, of a frenzy of scientific research and discovery that revealed that the atom had a complex internal structure and, moreover, one that was not unchangeable. Along the way, it also confirmed Albert Einstein's theories on mass and energy and laid the foundations for the exploitation of the power of the nucleus.
-
2 Reactor designs
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
19
–44
(26)
This chapter presents designs for different fission reactor types including production reactors, graphite reactors (magnox reactors, advanced gas reactors, high-power channel reactors (RBMK), and high-temperature gas reactors), light-water reactors (pressurised-water reactors (PWR) and boiling-water reactors), heavy-water reactors (the Canadian deuterium uranium reactor (CANDU reactor), pressurised heavy-water reactors, and steam-generating heavy-water reactors), fast breeder reactors (Superphenix), and new generations of fission reactors.
-
3 Nuclear safety and three major accidents
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
45
–64
(20)
Nuclear reactor safety requires that three functions should be fulfilled at all times: 1) The chain reaction must be controlled and so must the power generated. 2) The fuel must be cooled during and after operation, including after the chain reaction has stopped, as residual heat remains in the reactor core caused by continued radioactive disintegrations and fissions. 3) Radioactive products must be retained and controlled. The safety philosophy relies upon two main principles: three protective barriers and so-called defence in depth. The three protective barriers are intended to contain radioactivity in all circum stances. The first barrier is the fuel, inside which most of the radioactive products are already trapped. The fuel is contained within a metal cladding (magnox, steel or zircaloy) which presents a barrier to stop the products escaping. The second barrier is the reactor coolant system, housed within a containment enclosure which includes the reactor vessel containing the core constituted by the fuel within its cladding. For the third barrier the reactor coolant system is also enclosed in a containment including a biological shield made of very thick concrete. For the European PWR now under construction in Finland, for example, this construction is a double shell resting upon a thick basemat, whose inner wall is covered with a leak-tight metal liner.
-
4 Operating experience
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
65
–82
(18)
This chapter discusses the different aspects of a nuclear power plant. (1) Improving plant performance, (2) Ageing and maintenance, (3) Vessel closures, (4) Instrumentation and control, (5) Life limits, (6) Life extension, and (7) Uprating.
-
5 Fuelling the reactor
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
83
–106
(24)
This chapter presents a discussion on the use of uranium fission reactor fuel. The discussion proceeds from uranium mining to its conversion and enrichment and eventually to fuel fabrication, cladding, and fuel pin construction. Uranium sources are also included as well as management of spent nuclear fuel and fuel life cycle analysis.
-
6 Privatising the UK nuclear industry
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
107
–130
(24)
For 40 years, between the 1950s and the beginning of the 1990s, the UK's electricity supply system was a monopoly that was state-owned mainly through the Central Electricity Generating Board, which came into being shortly after the Second World War. However, all that changed in the late 1980s when the Conservative government, led by Margaret Thatcher, decided that the power industry and other state industries should be in the private sector. After several successful privatisations, including British Gas and British Airways, the government decided to take a similar route with the electricity supply industry. At that time the electricity industry in England and Wales consisted of the Cen tral Electricity Generating Board (CEGB), which was responsible for generation and high-voltage transmission, and 12 local Area Boards responsible for distribution to domestic and commercial customers. In Scotland there were just two companies, the South of Scotland Electricity Board and the North of Scotland Hydro Board, respon sible for generation, transmission and distribution. The Northern Ireland Electricity Board was similarly 'vertically integrated' in Northern Ireland. Following extensive discussions in the late 1980s it was decided that the CEGB's functions in England and Wales should be split. All the power stations were to be allo cated to two generating companies. The high-voltage transmission network, across which electricity from power stations is transported in bulk, was to be turned into a single company, later to be known as the National Grid. The 12 area electricity boards that supplied power to customers at domestic and commercial voltages were turned into separate companies known as distribution network operators (DNOs).
-
7 A new nuclear programme for the UK?
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
131
–150
(20)
The UK currently has a stake in two reactor designs but is in the process of disposing of its interest. One is the Pebble-Bed reactor, whose design and development are now being spearheaded by Eskom in South Africa, which already has one nuclear power plant at Keoberg. The Pebble-Bed reactor is very closely based on high-temperature gas reactor designs, with small spherical fuel elements made of graphite and uranium. The Pebble Bed is at the detailed design phase and as such is unlikely to be on the drawing board for a new reactor in the UK. The UK's second stake in anew reactor is via BNFL's Westinghouse subsidiary, in the form of the AP600 and its larger variant the AP1000.
-
8 New reactor designs
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
151
–174
(24)
There are four leading contenders for new reactor designs in the UK. These 'most eligible' designs for the UK (see Chapter 7) have in some cases been built overseas, and in others been licensed in one country or more (i.e. passed a detailed inspection of the reactor design by the national safety authority). Some reactor designs have also been 'pre-certified' by the US regulator, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In the past the US NRC did not certify reactors until a site was chosen, as the site's characteristics have some part to play in the final reactor design (e.g. in the provision of cooling water, seismic qualifications, etc.). Pre-certification is intended to reduce site development times by resolving major issues in the basic design in advance. None of the overseas licensing or construction work guarantees that a reactor will successfully complete the UK's licensing process, although issues that might have been stumbling blocks in a UK licensing process may already have been resolved elsewhere. The four designs are: EPR, AP600, Advanced BWR, and ACR-700.
-
9 Future reactor designs
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
175
–198
(24)
In the Generation IV programme the potential uses of these reactors may be broader than the production of electricity. They may also be sited on an industrial site (and sized very differently from current reactors) so that the 60 per cent or more of heat production that is currently vented into air or otherwise wasted can be used to provide process heat for industry. In some designs the reactor is directly linked to a hydrogen production process, anticipating a shift towards using hydrogen, instead of oil, as an energy transfer medium for vehicles and other uses. Finally, the new reactor designs are intended to 'burn' a broader range of fissile substances so that the problem of disposing of plutonium and other long-lived wastes is reduced as they can be transmuted in the reactor. There are six reactors in the programme at present; the U S is expected to focus on three for further development. The following summarises the reactor system descriptions in the Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems and its assessment of research and development needs and other issues associated with each design.
-
10 The development of fusion
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
199
–220
(22)
A defining moment in the development of fusion power came in the 1950s when, flushed with the apparent success of early experiments, a respected researcher made the prediction that fusion power would be developed within 50 years. This statement has come back to haunt the programme 50 years later, as the energy source is still at least 50 years away from commercialisation. Public incredulity is understandable, but the delay is a direct result of the complex and specialised challenges to be faced in developing this potentially attractive and very long-term energy source. However, there is steady progress towards the goal.
-
Back Matter
- + Show details - Hide details
-
p.
221
(1)