November 2012

N
o
v
e
m
b
e
r

2
0
1
2

V
o
l
.

1
5
6

N
o
.

1
1
Vol. 156 No. 11 November 2012

Top Plants:
Two Innovative
Nuclear Plants
North Anna: Earthquake Recovery
Chinas Nuclear Industry
Responds to Fukushima
Prepare for New PM2.5 Standards
A compact powerhouse for reliable generation of electricity and heat. The newly developed 6-cylinder
220 kW gas engine sets standards that are nothing short of revolutionary. Its combination of four-valve
technology and new combustion chamber geometry boosts specic performance, optimises cost
efciency and also reduces emissions. The novel engine concept features an overhead camshaft
cylinder head that additionally increase the life and service friendliness of the engine. Come along and
see the new MAN Power at BioEnergy in Hanover from 13 to 16 November.
M
A
N

T
r
u
c
k

&

B
u
s

A

m
e
m
b
e
r

o
f

t
h
e

M
A
N

G
r
o
u
p

w
w
w
.
m
a
n
-
e
n
g
i
n
e
s
.
c
o
m
MAN Engines
A Division of MAN Truck & Bus
NEW POWER BOOST.
EXPERIENCE THE PREMIERE OF A NEW GAS ENGINE.
ylinder
V
IS
IT
U
S
A
T

B
i
o
E
n
e
r
g
y
H
ALL F10, STAN
D
21
11159 200x273 motiv191c_e.indd 1 28.09.12 16:22
CIRCLE 1 ON READER SERVICE CARD
November 2012
|
POWER www.powermag.com 1
ON THE COVER
Dominion Virginia Power contracted with Alstom Power to upgrade the two steam turbines
at its North Anna nuclear power station in 2007. The steam turbine rework included replac-
ing the double-flow, high-pressure rotor and diaphragms with a more efficient single-flow
arrangement and two low-pressure (LP) double-flow turbinesshown in the photo as they
are being assembled. The LP turbines last-stage blade length increased from 48 to 57
inches, requiring replacement of the LP inner casing and significant rework to the exhaust
hoods, condenser connections, and surrounding structural steel. Courtesy: Alstom Power
COVER STORY: nuClEaR TOp planTS
30 north anna power Station, louisa County, Virginia
For decades now, U.S. nuclear generators, faced with daunting barriers to new con-
struction, have had to practice a special kind of energy efficiency by way of up-
grades. Dominions North Anna station recently completed its second uprate, this
one made possible by steam turbine retrofits.
32 Oconee nuclear Station, Seneca, South Carolina
Nuclear plant operators and regulators are cautious by naturefor good reason.
But you cant use outmoded equipment forever. By installing the first nuclear plant
digital control system in the U.S., Duke Energy has positioned itself at the forefront
of an important technology switch.
SpECIal REpORTS
nuClEaR pOwER
34 Dominions north anna Station Sets new Standard for Earthquake
Response
Just six months after the earthquake-and-tsunami-caused nuclear disaster in Japan, a
record-setting earthquake struck Central Virginia. For the nuclear plant located only 11
miles from the epicenter, it was a beyond-design-basis event. How management and
staff responded to that event has set a new benchmark for earthquake recovery.
42 what worldwide nuclear Growth Slowdown?
Although last years nuclear plant disaster in Japan prompted a necessary and ex-
pected reevaluation of nuclear plants and plans worldwide, one year later, the net
effect on the global nuclear outlook is barely measurable.
30
A compact powerhouse for reliable generation of electricity and heat. The newly developed 6-cylinder
220 kW gas engine sets standards that are nothing short of revolutionary. Its combination of four-valve
technology and new combustion chamber geometry boosts specic performance, optimises cost
efciency and also reduces emissions. The novel engine concept features an overhead camshaft
cylinder head that additionally increase the life and service friendliness of the engine. Come along and
see the new MAN Power at BioEnergy in Hanover from 13 to 16 November.
M
A
N

T
r
u
c
k

&

B
u
s

A

m
e
m
b
e
r

o
f

t
h
e

M
A
N

G
r
o
u
p

w
w
w
.
m
a
n
-
e
n
g
i
n
e
s
.
c
o
m
MAN Engines
A Division of MAN Truck & Bus
NEW POWER BOOST.
EXPERIENCE THE PREMIERE OF A NEW GAS ENGINE.
ylinder
V
IS
IT
U
S
A
T

B
i
o
E
n
e
r
g
y
H
ALL F10, STAN
D
21
11159 200x273 motiv191c_e.indd 1 28.09.12 16:22
circle 1 on reader service card
Established 1882 Vol. 156 No. 11 November 2012
Look for this web-exclusive story under
the Features heading on our homepage,
www.powermag.com, during the
month of November or in our Archives
any time: Too Dumb to Meter, Part 5.
Its the latest installment of Contribut-
ing Editor Kennedy Maizes history of
nuclear power in the U.S.
And remember to check our Whats
New? segment on the homepage regu-
larly for just-posted news stories cover-
ing all fuels and technologies.
More POWER Nuclear
Coverage on the Web
32
34
02_PWR_110112_TOC&Mast.indd 1 10/13/12 4:01:10 PM
www.powermag.com POWER
|
November 2012 2
FEATURES
POWER IN CHINA
48 Post-Fukushima Nuclear Power Development in China
When Chinas neighbor suffered the devastation of the Fukushima Daiichi nucle-
ar plant disaster, it prompted a reconsideration of Chinas nuclear development
goals. Despite some expected short-term adjustments, the long-term goals re-
main virtually unchanged.
WATER & POWER
53 Potential Impacts of Closed-Cycle Cooling Retrofits at U.S. Power Plants
Though the best technology available (BTA) determination under the Environmental
Protection Agencys proposed rule for cooling water intake structures is not yet written
in stone, industry researchers are looking at the likely consequences if BTA is closed-
cycle cooling. EPRI recently completed a study of estimated costs, benefits, impacts,
and environmental consequences of a potential national requirement to retrofit cool-
ing towers on all once-through facilities in the U.S. The estimated costs? Over $100
billion.
AIR QUALITY
57 Hazy Timetable for EPAs Proposed Tighter PM2.5 Standards
Its a question of when, not if tighter particulate standards will be released by
the Environmental Protection Agency, so its time to take a close look at the techni-
cal and economic particulars of whats likely to be involved for plants that will be
affected by the new limits.
PLANT DESIGN
62 The Evolution of Steam Attemperation
Increased superheated steam volumes and temperatures plus diverse operational
modes challenge steam attemperator systems at combined cycle plants. Know the
design options and engineering considerations before you choose a new or replace-
ment system.
DEPARTMENTS
SPEAKING OF POWER
6 Economic Meltdown
GLOBAL MONITOR
8 France Considers Departure from Iconic Stance on Nuclear Energy
10 THE BIG PICTURE: Advanced Fission
12 After Blackouts, India Plans Reforms
12 Progress for Germanys Power-to-Gas Drive
14 Research Center Dedicated to Power Plant Water Use Opens
15 POWER Digest
FOCUS ON O&M
18 Seismic Instrumentation at Nuclear Power Plants
20 Maximizing Steam Turbine/Compressor Performance with Precise
Torque Monitoring at the Coupling
22 Measuring On-Time Completion to Improve Your EHS Audit Program
LEGAL & REGULATORY
28 EPAs Title V Source Policy Takes a Hit
By Angela Neville, JD
66 NEW PRODUCTS
COMMENTARY
72 Preparing for the EPAs Cooling Water Rule
By Harold M. Blinderman, JD, partner, Day Pitney
Connect with POWER
If you like POWER magazine, follow us
online (POWERmagazine) for timely industry
news and comments.

Become our fan on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter
Join the LinkedIn POWER
magazine Group
48
62
8
ADIPEC Hall: 11 Stand 11065
eclipse.magnetrol.com
|
November 2012 4
Visit POWER on the web: www.powermag.com
Subscribe online at: www.submag.com/sub/pw
POWER (ISSN 0032-5929) is published monthly by Access
Intelligence, LLC, 4 Choke Cherry Road, Second Floor, Rock-
ville, MD 20850. Periodicals Postage Paid at Rockville, MD
20850-4024 and at additional mailing offices.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to POWER, P.O. Box
2182, Skokie, IL 60076. Email: powermag@halldata.com.
Canadian Post 40612608. Return Undeliverable Canadian
Addresses to: PitneyBowes, P.O. BOX 25542, London, ON
N6C 6B2.
Subscriptions: Available at no charge only for qualified ex-
ecutives and engineering and supervisory personnel in elec-
tric utilities, independent generating companies, consulting
engineering firms, process industries, and other manufactur-
ing industries. All others in the U.S. and U.S. possessions:
$87 for one year, $131 for two years. In Canada: US$92 for
one year, US$148 for two years. Outside U.S. and Canada:
US$197 for one year, US$318 for two years (includes air
mail delivery). Payment in full or credit card information is
required to process your order. Subscription request must
include subscriber name, title, and company name. For new
or renewal orders, call 847-763-9509. Single copy price: $25.
The publisher reserves the right to accept or reject any order.
Allow four to twelve weeks for shipment of the first issue on
subscriptions. Missing issues must be claimed within three
months for the U.S. or within six months outside U.S.
For customer service and address changes, call 847-763-
9509 or fax 832-242-1971 or e-mail powermag@halldata
.com or write to POWER, P.O. Box 2182, Skokie, IL 60076.
Please include account number, which appears above name
on magazine mailing label or send entire label.
Photocopy Permission: Where necessary, permission is
granted by the copyright owner for those registered with
the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive,
Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, www.copyright.com, to
photocopy any article herein, for commercial use for the flat
fee of $2.50 per copy of each article, or for classroom use
for the flat fee of $1.00 per copy of each article. Send pay-
ment to the CCC. Copying for other than personal or internal
reference use without the express permission of TradeFair
Group Publications is prohibited. Requests for special per-
mission or bulk orders should be addressed to the publisher
at 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042.
ISSN 0032-5929.
Executive Offices of TradeFair Group Publications: 11000
Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042. Copyright
2012 by TradeFair Group Publications. All rights reserved.
TWO GREAT
COMPANIES.
ONE BRIGHT
FUTURE.
How do you create a global company built
for the future? By combining two powerful
histories in pursuit of a bold visionto help
companies around the world contribute to
healthier, safer environments.
Building on the achievements of Pentair and Tycos Flow Control
businesses, comprised of Valves & Controls, Thermal Controls
and Water & Environmental Systems, the new Pentair delivers
exceptional depth and expertise in filtration and processing, flow
management, equipment protection and thermal management.
From water to power
From energy to construction
From food service to residential
Were 30,000 employees strong, combining inventive thinking
with disciplined execution to deploy solutions that help better
manage and utilize precious resources and ensure operational
success for our customers worldwide. Pentair stands ready
to solve a full range of residential, commercial, municipal and
industrial needs.
PENTAIR.COM
EDITORIAL & PRODUCTION
Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
480-820-7855, editor@powermag.com
Managing Editor: Dr. Gail Reitenbach
Executive Editor: David Wagman
Senior Editor: Angela Neville, JD
Gas Technology Editor: Thomas Overton, JD
Senior Writer: Sonal Patel
European Reporter: Charles Butcher
Contributing Editors: Mark Axford; David Daniels; Steven F. Greenwald; Jeffrey P. Gray;
Jim Hylko; Kennedy Maize; Dick Storm; Dr. Justin Zachary
Graphic Designer: Tamara Morris
Production Manager: Tony Campana, tcampana@accessintel.com
Marketing Director: Jamie Reesby
Marketing Manager: Jennifer Brady
ADVERTISING SALES
Sales Manager: Matthew Grant
Southern & Eastern U.S./Eastern Canada/
Latin America: Matthew Grant, 713-343-1882, mattg@powermag.com
Central & Western U.S./Western Canada: Dan Gentile, 512-918-8075, dang@powermag.com
UK/Benelux/Scandinavia/Germany/
Switzerland/Austria/Eastern Europe: Petra Trautes, +49 69 5860 4760, ptrautes@accessintel.com
Italy/France/Spain/Portugal: Ferruccio Silvera, +39 (0) 2 284 6716, ferruccio@silvera.it
Japan: Katsuhiro Ishii, +81 3 5691 3335, amskatsu@dream.com
India: Faredoon B. Kuka, 91 22 5570 3081/82, kuka@rmamedia.com
South Korea: Peter Kwon, +82 2 416 2876, +82 2 2202 9351, peterhkwon@hanmail.net
Thailand: Nartnittha Jirarayapong, +66 (0) 2 237-9471, +66 (0) 2 237 9478
Malaysia: Tony Tan, +60 3 706 4176, +60 3 706 4177, nmedia@tm.net.my
Classified Advertising
Diane Hammes, 713-343-1885, dianeh@powermag.com
POWER Buyers Guide Sales
AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
Audience Development Director: Sarah Garwood
Fulfillment Manager: George Severine
CUSTOMER SERVICE
For subscriber service: powermag@halldata.com, 800-542-2823 or 847-763-9509
Electronic and Paper Reprints: Wrights Media, sales@wrightsmedia.com, 877-652-5295
List Sales: Statlistics, Jen Felling, j.felling@statlistics.com, 203-778-8700
All Other Customer Service: 713-343-1887
BUSINESS OFFICE
TradeFair Group Publications, 11000 Richmond Avenue, Suite 690, Houston, TX 77042
Publisher: Brian K. Nessen, 713-343-1887, briann@tradefairgroup.com
President: Sean Guerre
ACCESS INTELLIGENCE, LLC
4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd Floor, Rockville, MD 20850
301-354-2000 www.accessintel.com
Chief Executive Officer: Donald A. Pazour
Exec. Vice President & Chief Financial Officer: Ed Pinedo
Exec. Vice President, Human Resources & Administration: Macy L. Fecto
Divisional President, Business Information Group: Heather Farley
Senior Vice President, Corporate Audience Development: Sylvia Sierra
Senior Vice President & Chief Information Officer: Robert Paciorek
Vice President, Production & Manufacturing: Michael Kraus
Vice President, Financial Planning & Internal Audit: Steve Barber
Vice President/Corporate Controller: Gerald Stasko
TWO GREAT
COMPANIES.
ONE BRIGHT
FUTURE.
How do you create a global company built
for the future? By combining two powerful
histories in pursuit of a bold visionto help
companies around the world contribute to
healthier, safer environments.
Building on the achievements of Pentair and Tycos Flow Control
businesses, comprised of Valves & Controls, Thermal Controls
and Water & Environmental Systems, the new Pentair delivers
exceptional depth and expertise in filtration and processing, flow
management, equipment protection and thermal management.
From water to power
From energy to construction
From food service to residential
Were 30,000 employees strong, combining inventive thinking
with disciplined execution to deploy solutions that help better
manage and utilize precious resources and ensure operational
success for our customers worldwide. Pentair stands ready
to solve a full range of residential, commercial, municipal and
industrial needs.
PENTAIR.COM
|
November 2012 6
SPEAKING OF POWER
Economic Meltdown
T
he bill for German Chancellor An-
gela Merkels coalition governments
knee-jerk decision to close all 17
of its nuclear plants by 2022 is coming
due. Merkels energy plan is to radically
expand the use of renewable energy to
35% of total power consumption by 2020
and to 80% by 2050. Currently, renew-
ables represent 20% of the countrys en-
ergy mix.
You may recall my editorial (Irrational
Exuberance, December 2011) in which I
estimated the cost of replacing Germa-
nys lost nuclear capacity with wind and
solar. My back-of-the-envelope numbers
suggested that the added costs to Ger-
man electric rates for renewables would
rise to 7 cents/kWh by 2020 and that the
plan will cause household electric rates
to rise about 6% per year for the next
nine years. I was wrong. My long-term
rate of increase estimate took place in
the first year and is not sustainable.
Steep Residential Rates
The German Economy Ministry has stated
that the renewable energy subsidy portion
of the Renewable Energy Act (EEG) of the
residential electricity bill will rise to be-
tween 5.9 and 6.6 cents/kWh this year (not
including the 19% value added tax, VAT) to
help pay for Merkels renewable energy poli-
cies, an increase of 30% to 50% over last
year. Some in the government have sug-
gested the EEG may soon rise to 7.5 cents/
kWh, a 70% increase in one year.
Berlin Technical University Professor
Georg Erdmanns calculations show the
EEG portion of the consumers electricity
bill will jump to over 10 cents/kWh, or
nearly three times what Merkel pledged
to consumers when revealing her energy
plan less than a year ago. Remember,
this is only the additional cost to the
monthly bill to pay for the extremely lu-
crative 20-year feed-in tariff contracts
for renewable electricity. For 2011, the
average household electricity price was
31.6 cents/kWh, according to Eurostat,
not including the VAT, three and one half
times more than the average household
pays in the U.S.
German government data suggests that
consumers will pay out $125 billion over
the next 20 years to subsidize renew-
ables installed before the end of 2011;
the number rises to $250 billion if future
hookups are included. Erdmann predicts
the real number is well over $375 billion
because the rate of photovoltaic (PV) in-
stallations is much higher than govern-
ment predictions. In 2011 alone, 7.5 GW
of solar were installeddouble govern-
ment estimates.
Public interest groups condemn these
rapidly accelerating electricity prices as
unfairly impacting those on fixed incomes.
Private households are expected to pay
for an energy transition for which no clear
plan exists, says Holger Krawinkel of the
Federation of German Consumer Organiza-
tions. The group says that one-seventh of
Germanys households now live in energy
poverty. Government data shows that
more than 600,000 households had their
electricity turned off for non-payment in
2011. Its no wonder that many public ad-
vocacy groups are protesting the rapidly
rising rates in the name of social justice.
Industrial Advantage
Germanys largest industrial power consum-
ers have always enjoyed generous electric-
ity rate subsidies. Eurostat data shows that
the price of electricity for the largest indus-
trial users is one-half of that for consumers.
In fact, industrial users are required to pay
only 0.3% of the cost of the EEG mandated
renewable feed-in tariffs!
Even so, the large industrial rates are
the highest in the European Union and
are expected to rise 20% by 2020. Ac-
cording to the Association of German
Chambers of Industry and Commerce
(DIHK), high electricity rates are a prin-
cipal cause of the acceleration of Germa-
nys de-industrialization. DIHK reports
that almost one in five industrial compa-
nies plans to increase capacities abroad,
if it hasnt done so already.
Projects Behind Schedule
PV projects are moving quickly, but off-
shore wind projects are becalmed. Moving
expensive yet abundant offshore wind en-
ergy to Germanys industrial south requires
thousands of kilometers of new transmis-
sion lines. Its not surprising that many
local jurisdictions dont want these new
transmission towers in their districts or
are demanding expensive undergrounding
of the wires. Siting of these new lines is at
a virtual standstill across Germany.
In May, the operators of Germanys
four power grids presented their esti-
mates of the costs to comply with the
German governments national expan-
sion of the grid: $25 billion over the
next 10 years. TenneT, the Netherlands
state-owned grid operator (which also
supplies about a third of Germany), says
it will cost an additional $15 billion in
grid improvements to connect just the
first wave of offshore wind turbines to
the grid by 2020, and the economics
dont justify the investment. In addi-
tion, another 4,000 kilometers (km) of
existing lines must be modernized, al-
though that cost wasnt noted.
Many offshore wind parks are now un-
der construction, some up to 200 km out
in the Baltic Sea and the North Sea, but
none has been finished. Without trans-
mission lines, many projects are at a
standstill; at least one project is three
years behind schedule. Also, technical
problems are confounding developers
relying on unproven HVDC systems con-
nected to very long undersea cables. In
the meantime, the government is again
looking to the consumer to pay for these
project delays.
The Green Party has taken the position
that it is necessary to make financial sac-
rifices for the sake of the environmen-
tal transformation of society. Germanys
transformation has barely begun, but
it seems to me that the consumers have
already been sacrificed.
Dr. Robert Peltier, PE is POWERs
editor-in-chief.
he Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear power plant is the most advanced
design available in the global marketplace. he AP1000 plant was
designed to make use of modern, modular-construction techniques
enabling shorter construction times, lowering construction costs and
bringing opportunities to local suppliers.
he AP1000 design is the only advanced plant that can ofer regulatory
certainty with the recent issuance of Final Design Certiication from
the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and interim design
approval by regulatory authorities in the United Kingdom.
To date, a total of ten AP1000 reactors are under contract four in
China and six in the US. Construction is underway on four units
in the US (Vogtle and VC Summer), ater receiving their combined
construction and operating licenses in 2012. All four Chinese plants
remain on schedule, with the irst Sanmen unit on track to produce
electricity by the end of 2013.
he AP1000 plant is ready to provide future generations with safe,
clean and reliable electricity.
Check us out at www.westinghousenuclear.com
Online in 2013
Westinghouse AP1000
Westinghouse AP1000 Sanmen Unit 1,
under construction and on schedule
W
E
S
T
I
N
G
H
O
U
S
E

E
L
E
C
T
R
I
C

C
O
M
P
A
N
Y

L
L
C

|
November 2012 8
France Considers Departure from Iconic
Stance on Nuclear Energy
No other country has been as frequently cited as an example
of exploiting the virtues of a nuclear-heavy energy policy as
France. Deriving more than 75% of its electricity from 58 op-
erational nuclear reactors with a total capacity of about 63 GW,
France has one of the lowest costs of generation and is the
worlds largest net exporter of power, earning 3 billion ($3.9
billion) a year from sales of surplus power to buyers beyond its
borders. But that is all about to change.
Having few indigenous energy resources, and impelled by the first
oil shock of 1974, the French government embarked on a pointed
mission to rapidly expand the countrys nuclear power capacity. Sub-
sequent parliamentary debate reaffirmed nuclears central role in the
countrys energy policy, which stresses security of supply and ad-
dressing environmental concerns, including mitigating greenhouse
gas emissions and properly managing radioactive waste. As well as
developing a closed fuel cyclenearly 17% of the countrys electricity
is produced from recycled nuclear fuelFrance has also established
research policy that incorporates its heavy engineering experience
and seeks to develop innovative nuclear energy technologies.
Considering that nuclear energy is so important to France, it is no
surprise that it has featured in blueprints of the countrys economic
future. Spearheaded by former President Nicolas Sarkozy, the coun-
try in 2008 established the Agence France Nuclaire International
(AFNI), a vehicle to help set up civil nuclear programs in other
countries. Sarkozys government called for a massive resurgence of
nuclear power, extolling its ability to combat climate change, pro-
vide an economic boost, and achieve energy independence.
But even before the devastating Fukushima crisis in Japan in
March 2011, experts say some French citizens had been pushing
back, contesting the almost religious consensus on the matter
of the countrys reliance on nuclear power. As early as 2008, a few
nuclear experts associated with Global Chance (whose members are
academic and institutional scientistsa group comparable to the
Union of Concerned Scientists in the U.S.) confronted what it called
the official narrative.
They alleged that the image of Frances nuclear program as a highly
successful industry was a sham. Development of nuclear power was
marked by a succession of technological blind alleys, planning errors
and all kinds of difficulties, which are generally noted and corrected
without any public discussion. The economic justification of vend-
ing nuclear technology was also particularly suspicious, the group
claimed, citing a lack of transparency on several crucial levels: Official
projected investment costs for a number of projects were consistently
lower than actual costs, andas exemplified by the two EPR reac-
tors under construction at sites in France and Finlandconstruction
times and load factors often lagged behind projected figures.
When the Fukushima accident happened, as Germany and Tai-
wan vowed to phase out nuclear power entirely, cracks in Frances
nuclear facade widened. Public concerns for safety mounted as anti-
nuclear groups highlighted startling statistics that showed French
nuclear plants saw 700 to 800 incidents a year, varying in serious-
ness. And when Socialist Franois Hollande ran on a platform pro-
posing to reduce nuclears share of the countrys energy mix from
75% to 50% by 2025, and pledged to order the closure of the two-
unit Fessenheim before the end of his first term in 2017, he won,
albeit narrowly, over incumbent Sarkozy, who had called Hollandes
policies economically disastrous.
Hollande has, since the election, reiterated his pledge to cap
nuclears share at 50%, promising a transition strategy based on
energy efficiency and renewable energy. At a two-day conference
in September, he said his government was pushing for closure of
Frances oldest nuclear plant, the 1977-built Fessenheim plant
in Alsace, near the German border, within four years, and that it
would make an example of successful decommissioning (Figure
1). Meanwhile, he said new tenders for solar and offshore wind
power would be launched before the end of 2012.
Even though Frances nuclear industry employs about 400,000
heavily unionized workers, the avowal has not been strongly po-
litically contestedsave by the Greens Party, which captured 17
parliamentary seats in May after coalescing with the center-right
Socialists and having accepted the Socialists goal of a 50% nuclear
cap (which is far higher than their own goal of zero).
Site directors of all nuclear plants operated by Fessenheims
owner EDF have protested the closure of Fessenheim in an open
letter, calling it a profound injustice. The decision would create
uncertainty about EDFs plans for its nuclear plant fleet and casts
doubt on employment and economic development for the regions
in which nuclear plants are sited, the letter said.
Some experts express skepticism about how France will carry out
the transition. At the end of 2011, of Frances total generating ca-
pacity of 126 GW, 25 GW was hydro, 28 GW fossil fuel, 6.6 GW wind,
and 2.2. GW solar PV. Counting hydro, renewables made up 13% of
the countrys total generated electricitybut that is well below the
23% target set by Sarkozy for 2020. Experts point out that compared
with its neighbors Germany and Spain, only 2% of generated power
comes from wind, while solar power makes up less than 0.5%.
Most nuclear industry stakeholders in France concede that a
fair debate on Frances energy future is warranted. A formal na-
tional discussion has been scheduled by Minister for Environ-
ment, Sustainable Development and Energy Delphine Batho. It
includes an information phase that will take place between
November and December this year, followed by a public participa-
1. The end of an era. Newly installed French President Franois
Hollande defeated incumbent Nicolas Sarkozy in May by running on a
platform that proposed to cut Frances share of nuclear energy from 75%
to 50% by 2025 and to shut the 1978-built two-unit Fessenheim plant,
shown here, before the end of his term in 2017. Fessenheim, located in
the Alsace region of northeastern France, is the countrys oldest nuclear
plant. French regulators in 2011 deemed the plant suitable to operate for
another 10 years if it made some improvements. Courtesy: EDF
value chainfrom repairs, coatings and design engineering, to machining, eld services and the worlds most
Chromalloy extends engine life like no other company can, by providing the industrys most complete independent
value chainfrom repairs, coatings and design engineering, to machining, eld services and the worlds most
advanced independent castings facility. These unrivaled in-house capabilities represent over 60 years of
innovationand they can make an impact today.
chromalloy.com Long live your engine.
Chromalloy takes engine life to a higher level.
|
November 2012 10
THE BIG PICTURE: Advanced Fission
|
November 2012 12
tion phase (via webcast and regional conferences) from January
through April 2013. Recommendations for the energy transition
will be made in May 2013 following the discussion, and a new
energy policy bill could emerge as early as June 2013. Batho has
noted that the discussion will pay particular attention to social
issues and economic transitions as well as industrial and profes-
sional retraining authorities.
After Blackouts, India Plans Reforms
The back-to-back collapse at the end of July of Indias Northern,
Eastern, and Northeastern grids that slashed power to more than
60% of Indias population of 1.24 billion has impelled the coun-
try into a spending frenzy to upgrade its rickety power network,
which, a government inquiry revealed, was one cause of the
unprecedented blackouts. But the 10th-largest economy in the
world has much more work to do, including a much-needed over-
haul of its current patchwork of energy policies, experts say.
The blackouts on July 30 and July 31 afflicted a massive swath
of the subcontinent stretching 2,000 miles from Assam on the
east, near China, to the Himalayas in the north, and the north-
western deserts of Rajasthan. The Western and Southern grids
were unaffected, leaving Gujarat and many southern states un-
touched by the chaos. In the days after the blackouts, as the
country registered how immense the problem was, the govern-
ment jumped into action.
As speculation mounted about the cause of the blackouts,
the governments first order was to assemble a three-member
panel to determine the reason for the massive failures. In an 81-
page report issued on Aug. 16, the panel pinned the causes on
weak interregional power transmission corridors that had been
compromised by multiple existing outages. Northern India was
already seeing excessive power demand, and a chronic supply
shortfall was exacerbated by lower-than-normal rainfall from the
weak summer monsoon that strained the countrys hydroelectric
power supply. But on July 30, several utilities overdrew from the
Northern Grid despite instructions from regional load dispatch
centers, causing its collapse and putting out the lights for the
more than 300 million people it serves across nine states.
On July 31, after the Northern region was separated from the
Western region following the trip of the 400-kV Bina-Gwalior line,
the Eastern and Northeastern grids collapsed, barring a few pock-
ets, due to multiple tripping attributed to the internal power
swings, under frequency and overvoltage at different places, the
report said. Restoration took five hours, eight hours, and two hours
in the Northern, Eastern, and Northeastern regions, respectively.
Several measures could have saved the system from collapse,
the report pointedly concluded, including better coordinated
planning of outages of state and regional networks, specifically
under depleted condition of the inter-regional power transfer cor-
ridors, and better regulation to limit overdrawal/underdrawal.
The panels message was clear. In September, Power Grid Corp.
of India, the nations largest electricity transmission company,
pledged to spend 1 trillion rupees ($18 billion) to upgrade its
network over the next five years. The urgency is not understated,
company officials say, noting that India plans to increase its
generating capacity by 76 GW by 2017. Making sure a collapse
doesnt happen again is our top priority, Power Grid Chairman
R.N. Nayak said in an interview with Bloomberg on Sept. 14.
We may end up crossing that 1 trillion-rupee spending mark to
strengthen and stabilize the gaps exposed by the blackouts.
Yet that is only the tip of the iceberg, say experts from the
International Energy Agency in a September report outlin-
ing challenges that the country must address to create a well-
functioning, financially viable power sector. Hurdling the first of
those challenges will require further reform of the electricity sec-
tor, whereby the nations energy companies can achieve mana-
gerial autonomy from central or state ministries . . . for timely
investment. The key issue is not private- versus publicly-owned
entities; rather, ownership should not interfere with market prin-
ciples, the report says.
Another pressing reform involves pricing mechanisms. The cur-
rent rigid pricing setting determined by the government does not
reflect realistic costs, and this has been a primary cause of Indias
recurring fiscal and supply-side problems, the report says. Indias
power sector is overwhelmingly afflicted by a shortage of fuels,
insufficient infrastructure, and financial weakness of state-owned
power companiesand these are issues caused by distorted pric-
ing mechanisms and a systematic weakness to enforce legitimate
revenue realization.
One way that India could possibly become an open and func-
tioning energy market is by electing strong political leadership to
convey clear policy messages. Frequent populist remarks, which,
for example, promise free electricity, are not conducive to creat-
ing the right public perception of energy as a commodity, not an
entitlement. Furthermore, in the context of an increasing need
for investments and the integration of Indias energy sector into
the global energy market, India needs to align its energy policies
and institutions with global practices, it concluded.
Progress for Germanys
Power-to-Gas Drive
Germanys E.ON this August began construction of a new pilot plant
in Falkenhagen in northeast Germany that will convert excess wind
2. Blackout. When the Northern, Eastern, and Northeastern grids
collapsed on July 30 and 31, more than 60% of Indias population of
1.24 billion across 22 states experienced power outages lasting as long
as eight hours. States shaded in dark red are those that were affected
on July 30; lighter red indicates additional states affected on July 31.
Source: Wikipedia
States and Union Territories
Map of India
Our connections
deliver so much more
than uid systems.
Your Swagelok representative is your connection to so much
more than you expect. Yes theyre experts in their own right.
But beyond that, they can tap into the global knowledge accrued
in more than 65 years of research, development and innovation.
Your authorized Swagelok representative is ready to work with
you and provide you with the tools and problem-solving solutions
that deliver a real business edge and so much more too
because in this business you need all the right connections.
Visit swagelok.com/connections.

2
0
1
2

S
w
a
g
e
l
o
k

C
o
m
p
a
n
y
|
November 2012 14
energy into synthetic natural gas that can then be fed into the re-
gional gas grid, where it can be used to produce heat and power.
The technology is not new. In 2010, German researchers
at the Center for Solar Energy and Hydrogen Research Baden-
Wrttemberg, in cooperation with the Fraunhofer Institute for
Wind Energy and Energy System Technology IWES, announced
they had developed what they called a power-to-gas process,
which essentially employs hydrogen-electrolysis with metha-
nization. It involves splitting water using surplus renewable
energy to create hydrogen and oxygen. A chemical reaction of
hydrogen with carbon dioxide generates methaneor synthetic
natural gas (Figure 3). The researchers then built a 25-kW pilot
plant in Stuttgart, supported by Austrian company SolarFuel. A
second 250-kW research facility is now in the works, scheduled
for completion this year.
The technology seems to have made major strides since the
first pilot. SolarFuel is currently working on a project that will
see the construction of an industrial pilot facility in Werlte near
Oldenburg for the production of renewable gas (or e-gas) for use
in Audi vehicles. If all goes as planned and the facility begins
operating in the third quarter of 2013, power from four 3.6-MW
offshore wind turbines will be sourced to produce around 4,000
cubic meters of renewable methane for a connected load of 6.3
MW, fueling 1,500 turbo-compressed natural gas (TCNG) Audi A3
vehicles for a year. Audi plans to begin serial production of this
vehicle type next year.
Meanwhile, E.ON is just one of a dozen parties interested in
the technology. European firm ENERTAG has also gotten into the
game, partnering with Swedish utility Vattenfall and other com-
panies to build a 6-MW hybrid power station that transforms wind
energy into hydrogen in Prenzlau. After converting excess wind
energy to hydrogen, the plant uses that hydrogen and biogas to
generate power and heat.
But E.ONs project is unique in that it involves methanization
and is of a larger scale, consisting of a 2-MW storage facility
(over a 24-hour period, the facility will store about 30 MWh
of energy). The hydrogen gas produced from the Falkenhagen
plant at a rate of 360 cubic meters per hour will be injected
into the regional natural gas pipeline, making the natural gas
pipeline network a storage system for surplus electrical power
generated from renewable resources.
The project involves a turnkey contract awarded to Canadian
company Hydrogenics Corp., which means that firm will supply,
install, connect, and commission most components of the hy-
drogen production facility, including gas compression and mas-
ter controls, and ready it for operationscheduled for 2013.
In a larger context, the technology had been lauded as showing
tremendous promiseparticularly in Germany, because it is well-
suited to the countrys infrastructure. Germany reportedly has a
natural gas storage reservoir equivalent to more than 200 TWh.
Integration into the infrastructure is simple, developers say: The
natural gas substitute can be stored like conventional natural gas
in the supply network, pipelines, and storage systems in order to
fuel natural gas cars or fire natural gas heating systems.
The approach, which is still relatively new and expensive, is
strongly being promoted by Germanys federal power and gas agen-
cy, the Bundesnetzagentur, which in November 2011 held a con-
ference to discuss new developments in the field. Matthias Kurth,
president of the Bundesnetzagentur, has said that it could also
prove invaluable to Germany in light of the nations change of
direction in energy policy towards a renewable future. In addition
to grid expansion and intelligent load and generation management,
considerably more storage capacity will in fact be required to bal-
ance fluctuations in solar and wind power generation. Pumped-
storage power stations are a good solution for short-term load
balancing, but there is only limited capacity available in Germany.
Long-term storage is therefore a major challenge when it comes to
transforming the energy supply system, he said.
Research Center Dedicated to Power
Plant Water Use Opens
The Electric Power Research Institute and several partners
including the Southern Research Institute, Southern Co. sub-
sidiary Georgia Power, and Southern Researchare testing a
new technology that could reduce the amount of water needed
for power plant cooling. The work is taking place at the new
Water Research Center (WRC) at Georgia Powers Plant Bowen in
Cartersville, Ga.a novel facility dedicated to developing and
testing technologies to reduce power plant water withdrawals
and consumption.
The partners are evaluating a new thermosyphon cooler tech-
nology developed by Johnson Controls (Figure 4). According
to the Wisconsin-based firm, the technology transfers heat
to the environment without evaporative water loss by using
an air-cooled refrigerant that pre-cools water before it enters
the cooling tower. The thermosyphon cooler also reduces the
3. Storing gas. Power-to-gas, a fairly new type of energy storage,
involves converting renewable power to hydrogen, using electrolysis,
and then chemically converting it to methaneor synthetic natural
gasfor storage in existing gas grids. Austrian company SolarFuel
was among the first to collaborate with German researchers as they
developed the process. Source: SolarFuel; Specht, Sterner et al.
Conversion into electricity
Storage of electricity
Combined cycle
plant/CHP
Methanization
Electrolysis/
H
2
tank
Power grid
Gas grid
Wind
Sun
CO
2
CO
2
tank
CO
2
CH
4
CO
2
H
2 H
2
Gas storage
tank
4. Testing the water. The newly opened Water Research Center
at Georgia Powers Plant Bowen in Cartersville, Ga., will develop and
test technologies to reduce power plant water withdrawals and con-
sumption. This image shows Johnson Controls thermosyphon cooler,
which is the first project to become operational at the center. Courtesy:
Georgia Power
November 2012
|
amount of water that must be cooled by
evaporation in the cooling tower, thus
reducing water consumption. The year-
long testing at the WRC will document
the technologys water-saving potential
and energy consumption characteristics,
developers say.
The WRC will have seven distinct focus
areas: moisture recovery; cooling tower
and advanced cooling systems; zero liq-
uid discharge; low-volume wastewater
treatment; solid landfill water manage-
ment; carbon technology water issues;
and water modeling, monitoring, and
best management practices.
POWER Digest
Global Companies Take on Nigerias
Newly Privatized Plants. Nigerias $1
billion liquidation of five government-
owned thermal and hydropower generation
companiespart of a wider privatization
effort that includes transmission and dis-
tribution assets to encourage investment
in the power shortagestricken countrys
electricity sectorhas attracted a number
of global companies and investors. Eight
firms bid a total of $707 million for the
434-MW Gerugu plant, 832-MW Ugheli
plant, 1,020-MW Sapele plant, 600-MW
Shiroro plant, and 760-MW Kainji plant,
but five consortia were picked as preferred
bidders for the successor companies cre-
ated from the divestiture of Power Hold-
ing Co. of Nigeria.
Among the highest bidders was a con-
sortium listing Nigerian conglomerate
Transcorp and U.S. firm Symbion Power,
which offered $300 million for the gas-fired
Ugheli plant. Another consisted of a Chi-
nese firm and Eurafric, a Nigerian oil and
gas firm, which bid $201 million for the
thermal Sapele plant. And one listing was
for Forte Oil, Shanghai Municipal Electric
Power Co., and BSG Power, which bid $132
million for the gas-fired Gerugu plant. Man-
agement contracts for the two hydropower
plants went to consortiums that included
several Nigerian firms, Russias RusHydro,
and China Three Gorges Corp.
Two CFB Contracts for Foster Wheel-
er in South Korea. Foster Wheeler in
September won a contract from South Ko-
reas Yeosu Cogeneration Corp., a subsid-
iary of Hanwha Corp., for the design and
supply of a 60-MWe circulating fluidized-
bed (CFB) steam generator located in an
industrial complex in Yeosu City, South
Korea, that is slated to go online in the
first quarter of 2015.
In October, the global engineering and
construction company Foster Wheeler re-
ceived a full notice to proceed on a separate
contract with Doosan Heavy Industries &
Construction Co., Ltd. for cooperation in
the design of a 350-MWe CFB steam gen-
erator for the Yeosu Thermal Power Plant
1 Project for Korea South East Power Co.,
Ltd. Doosan will supply the major equip-
ment, including the CFB boiler and turbine
generator for the Yeosu 1 project, which
will replace an existing heavy oilfired
unit. That project is also expected to be
completed in the first quarter of 2015.
Demand for CFB boilers is increasing in
South Korea and other countries, pegged
on the growing use of low-quality coal, of
which there are large reserves, a Doosan
official said in a statement.
Coal Gasification Power Plant Devel-
oper Secures Construction, Financing
Contracts. Seattle-based Summit Power
Group on Sept. 12 signed a memorandum
of understanding with representatives of
Chinas Sinopec Engineering Group for an
engineering, procurement, and construc-
Scan the QR Code for more information
877-4SI-POWER
or go to
www.structint.com/power
Structural Integrity works hard and believes in our expertise to help power plants solve
problems. As Experts in the prevention and control of structural and mechanical
failures, our engineering experts help with:
Comprehensive Turbine Generator Assessment
Planning
Nondestructive Examination
Condition and Failure Assessment
Repairs
Stress & Fracture Analyses/Life Assessment
Our expertise encompasses many other plant components and systems, as well as
comprehensive, innovative solutions including Guided Wave Testing, Direct Assessment,
Root Cause Analyses, Welding Engineering, Linear Phased Array NDE and more.
Call us today at 877-474-7693 for a quote or for help preventing future problems.
Were experts you can rely on.
Sir Charles Algernon Parsons
1854 1931 was an Anglo-Irish engineer, best known for his inven-
tion of the steam turbine. He worked as an engineer on dynamo and
turbine design, and power generation, with great inluence on the
naval and electrical engineering ields.
IF YOU BELIEVE IN A
PRINCIPLE...
YOU MUST GO ALL THE
WAY.
|
November 2012 16
tion contract, and with the Export-Import Bank of China to
secure financing for the $2.5 billion Texas Clean Energy Project
(TCEP), a large-scale commercial coal gasification power/polygen
project that the company is developing near Odessa, Texas.
Siemens Energy is expected to provide a high-hydrogen com-
bustion turbine for the project, which proposes to remove carbon
dioxide, sulfur, and mercury from the projects gas stream prior to
combustion, leaving only a high-hydrogen/low-carbon clean syn-
gas as the sole fuel that is burned. The project will capture 90%
of its carbon dioxide emissions for use in enhanced oil recovery by
producers in the Permian Basin of West Texas. TCEP will also produce
more than 700,000 tons per year of urea as fertilizer, which will be
bought entirely by Minnesota-based CHS Inc., and Houston-based
Shrieve Chemical Co. will purchase TCEPs output (about 50,000
tons per year) of sulfuric acid. CPS Energy, San Antonios municipal
electric and gas utility, will buy 200 MW of the plants power.
About $450 million of TCEPs costs will be covered by a Depart-
ment of Energy cost-sharing program under the federal Clean Coal
Power Initiative.
RWE Opens 2-GW CCGT Plant in West Wales. RWE AG
opened its 2,160-MW Pembroke combined cycle gas turbine plant
on Sept. 19, handing over the fifth and final unit of the station
to its UK subsidiary RWE npower and culminating three years of
construction during which more than 10,000 contractors worked
7.4 million man hours to complete the $1.6 billion facility. The
new plant was built on a site formerly occupied by a 2,000-MW
oil-fired power station. The station was outfitted with five Als-
tom GT26 single-shaft gas turbines, five drum-type heat recovery
steam generators, five STF30C steam turbines with axial exhaust,
and five TOPGAS turbo-generators. Swiss company ABB supplied
the automation system and the Shaw Group put up five heat
recovery steam generator boilers.
The power from the new plant in west Wales is badly needed by
the UK: About 40% of the countrys existing generation facilities
were built before 1975 and are expected to be shuttered over the
next 10 to 15 years. Several fossil fuelfired plantsincluding
RWEs own 2,000-MW coal-fired Didcot A power plant and the
1,000-MW oil-fired Fawley plantwill be shut down in line with
requirements of the European Unions Large Combustion Plant
Directive. Many nuclear power plants are also reaching the end
of their operational lives. Meanwhile, power demand in the UK
is expected to surge, forcing the country to increase generating
capacity by 35 GW by 2020 to ensure energy reliability.
SunPower Corp. Completes 1.3-MW Rooftop Solar Proj-
ect in San Francisco. California firm SunPower Corp. on Sept.
19 completed a 1.3-MW solar system on the roof of the Explor-
atorium, a massive science museum under construction at Pier 15
in the heart of San Franciscos waterfront district. The system will
generate as many kilowatt-hours of power as the facility needs
when it opens in the spring of 2013. It uses 5,874 SunPower so-
lar panels, which the company says are up to 50% more efficient
than conventional panels, and a performance-monitoring system
that displays system performance, updated every 15 minutes, in
the lobby of the new 330,000-square-foot facility. Any energy
unused by the Exploratorium will be fed into the utility grid for
use by other Pacific Gas & Electric customers.
FENOC Plans to Expand Nuclear Fuel Storage Capacity at
Beaver Valley. FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Co. (FENOC) on
Sept. 19 announced plans to expand used nuclear fuel storage ca-
pacity at its two-unit Beaver Valley Power Station in Shippingport,
Pa. The FirstEnergy subsidiary plans to install six above-ground,
airtight steel and concrete canisters that provide cooling to used
fuel assemblies through natural air circulation starting in the fall of
2012, but it says at least 47 additional canisters may be added as
needed after that projects completion in 2014. The canisters will be
stored on a thick concrete pad located within Beaver Valleys highly
secured protected area, providing additional safety assurance. The
storage system will be monitored closely by trained personnel and
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to ensure its integrity.
Beaver Valley began operation of Unit 1 in 1976 and Unit 2 in
1987, and its used fuel assemblies have been stored in an indoor,
steel-lined pool within the power station. Approximately 40%
of each units 157 fuel assemblies are replaced and then stored
in the pool following each 18-month operating cycle. But the
fuel pool is expected to reach full storage capacity by 2015, and
because a national repository for used nuclear fuel has not yet
been developed, Beaver Valley must plan for additional storage
space, the company said.
Plant Barry CCS Demonstration Begins Underground In-
jection. A carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) demonstration
project jointly under way by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd.
(MHI) and Southern Co. in September began underground injec-
tion of carbon dioxide (CO
2
) recovered from flue gas emissions
of a carbon capture facility built at Southern Co.s Plant Barry in
Alabama. The demonstration test, which began last June, is the
worlds largest in scale, capturing 500 metric tons per day (mtpd)
with a CO
2
recovery efficiency of above 90%.
Injection is being performed in a saline formation at a depth
of 3,000 to 3,400 meters in the Citronelle Dome geologic struc-
ture, which is approximately 12 miles west of the plant. The se-
questration aspect of the project is being conducted as Phase
III of the Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnerships program, a
program sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy.
The carbon capture facility consists primarily of a flue gas
scrubber, flue gas CO
2
capture/regeneration system, CO
2
compres-
sion machinery, and electrical components. For CO
2
recovery the
facility adopts MHIs KM CDR Process, which uses a proprietary
KS-1 high-performance solvent for CO
2
absorption and desorption
that was jointly developed by MHI and the Kansai Electric Power
Co., Inc. MHI said it had previously completed small-scale dem-
onstration testing at 10 mtpd in cooperation with the Research
Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth and Electric
Power Development Co., Ltd. (J-POWER) and confirmed unin-
terrupted stable operation.
Westinghouse Prepares for Possible AP1000 Construc-
tion in Czech Republic. Westinghouse Electric, one of three
bidders vying for a multi-billion-dollar tender from Czech utility
CEZ to construct two new units at its Temeln nuclear power sta-
tion, on Sept. 11 said it would cooperate with Czech construction
company Hutn monte a.s. to prepare for potential construc-
tion of AP1000 nuclear plants in the Czech Republic and region-
ally. If Westinghouse is awarded the tender, the Toshiba Corp.
unit said Hutn monte would be responsible for performing the
vast majority of the mechanical installation and corresponding
construction testing, including assembly and installation of the
containment vessel.
Westinghouse has embarked on an initiative to develop a lo-
cal supply chain to prepare for construction of the reactors at
Temeln, including signing memoranda of understanding with ma-
jor Czech companies, notably I&C Energo a.s., Metrostav a.s.,
and Vtkovice a.s. Westinghouses bidding competitors include
AREVA, which has put forward its EPR design, and Russias At-
omStroyExport consortium, whose bid is based on Gidropress
MIR-1200 third-generation VVER model under construction at
Leningrad Phase II and Novovoronezh Phase II.
Sonal Patel is POWERs senior writer.
M220EM
W E M A K E W A T E R
A N A L Y S I S S I M P L E R .
F o r m o r e t h a n 6 0y e a r s , w e v e b e e n a tt h e c r e s t o f t h e i n d u s t r y
f i n d i n g s o l u t i o n s t h a t h e l p y o u b e s t m a n a g e y o u r w a t e r .
W a t e r a n a l y s i s h a s t ob er i g h t . Y o u d e s e r v e c o m p l e t e s o l u t i o n s y o u
c a n b ef u l l y c o n f i d e n t i n . H a c h i sy o u r r e s o u r c e f o r e x p e r t a n s w e r s ,
o u t s t a n d i n g s u p p o r t , a n d r e l i a b l e , e a s y - t o - u s e p r o d u c t s .
R e d i s c o v e r H a c h a th a c h . c o m / r e d i s c o v e r
7.875x10.75 PowerMag BRAND.qxp:7.875x10.75 PowerMag K1100.qxp 10/4/12 5:58 PM Page 1
M220EM
WE MAKE WATER
ANALYSIS SIMPLER.
For more than 60 years, weve been at the crest of the industry
finding solutions that help you best manage your water.
Water analysis has to be right. You deserve complete solutions you
can be fully confident in. Hach is your resource for expert answers,
outstanding support, and reliable, easy-to-use products.
Rediscover Hach at hach.com/rediscover
7.875x10.75 PowerMag BRAND.qxp:7.875x10.75 PowerMag K1100.qxp 10/4/12 5:58 PM Page 1
04_PWR_110112_GM&BP.indd 17 10/13/12 4:31:04 PM
|
November 2012 18
Seismic Instrumentation
at Nuclear Power Plants
When a nuclear power plant experiences
ground motion due to an earthquake, an
evaluation may be needed before allowing
the plant to continue operating or to re-
sume operating if it has been shut down,
as was the case after the seismic event
that shut down both units at Dominions
North Anna Power Station on August 23,
2011. (See p. 34 for a complete analysis
of the event and successful recovery pro-
gram.) The Electric Power Research In-
stitute (EPRI) had previously conducted
research to develop guidance regarding
the types of evaluations and inspections
that would be necessary to ensure that an
earthquake had not caused damage that
could affect safe operation of a plant.
More recently, EPRI has formulated guid-
ance relating to the types of instrumenta-
tion necessary to determine the extent of
the ground motion at a plant site.
For every nuclear plant, an operating
basis earthquake (OBE) has been estab-
lished. The OBE has been defined such
that if it can be determined that the
ground motion experienced at the plant
site did not exceed the design basis, the
plant can continue to operate (or can
return to operation if it has been shut
down). If the ground motion exceeds the
OBE, or if it cannot reliably be established
whether the OBE has been exceeded, the
plant may need to shut down and remain
shut down until it can demonstrate that
the earthquake caused no damage that
could affect safe operation.
Although the OBE is often character-
ized in terms of a single parameter, peak
ground acceleration, it is actually defined
by a response spectrum. A response spec-
trum relates the maximum acceleration or
velocity experienced at a particular loca-
tion to the frequency associated with the
vibrations caused by the earthquake. The
response spectrum is typically presented
in the form shown in Figure 1.
Application of the Nuclear Regulatory
Commissions (NRCs) approved OBE ex-
ceedance criterion requires not only mea-
surement of the OBE parameters (that is,
the response spectrum and cumulative ab-
solute velocity, CAV), but also walkdown
inspections of the plant. CAV indicates
the potential for a recorded earthquake to
cause damage to nuclear plant structures.
It is the absolute area under the accelera-
tion vs. time plot as recorded by a time-
history digital recorder.
If the OBE criterion is not exceeded and
the inspections yield no evidence of sig-
nificant damage, the plant can remain in
operation or be restarted. Valid instrument
data, available within 4 hours after an
earthquake, are necessary to support such
a determination. Thus, it is very impor-
tant that nuclear power plants install and
maintain appropriate seismic instrumenta-
tion that can facilitate prompt evaluations
of earthquake data.
Requirements and Options for
Instrumentation Systems
To assess whether an earthquake has ex-
ceeded the OBE for a nuclear power plant,
it is important for a modern, online, digi-
tal seismic instrumentation system to be
in place. EPRI suggests three options for a
seismic instrumentation system:
Minimum system
Basic automatic system
Complete system that complies with
NRC Regulatory Guide 1.2
Minimum System. The minimum sys-
tem would include one or two accelero-
graphs, depending on how the OBE was
defined for the plant. If the OBE had been
defined in the free field, one instrument
in the free field would be sufficient. On
the other hand, if the OBE had been de-
fined at a building location (for example,
1. Typical earthquake response. The usual form of an earthquake response spectrum
is illustrated. The plot shows maximum acceleration, velocity, or displacement caused by the
recorded earthquake at a range of frequencies associated with the vibrations caused by the
earthquake. Source: EPRI
A
c
c
e
l
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
g
)
Frequency (Hz)
0.1 1 10 100
Key References
A Criterion for Determining Exceedance
of the Operating Basis Earthquake.
EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1988. NP-5930.
Final Policy Statement on Technical
Specifications for Nuclear Power Re-
actors. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com-
mission (NRC), Federal Register Notice
58FR39132, July 22, 1993.
Guidelines for Nuclear Plant Response
to an Earthquake. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA:
1989. NP-6695.
Nuclear Power Plant Instrumentation for
Earthquakes. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.12,
1997.
Pre-Earthquake Planning and Immedi-
ate Nuclear Power Plant Operator Post-
Earthquake Actions. NRC Regulatory
Guide 1.166, 1997.
Restart of a Nuclear Power Plant Shut
Down by a Seismic Event. NRC Regu-
latory Guide 1.167, 1997.
Seismic Instrumentation in Nuclear
Power Plants for Response to OBE Ex-
ceedance: Guidance for Implemen-
tation. EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 1994.
TR-104239.
Standardization of the Cumulative
Absolute Velocity. EPRI, Palo Alto,
CA: 1991. TR-100082.
November 2012
|
at the top of the basemat of the reactor
containment), both an instrument at that
location and one in the free field would
be required.
In addition to being placed in the loca-
tions at which the OBE is defined, these
instruments would need to meet minimum
qualifications:
The accelerographs would need to have
battery backup, with pre-event memory
sufficient to record the entire earthquake
motion and a storage device that could
accommodate rapid data retrieval.
The instruments must be digital, with
a sampling rate of at least 200 samples
per second.
The instruments would need to cover a
frequency bandwidth of 0.2 to 50 Hz.
A stand-alone desktop or laptop com-
puter equipped with software to per-
form the necessary calculations on the
collected data is required. The software
would need to generate the CAV and
the response spectra. The nature of the
data retrieval and transfer to the com-
puter would need to be such that the
calculations could be completed within
4 hours after the earthquake.
Basic Automatic System. Improved
functionality can be achieved by automat-
ing certain steps that must be performed
manually using the minimum seismic in-
strumentation system. The basic automatic
system would add a dedicated online com-
puter to automatically retrieve data from
the accelerographs and perform the calcu-
lations related to possible exceedance of
the OBE. Such a capability would expedite
the process of assembling the information
needed to make a decision with regard to
whether a plant shutdown is required.
To upgrade from the minimum system
to the basic automatic system, a dedi-
cated cable would be needed from each
instrument to the recording location (typ-
ically, the main control room) to capture
the acceleration time history. The analysis
results should be displayed to the control
room operators in a form that is easy to
understand. An uninterruptable power
source for the computer that records and
analyzes the data would also be needed to
ensure that the results could be available
within the 4-hour timeframe.
Complete System. The complete sys-
tem is the most advanced of the three.
Such a system would incorporate an online
computer for data acquisition and analysis
along with more extensive instrumentation.
The system could be configured so that it
complies with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.12.
Although the minimum and basic automatic
systems could facilitate short-term response,
the complete system would facilitate the
collection of more extensive response data
from within plant structures, enabling more
comprehensive long-term evaluations of the
earthquakes damage potential.
A complete system would incorporate
additional accelerograph locations, rather
than accounting only for the free field and
the location at which the OBE is defined.
Data collected from other response locations
within the containment and auxiliary build-
ings would provide more definitive informa-
tion regarding the impact of the earthquake.
The system would be fully battery-backed.
Costs of Seismic
Instrumentation Systems
The costs to implement a seismic instru-
mentation system will vary from plant to
plant, depending on many factors: what
options are desired for the instrument,
where the sensors might need to be locat-
ed, and whether the instrumentation will
RARE
refinement.
Responsive, Accountable, Reliable, Effective
Withinthe nuclear industry, theres a newand rare
alternative for safety-critical needs...ChathamSteel.
With 97years of business behindour name, wedont
deliver anything short of responsive, accountable,
reliable and effective service for our customers. Its
what has earned us our reputationfor excellence in
themetals service industry. That is what we believe
to be refinement at its best.
For more information on our extensive inventory
of steel products and processing services, call
1-800-869-2762andaskfor a nuclear sales specialist,
email us at nuclear@chathamsteel.comor visit
us online at www.chathamsteel.com. Providing safety-critical steel products to the nuclear industry.
ASMEQuality SystemCertificate (QSC) applies to ChathamSteels Durham, North Carolina location. ISO9001:2008accreditation applies toall ChathamSteel locations except Ironton, Ohio, which is scheduled for certificationin2012.
Safety-critical steel products provided to the nuclear industry come fromour Durham, North Carolina and Savannah, Georgia locations.
Amember of theRelianceSteel andAluminumfamily of companies.
V i s i t u s a t
Power-Gen
I nternati onal
b o o t h # 1 2 1 2
CHA-115 RARE2012with2SnipesPowerMagNov2012:Layout 1 10/3/12 4:45 PM Page 1
05_PWR_110112_O&M.indd 19 10/13/12 4:55:32 PM
|
November 2012 20
augment or replace an existing instrument
system. EPRI estimates the cost of the
minimum system in the range of $120,000
to $180,000, the basic automatic system
at $150,000 to $270,000, and the com-
plete system at $225,000 to $300,000,
although specific site locations could add
additional cost.
A seismic instrumentation installation or
upgrade at a nuclear power plant is sub-
ject to certain licensing considerations. It
should be noted first that voluntary im-
plementation of the earthquake-response
guidelines provided in the four EPRI refer-
ences listed in the sidebar, including in-
stalling new seismic instrumentation, does
not generally require prior NRC approval.
This is a synopsis of an EPRI white paper
originally published in January 2012 and
available at no charge from www.epri.com.
Search for document 1024889.
Edited by Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
Maximizing Steam Turbine/
Compressor Performance
with Precise Torque Moni-
toring at the Coupling
All turbo machinery is subject to degrada-
tion that, over time, will affect the systems
efficiency and operational performance.
Precise monitoring of turbo machinery per-
formance with continuous torque-monitor-
ing systems can be used to identify gradual
efficiency loss. That, in turn, allows a more
focused maintenance scope to be developed
that can return the system to its optimum
operation and efficiency.
Torque monitoring based on heat bal-
ance, energy balance, and other methods
requires measuring numerous parameters
such as pressure, temperature, flow rate,
and gas composition, which require high-
accuracy instrumentation. However, phase
displacement technology can be used to
accurately measure torque directly at the
coupling to within 1% of full-scale torque,
a combination of all electrical and me-
chanical sources of error.
Measure the Torque
A torque-monitoring system was recently
installed on a cracked-gas compressor
train at Qenos Olefins in Australia to de-
termine the causes of a power limitation.
The Kop-Flex Powerlign system installed
utilizes phase displacement technology
for long-term reliability, eliminating the
need for recalibration.
Two rings with pickup teeth are in-
stalled on a torsionally soft spacer and
are intermeshed at a central location. Two
monopole sensors 180 degrees apart are
mounted on the coupling guard. As the
coupling rotates, the ferromagnetic teeth
create an AC voltage waveform in the sen-
sor coil, which is digitally processed using
known calibration parameters. Because of
the intermeshed pickup teeth, the system
is referred to as a single-channel phase
displacement system, producing two inde-
pendent torque measurements (Figure 2).
The Powerlign system will output torque,
power, speed, and temperature, which can
be easily integrated with any distributed
control system (Figure 3).
At the Olefins plant the operating cycle
of the steam-driven, cracked-gas compres-
sor train is seven to eight years. During
this cycle the plant eventually has produc-
tion limitations because the compressor
train encounters a power limit. Turbine
fouling or compressor fouling or a com-
bination of both caused the power limit.
The true cause had long been the subject
of an engineering debate among the Ma-
chinery group, Process Engineering group,
and Operations department.
The power loss was so important that
the plant considered upgrading the tur-
bines power rating from 7.5 MW to 9 MW.
This upgrade would have required a capi-
tal investment of $2 million, so the plant
elected to defer this investment and in-
stead installed a torque meter during the
last eight-year major overhaul shutdown.
The installation involved replacing
the existing coupling spacer and flex-
ible halves with a drop-in torque meter
and integral flexible elements (Figure 4).
The torque meter assembly was dynami-
cally balanced to API standards so it was
not necessary for the user to return any
coupling components for the retrofit. The
coupling guard was modified so that the
two variable-reluctance sensors could be
installed, completing the mechanical in-
stallation (Figures 5 and 6).
Successful Restart
The plant was restarted after completing a
number of compressor efficiency improve-
2. Tracking two signals. The Powerlign system produces two independent torque sig-
nals. Source: Kop-Flex
V
o
l
t
a
g
e
4
3
2
1
o
-1
-2
-3
-4
Time
Sensor 1 Sensor 2
3. Important stats. Typical output from Powerlign system includes torque, power, speed,
and temperature. Source: Kop-Flex
V
a
l
u
e

(
N
-
m
,

k
W
,

R
P
M
)
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Time
Torque Power Speed Temp
1
6
:
3
7
:
1
1
1
6
:
4
0
:
4
2
1
6
:
4
4
:
1
2
1
6
:
4
7
:
4
4
1
6
:
5
1
:
1
2
1
6
:
5
4
:
4
3
1
6
:
5
8
:
1
3
1
7
:
0
1
:
4
4
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
T
e
m
p
e
r
a
t
u
r
e

(
C
)
|
November 2012 22
ments during the overhaul outage. The data
collected from the torque meter clearly
showed the 7.5-MW steam turbine did not
require an uprate and that the major power
losses were coming from the compressor.
The torque meter also allowed online tun-
ing of the seal gas system of the compres-
sor to establish the lowest power draw. The
turbine load was reduced an additional 200
kW with the manual adjustments made on
the seal gas system alone.
The torque meter is now being used to
monitor turbine steam fouling issues and
processes related to compressor fouling so
that the corrective online washing can be ac-
tivated as soon as performance is affected.
The historical data collected from the
torque meter will also provide a baseline
of mechanical loading through the drive
drain of the cracked-gas compressor over
time. This data will be used to determine
if increases in the maximum continuous
operating speed rating of the compressor
and the turbine can be accomplished at
minimal cost. If so, this will increase the
operating envelope of the compressor.
The value of the torque meter justi-
fied installation of a second system in the
plants second steam cracking plant tur-
bine/compressor train in October 2012.
Contributed by Daniel Phillips (daniel.
phillips@emerson.com), manager, field
service engineering, Kop-Flex, Emerson In-
dustrial Automation; Trevor Mayne (trevor.
mayne@qenos.com), machinery engineer,
and Mark Ellul (mark.ellul@qenos.com),
an I & E specialist, for Qenos Olefins Pty
Ltd, Australia.
Measuring On-Time
Completion to Improve
Your EHS Audit Program
Many companies have difficulty ensuring
that issues identified during their envi-
ronmental, health, and safety (EHS) au-
dits get resolved in a timely fashion. This
can be particularly difficult in the utility
industry, where a number of different ac-
tivities may be conducted at a facility,
each managed by a different part of the
organization (such as generation, trans-
mission, and temporary storage of trans-
formers brought in for repair). A number
of factors promote effective and responsi-
ble completion of EHS audit action plans,
with the most important being the proper
alignment of responsibility and authority
for developing and implementing the au-
dit action plan.
Measuring On-Time
Completion Performance
Generally, organizations understand the
need to assign specific corrective and
preventive actions to specific persons.
Ensuring that the periodic review of im-
plemented lockout/tagout procedures is
conducted might be assigned to the facil-
itys maintenance manager. The environ-
mental manager is the probable choice for
realigning written procedures for equip-
ment calibration found in the continuous
emissions monitoring plan with current
practices. The person most closely aligned
with responsibility for implementing the
requirement usually ends up with the as-
signment and the deadline.
But how do you ensure that the actions
do get completed this time? After all, the
item may have been on that persons list
all along, and somehow the responsible
person missed it. The answer is that in
addition to assigning responsibility for
an action to the right person, that person
and his or her supervisor need to be held
accountable for completing the action.
While managing an EHS audit program
at a major waste and recycling services
company that conducts more than 100
audits a year, the corporate managers de-
vised a simple way to monitor progress
on audit action plans. This successful EHS
audit program is outlined in Case Study:
Browning-Ferris Industries Computer-
ized System for Managing Audit and En-
vironmental Performance in Auditing for
Environmental Quality Leadership: Beyond
Compliance to Environmental Excellence,
John T. Willig, Editor, 1995.
Rather than distributing lengthy reports
to management describing actions planned
and actions completed, EHS auditors dis-
tilled their progress into one-page reports
detailing completion performance, showing:
Total number of findings and actions.
Number and percentages of actions
completed.
Number and percentages of actions
completed on or before their respective
target dates.
Short descriptions of actions that were
overdue.
Quickly, and with little need for in-
depth understanding of EHS requirements,
senior management could review these re-
ports and identify which action plans were
being managed well, and which facilities
needed attention and assistance. Regard-
less of how many findings were identified
or how many discrete actions needed to
be tracked to resolve the findings, every
manager could achieve a 100% on-time
completion performanceif he or she
managed the action plan effectively.
This approach adopts the principle
learned from quality management pro-
grams that things that get measured are
things that improve performance. For
example, the Browning-Ferris Industries
(BFI) staff achieved a near doubling of
on-time completion in the first year of
measurement, improving from below 40%
of the items being completed on time to a
nearly 80% completion rate.
Accountability of Senior
Managers
Because supervisors and senior managers
directly influence facility and local manag-
ers by assigning tasks, setting objectives,
and approving budgets and compensation,
senior managers need to be held account-
6. Back in business. This is the com-
pleted mechanical installation of the Power-
lign system. The spacer is covered with the
shaft shield. Courtesy: Kop-Flex
4. Simple retrofit. The Powerlign sys-
tem provides accuracy to within 1% of full-
scale torque, utilizing single-channel phase
displacement. Courtesy: Kop-Flex
5. Shaft replacement. The original
shaft spacer was replaced with a Smart Spac-
er. Courtesy: Kop-Flex
DetailedDesignEPCCM
StudiesOwner&Bank
Engineering
UtilitiesIPPsIndustry
UniversitiesOEMs
Banks/Investors
BiomassSolar(Thermal&PV)Simple&CombinedCycle
WindFluidizedBed/PC/StokerBoilersBiofuelsMSW
GasiicationLandillGasPyrolysisPlantImprovements
AirPollutionControlCHP/CogenerationEnergySavings
Engine-GeneratorsFacilities/Buildings&Systems
FiveBiomassPowerplantsNowinDetailedDesign
OwnersEngineerNowfora950MWCombined
CycleRepoweringProject
DetailedDesignNowfora1.2MGPDIndustrial
WastewaterDesalinationPlant
CompletedDesignandStartupofa300MW
CombinedCycleRepoweringProject
CompletedDesignandStartupofaConcentrating
SolarThermalPowerTowerProject
OwnersEngineerNowfora4xLM6000Simple
CyclePowerPlant
VariousPowerPlantServiceProjects
Chairman/CEO President/COO VPEngineering Mgr.Civil/Structural Mgr.Electrical
Mgr.
Mechanical
Sr.ProjectMgr.
Sr.
ProjectMgr. Sr.ProjectMgr. Sr.ProjectMgr. ChiefMech.Eng.
Mgr.Bus.Develop.
For career opportunities e-mail a resume in conidence to: recruitment@bibb-eac.com
Bus.Dev.Billings
PowerMag080712.indd1 8/13/201211:59:46AM
Check out the new POWER iPad app!
Go to e App Store on
your iPad and search
POWER magazine
Get the latest power industry news,
trends, and business & regulatory info
right at your ngertips.
Enjoy our latest complete issues
everything in the print edition
and more!
For more information on
POWER magazine, visit
www.powermag.com
05_PWR_110112_O&M.indd 23 10/13/12 4:57:29 PM
|
November 2012 24
able for completion of EHS audit action
plans as well. This was accomplished by
rolling up the on-time completion perfor-
mance for all the audit action plans for
facilities and activities for which a par-
ticular senior manager has responsibility.
Consider a senior manager who has re-
sponsibility for all the service centers in a
particular geographic area. That manager
would receive a copy of the individual re-
ports showing performance levels for all the
action plans for service centers for which the
manager was responsible. That senior man-
ager would also receive a rating compiled
from the on-time performance for all the ac-
tion items for all of those service centers.
The more activities and properties under a
senior managers direction, the greater the
number of audit action plan items compiled
into that senior managers rating.
In the example shown in Figure 7, the
compiled on-time completion performance
for the two action plans for activities un-
der the control of Senior Manager A is
100%, because all actions for both sites
were completed on time. Senior Manager
B, however, has an on-time completion
performance of only 60%, because 5 of 10
items were completed on time at one site
and 10 of 15 actions were completed on
time at the other site (Figure 8). Manag-
ers in the A grouping receive congratula-
tions, while managers in the B grouping
need assistance and/or attention.
Linking On-Time Completion
Performance to Compensation
Encouraged with the improvement in on-
time completion performance that result-
ed from measurement and reporting, the
company linked measurement to bonus
compensation to promote further improve-
ments. Other operational measures deter-
mined the potential bonus for a manager
and the percentage of actions completed
on time was then multiplied by the poten-
tial bonus. Because on-time completion
performance could range from 0% to 100%,
managers worked hard to complete all their
actions on time so they could receive their
full bonus. Senior managers wanted to
receive 100% of their potential bonus as
well, so they made sure their facility man-
agers completed their action plans on time.
Predictably, as shown in Figure 9, on-time
completion performance of EHS audit ac-
tion plans approached 100% after being
linked to senior managers compensation.
A concern heard too often during EHS
audits of utilities is that the particular
manager initially assigned to implement
an action item doesnt have responsibil-
ity for certain equipment or activities. The
manager might say, The transformer may
be located on this property, but the trans-
mission operations group takes care of it,
not me, or The laboratory is managed by
the shared services group. They essential-
ly lease office space from the generating
plant.
If a responsible manager can be identi-
fied, then responsibility for the action item
can be assigned, and, consequently, on-time
7. Perfect score. Because supervisors and senior managers directly influence facility and
local managers by assigning tasks, setting objectives, and approving budgets and compensation,
senior managers need to be held responsible for completion of environmental health and safety
(EHS) audit action plans. In this example, the compiled on-time completion performance (OTCP)
rate for the two EHS audit action plans under the control of Senior Manager A is 100%, because
all actions for both sites were completed on time. Source: Specialty Technical Consultants
Senior Manager A
OTCP = 100%
25 of 25 actions completed on time
Manager A-1
OTCP = 100%
Manager A-2
OTCP = 100%
8. Accountability is key. One of the main principles learned from quality management
programs is that things that get measured are things that can help improve performance. In
contrast to Senior Manager A (Figure 7), Senior Manager B has a low 60% on-time completion
performance rate related to EHS audit action plans because at one site under his supervision
only five of 10 items were completed on time and at another site only 10 of 15 actions were
completed on time. The OTCP rate is a signal that managers in the B grouping need assis-
tance to improve their EHS audit programs. Source: Specialty Technical Consultants
Senior Manager B
OTCP = 60%
Manager B-1
OTCP = 50%
Manager B-2
OTCP = 67%
9. The power of incentives. In this example, the OTCP rate of EHS audit action plans
approached 100% after being linked to senior managers compensation. Assessing senior
staffs management abilities by measuring their on-time completion performance will improve
an organizations ability to resolve audit findings in a timely and effective way and help achieve
the fundamental auditing goal of improving the organizations overall EHS performance. Source:
Specialty Technical Consultants
Early years
When linked to
compensation
First-year
measuring
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
PiPing SyStemS for nuclear Power PlantS
Bilinger Piping technologies is globally active as a qualiied contractor in piping construction
for nuclear power plants. the company meets global standards with its qualiied quality manage -
ment system and ambitious staf.

with its two own fabrications in germany including an own clean hall, piping systems are
prefabricated to the highest quality standards. engineering, pre-fabrication, construction and
commissioning of piping systems are efectively and eiciently performed all over the world.
Bilinger Piping technologies is internationally active and present in europe with its subsidiary and
sisters companies but also within the ciS, gcc, rSa and india.
www.piping.bilnger.com
P
h
o
t
o
:

H
a
n
n
u

H
u
o
v
i
l
a
/
T
V
O
PiPing SyStemS for nuclear Power PlantS
Bilinger Piping technologies is globally active as a qualiied contractor in piping construction

for nuclear power plants. the company meets global standards with its qualiied quality manage -
ment system and ambitious staf.

with its two own fabrications in germany including an own clean hall, piping systems are
prefabricated to the highest quality standards. engineering, pre-fabrication, construction and
commissioning of piping systems are efectively and eiciently performed all over the world.
Bilinger Piping technologies is internationally active and present in europe with its subsidiary and
sisters companies but also within the ciS, gcc, rSa and india.
BILFINGER PIPING TECHNOLOGIES GMBH

www.piping.bilnger.com
P
h
o
t
o
:

H
a
n
n
u

H
u
o
v
i
l
a
/
T
V
O
|
November 2012 26
completion performance can be measured to
hold that manager (and his or her supervi-
sor) accountable. If a management responsi-
bility gap is uncovered (such as no one was
assigned responsibility for the action), then
the manager with authority for the property
should be accountable for completing the
action. This makes sense because a third
party or an agency would reasonably assume
that the manager who has authority over
that property would also be responsible for
the action related to that property.
Additional Benefits of
Measuring On-Time
Completion Performance
Audit programs that measure performance
by the number and severity of findings inev-
itably turn contentious. Facilities may even
conceal failures to conform to approved ac-
tion plans from internal auditors and thereby
allow problems to continue unabated.
By measuring performance based on the
ability to complete the action plan, the au-
dit program profiled in the BFI case study
evolved to one of resolution and improve-
ment. Appropriately, pressure remained on
auditors to be correct and to distinguish
findings of nonconformance from opinions
and improvement opportunities, but there
were fewer disagreements between audi-
tors and facility personnel about whether
identified issues were findings to be in-
cluded in the report.
With the organization focused on resolu-
tion and improvement, more managers col-
laborated on solutions. Whereas previously it
seemed that every site was on its own, once
management compensation was impacted by
the on-time completion performance mea-
sure, senior managers were much more likely
to lend support staff, form teams, and coor-
dinate budgets so as to design and imple-
ment solutions that could be applied across
the organization, reducing overall costs.
Regardless of whether EHS audit action
plan completion performance can be linked
to compensation in your organization, as-
sessing your senior staffs management abil-
ities by measuring their on-time completion
performance will improve your organiza-
tions ability to resolve audit findings and
help achieve the fundamental auditing goal
of improving your organizations overall per-
formance in a timely and effective way.
Contributed by Curt Johnson (cjohnson@
stcenv.com), a senior program director
with Specialty Technical Consultants (www.
specialtytechnicalconsultants.com), with
more than 30 years experience in compli-
ance and management systems auditing
and improving organizations EHS compli-
ance assurance systems.
Hey, I'mTrey, Product Marketing Manager at Atlas Copco Compressors. It's my great
pleasure to introduce the next generation of the GAoil-injected screwcompressor range.
The GA40-125 horsepower range has been redesigned in line with Atlas Copco's commitment
to continuous innovation. Featuring newand improved components that provide unparalleled
performance, sustainability, efficiency and reliability, the VSDmodels deliver up to 35%energy
savings, while the premiumefficiency fixed speed models offer industry leading Free Air
Delivery (FAD).
Visit our dedicated website to learn howthis newcompressor range can boost your productivity
www.atlascopco.com/drivenbyefficiency or
call 866-688-9611 to learn more about us, our
products, and howwe have earned and will
continue to earn our reputation.
Driven by Efficiency
Setting NewMilestones
in Performance
Copyright 2012 Atlas Copco Compressors LLC. All rights reserved.
Atlas Quarry Ad 4.5 625 x 10:Layout 1 7/26/12 11:54 AM Page 1
The UL-listed Sunny Central CP- US series is the most cost- eective, ecient inverter line of its kind, oering
superior performance and a lower overall cost of PV-generated electricity. With a maximum DC input of 1,000
V and a 10 percent overload capacity, the CP- US series delivers optimum performance while achieving a
lower balance of system cost. Leading CEC-weighted eciencies up to 98.5 percent and integrated grid
management functions ensure that your next project will deliver the highest return possible.
SAVE THE DATE!
JUNE 10-12, 2013
Crowne Plaza
Providence/Warwick, RI
www.energyocean.com
20511
20551_EnergyOcean_show guideAdUP2.indd 1 10/11/12 1:36 PM
05_PWR_110112_O&M.indd 27 10/13/12 4:59:47 PM
|
November 2012 28
EPAs Title V Source Policy
Takes a Hit
L
ocation, location, location. This has long been the guiding
principle for selling real estate. Now, due to a recent appel-
late case, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
has learned this concepts importance in determining under what
conditions multiple facilities can be aggregated as a single source
under the Clean Air Act (CAA) Title V permitting program.
The Summit Cases Background
On August 7, in the case Summit Petroleum Corporation v. EPA
(Case Nos. 09-4348; 10-4572), the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth
Circuit, vacated the EPAs determination that a Michigan natural
gas operations plant and production wells constituted a single
major source and remanded the case to the agency for a reassess-
ment of Summit Petroleum Corp.s Title V source determination.
The case arose from the EPAs final action determining that
a natural gas sweetening plant near Rosebush, Mich., and vari-
ous production wells, commonly owned by Summit and separately
located, constitute a single stationary source under the Title V
permitting program. The EPA had determined that Summits plant
and wells were adjacent to one another, in part, because they
are functionally interrelated.
Summits plant by itself has the potential to emit just under
100 tons of pollutants per year, which is below the threshold
for being considered a major source. On the other hand, if the
plant and the nearby wells are considered to be one source, their
combined pollution totals exceed 100 tons and they would be
classified as a major source under Title V.
Summits plant sweetens the sour gas from approximately
100 sour gas production wells by removing hydrogen sulfide so
that the gas can be used. Summit owns all of the production
wells and the subsurface pipelines that connect each of the wells
to the sweetening plant. The wells themselves are located over
an approximately 43-square-mile area at varying distances from
the plantfrom 500 feet to 8 miles awayand Summit does not
own the property between the individual well sites nor the prop-
erty between the wells and the plant. None of the well sites share
a common boundary with each other, nor do any well sites share
a common boundary with Summits production plant. The closest
flare is located approximately 0.5 mile from the plant, while the
remaining flares are each over 1 mile away.
Debate over Denition of Adjacent
The EPA defines a stationary source as any building, struc-
ture, facility, or installation that emits or may emit a regulat-
ed air pollutant under 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Section
52.21(b)(5). Multiple pollutant-emitting activities can be ag-
gregated and considered a single source under a three-prong
test (also known as the Aggregation Factors) only if they: are
under common control, are located on one or more contiguous
or adjacent properties, and belong to the same major industrial
grouping (such as SIC code).
The EPA explained its reasoning with respect to adjacency in
making its Title V source determination for the multiple Summit
facilities. Although the Summit plant and wells were separated by
large distances, the agency had never established a fixed distance
beyond which facilities would not be considered adjacent. The
EPA also asserted that the degree of interdependence between
the Summit facilities and the fact that they together produced
a single product suggested that the facilities were not truly
independent.
In its decision, the Sixth Circuit ruled that the EPAs source
determination regarding the Summit facilities is contrary to
the plain meaning of the word adjacent. The court ultimately
concluded that the EPAs interpretation of the aggregation rule
undermines the plain meaning of the text, which demands by
definition that would-be aggregated facilities have physical
proximity. The court vacated the EPAs source determination and
remanded the case to the EPA for reassessment in light of the
proper, plain meaning application of the adjacency prong of the
Aggregation Factors.
Moving Forward
Down the road, the EPA may seek a rehearing of the Summit case
before the Sixth Circuit en banc or U.S. Supreme Court review. In
the meantime, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Tennessee, located
in the Sixth Circuit, are bound by the Summit case. Additionally,
the Sixth Circuits arguments will no doubt be cited in other parts
of the country in ongoing judicial and administrative matters
involving Title V source designations.
The Sixth Circuits decision will also probably have important
consequences for existing and future power plants. The threat
of environmental authorities combining widely dispersed yet
functionally related emission points, where ownership is the only
common factor, into a single point source is unlikely to occur,
given this decision.
In her dissent in the Summit case, Circuit Judge Karen Nelson
Moore argued that absent a bright-line rule as to how far is too
far for numerous sources to be considered adjacent source desig-
nations based on adjacency may continue to be subjective.
How far is too far? This recent ruling shows that, indeed,
the EPA went too far in stretching the meaning of adjacent.
The agency needs to pay more attention to sources actual geo-
graphical proximity to one another when determining adjacent
locations for Title V permit purposes. In the future, the EPA
should assume the plain meaning of the word adjacent as
used in the CAA when aggregating sources under its permitting
programs.
Angela Neville, JD, is POWERs senior editor.
215-1 > C = 100, M = 40, Y = 0, K = 10
229-1 > C = 100, M = 5, Y = 5, K = 0
294-1 > C = 50, M = 0, Y = 100, K = 0
BLACK
50% BLACK
TYPEFACES
ASIAN SBC > VERLAG BOLD
USERS GROUP > VERLAG BLACK
(NOTE: APOSTROPHE IS ENLARGED FROM BALANCE OF TYPE SIZE SO IT
APPEARS IN BETTER PROPORTION, ESPECIALLY WHEN REDUCED)
Promoting the Safe, Efcient, and Economic Use of
Subbituminous Coals by Generating Companies.
2
nd
ANNUAL MEETING
Harbour Grand Hong Kong Hotel HONG KONG
November 6-8, 2012
LUNCH SPONSOR USB DRIVE SPONSOR
GRAND SPONSOR PLATINUM SPONSORS GOLD SPONSORS
CO-HOSTS ORGANIZERS
BADGE LANYARD SPONSOR
Founding Members
SILVER SPONSOR
SECURE YOUR SEAT TODAY! Register at www.asiansbcusers.com
with VIP Code POWER12 to receive a 10% discount
Exclusive Discount for POWER Readers
ACCESS EXCLUSIVE INDUSTRY COVERAGE & CASE STUDIES
ON LEADING TOPICS SUCH AS:
US Powder River Basin Costs and Links to the World
Managing the Risks Associated with Mill Fires, Puffs
and Explosions while Firing Subbituminous Coals
Economic Coal Selection Systems
Optimizing Combustion While Firing Subbituminous
Coals to Achieve the Best Possible Performance,
Emissions and Unit Reliability
Stockpile Management and Spontaneous
Combustion Handling of Subbituminous Coal in the
Domes of Hsinta Thermal Power Plant
Coal Plant Facility Improvement in Castle Peak
Power Station
Operation and Maintenance of Pipe Conveyors in
Lamma Power Station
Hear directly from leading utilities such as Westar Energy, Hongkong Electric Company, KOSEP, Ameri-
can Electric Power (AEP), Taiwan Power Company, CLP Power, Quezon Power and more!
06_PWR_110112_L&R.indd 29 10/13/12 5:09:07 PM
|
November 2012 30
North Anna Power Station,
Louisa County, Virginia
Majority owner/operator: Dominion Virginia Power
By Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
E
lectricity from a newly constructed
nuclear reactor has not entered the U.S.
power grid since the Tennessee Valley
Authoritys Watts Bar 1 went into service in
1996. However, the electricity produced from
reactor upgrades has added the equivalent of
perhaps eight to 10 new reactors over the past
three decadeswithout the enormous cost of
new construction. Thats been made possible
by modern analytic tools that permit todays
engineers to reexamine the safety margins
used in the original design of operating reac-
tors to identify potential upgrades.
These upgrades, according to the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), fall
within three categories:
Measurement uncertainty recapture (MUR)
made possible by using better reactor in-
strumentation (up to 2% power increase).
Stretch power upratesusually existing sys-
tem upgrades (up to about 7% increase).
Extended power upratesrequire exten-
sive system upgrades and replacements
(up to 20% increase).
The nuclear industry has added 6,823
MW across its fleet through 146 approved
uprates of all types; 864 MW of uprates are
pending NRC approval; another 1,231 MW
of uprate applications are expected within
the next few years.
Squeezing Out Capacity
Dominion Virginia Powers (Dominions)
North Anna Power Station, located 40 miles
northwest of Richmond, Va., is one of many
plants that have benefited from the NRC-
approved uprates. North Anna consists of
two pressurized water reactors that entered
service in 1978 and 1980. When constructed,
each reactor was rated at 850 MW.
Both North Anna units completed a 4.2%
stretch uprate in 1986. The NRC approved
North Annas recent 1.6% MUR uprate in
2009. That added more accurate means of
measuring feedwater flow to the reactor and,
therefore, a small amount of additional reac-
tor thermal power is possible. The practical
effect was that additional steam production
was possible while staying within the mea-
surement accuracy of the new instruments.
The additional steam produced means that
more power could be producedif there
were sufficient excess capacity in the steam
turbine, generator, switchgear, other plant
equipment, and the grid interconnection.
Unfortunately, North Annas generators
were the limiting component, so steam tur-
bine upgrades were selected in conjunction
with a generator replacement to allow the
plant to maximize the efficient use of the ad-
ditional reactor steam production.
Major Steam Turbine Upgrade
The steam turbine upgrade to North Anna
Unit 1 was the fourth and final turbine up-
grade project completed by Alstom Power

In 2007, Dominion
Resources contracted Alstom to perform
steam turbine retrofits on two generating units at its
North Anna nuclear power station. The Unit 1 retrofit, with its
ongoing instrumentation upgrade, was the second to be completed at the North
Anna plant and the fourth overall for Dominion. Completion of this project marked
a significant milestone in terms of both technical achievement and investment in
providing clean, safe, and reliable baseload electricity for Dominion customers.
Courtesy: Dominion Virginia Power
TOP PLANTS
TOP PLANTS
November 2012
|
for Dominion. Previously, two steam turbines
at Dominions Surry Power Station and the
North Anna Unit 2 turbines were upgraded
by the same Alstom project team.
The scope of the steam turbine upgrades
for Unit 1 might be described simply as re-
placing the double-flow, high-pressure (HP)
rotor and diaphragms and two low-pressure
(LP) double-flow turbines. However, the
retrofit was much more complex and chal-
lenging than an ordinary like-for-like com-
ponent replacement.
The two-section HP turbine was changed
to a more efficient single-flow turbine con-
figuration. The LP turbine was also opti-
mized for performance with much larger
last-stage blades. These modifications re-
quired installation of new turbine inner
casings and significant external extraction
piping modifications. A thrust bearing locat-
ed on the LP end handles the shaft thermal
growth movement.
The LP turbine presented what was per-
haps the greater challenge when you consid-
er that the last-stage blade length increased
from 48 to 57 inches, an 18-inch diameter
increase, while maintaining the same shaft
centerline. This much larger LP turbine vol-
ume required replacement of the entire LP
inner casings. Installation of the two new
LP turbines also required structural modifi-
cation of the units LP condensers, a process
achieved with state-of-the-art computer-
guided propane torches that removed sec-
tions of structural beams to make room for
the larger LP unit casings.
Before the North Anna plant could be
upgraded with these latest advancements
in turbine technology, the project team first
had to address several significant engineer-
ing challenges.
First, a completely new high-energy pip-
ing configuration had to be designed, fab-
ricated, and installed to accommodate the
transition from a double-flow HP turbine
to a modern single-flow unit. This major
adaptation of the plants design required
the removal and replacement of 2,000 lin-
ear feet of piping and the replacement of
350 welds. This effort also included the
swap-out of turbine exhaust pipe that is 4
feet in diameter.
Learn by Doingand Planning
Nuclear steam turbine retrofits are, by na-
ture, big projects. The equipment is mas-
sive, as is the level of technical expertise
and collaboration required of both the plant
and supplier teams. The North Anna project
benefitted from hundreds of lessons learned
during retrofits carried out by Dominion and
Alstom on the plants Unit 2, and also on
Units 1 and 2 of Dominions Surry Power
Station. North Anna Unit 2s upgrades were
completed during the spring 2010 refueling
outage. The Unit 1 upgrades were complet-
ed a couple of months prior to the extended
forced outage at North Anna caused by the
August 23, 2011, earthquake (see Domin-
ions North Anna Station Sets Standard for
Earthquake Response, p. 34).
Planning the choreography of labor and
equipment began over two years before the
outage began. Engineers used laser-scanning
techniques to prepare 3-D models of all of
the affected piping with millimeter accuracy.
The model was then used to guide the plan-
ning of every step of the construction work.
The result was a project construction plan
that consisted of 1,100-plus work activities
(any activities that took more than an hour)
that then had to be conformed to the planning
schedule of the plants refueling outage.
One of the key challenges of coordination
with the refueling work was scheduling the
use of the overhead crane. The steam tur-
bine tear-out, reconfiguration, and reassem-
bly consisted of three dozen heavy lifts of
components such as the 140-ton LP rotors
and the 35-ton new inner casings (Figure 1).
The confined nature of the work around the
steam turbine required close coordination of
craft labor. It was also constrained to a par-
ticular sequence: Casings must be installed
before rewelding the exterior piping, which
is followed by the rotor reinstall and then
the centerline work.
Every one of the 1,100-plus work items
was described in detail in an associated
work package that described the work to be
performed. When completed, a craft and Al-
stom shift supervisor signed off every work
package as a cross-check that the work was
properly completed. Planning meetings
were conducted at the end/beginning of ev-
ery shift, with foremen to shift managers
present to ensure there was a hands on
turnover, particularly with any remaining
hot work under way.
About 140 craft labor were assigned to
the project during each 12-hour shift, plus
those involved with quality, safety, schedul-
ing, and management. NRC work rules that
limit workers to a maximum of 72 hours per
week were rigidly followed and exceptions
required approval by the site vice president.
Therefore, a labor pool of 160 to 170 work-
ers per shift was maintained to ensure day-
off rotations.
Before work packages for the refueling
outage were completed, the steam turbine
upgrades were completed, signed off, and
the turbine was sitting on its jacking gear
ready for steam. This last of four successful
uprate projects is part of the work complet-
ed by Dominion to extend the life of North
Annas Unit 1 for up to another 25 years of
operation while providing a significant in-
crease in capacity.
Economic Capacity Added
When the [spring 2012 refueling] outage
is finished, the company will have added
about 234 megawatts to the Virginia elec-
trical grid as a result of the upgrades at
North Anna and Surry, Dominion said in a
message to employees. In fact, the MUR
uprate and steam turbine upgrades have in-
creased the gross output of Unit 1 to 980.5
MWe and Unit 2s generating capacity to
972.9 MWe, according to NRC data. Do-
minions peak summer capacity rating for
each North Anna unit after the upgrades is
now 943 MWe net.
The project also constituted a significant
milestone for Alstom, as the two LP units
for the North Anna 1 retrofit were among
the first delivered by the companys new
manufacturing facility in Chattanooga,
Tenn. Alstom invested $300 million to build
the facility to serve the domestic production
needs of customers like Dominion.
editor-in-chief.
1. Heavy lifting. The steam turbine
upgrades on Dominions North Anna Unit
1, completed prior to the earthquake that
temporarily shut down the plant, replaced
the high-pressure and low-pressure sec-
tions with more efficient components.
Shown in the photo are workers placing
a low-pressure turbine shroud segment.
Courtesy: Alstom Power
|
November 2012 32
Oconee Nuclear Station, Seneca,
South Carolina
Owner/operator: Duke Energy
By Thomas W. Overton, JD
T
he Oconee Nuclear Station near Sen-
eca, S.C., first came online with Unit
1 in 1973; Units 2 and 3 began opera-
tion in 1974. With a total capacity over 2,500
MW, the stationnow one of the oldest in the
countryhas been a key element of the area
grid for almost four decades, having generated
more than 500 million MWh over its lifetime.
Oconees three units have a common Bab-
cock & Wilcox pressurized water reactor
design, each with a capacity of 885 MW. In
2000, the station received a license extension
from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion (NRC) that permitted operation through
2034. That, Duke recognized, meant signifi-
cant replacements and upgrades would be
required to continue operating Oconee in a
reliable, cost-efficient manner well into the
21st century.
Like every other nuclear plant built in the
U.S., the stations original protection systems
were analog. However, over Oconees life-
time, the original equipment manufacturers
for the control and protection systems began
to discontinue support for their equipment.
One way or another, Duke needed to replace
it. But rather than simply upgrade with newer
analog systems, Duke made the decision to
give Oconee the first digital control system
of any U.S. nuclear plant.
Digital instrumentation and control (I&C)
systems in fossil and renewable plants are
nothing new and are now largely standard
because of the clear benefits they offer over
analog. However, regulatory concerns over
potential safety issues have slowed deploy-
ment of digital controls in nuclear plants,
particularly in safety-related systems.
In 2006, as part of the overall refurbish-
ment program, Oconees staff began their
effort to upgrade many of the plants analog
I&C systems. The projects were selected
based on their impact on plant operation.
Duke chose AREVA as the vendor for the
new I&C systems based on the success of its
Teleperm XS technology. The AREVA Telep-
erm system was designed for use in the new
AREVA EPR plants that are currently under
NRC design review, but it can also be used
for upgrades at existing plants.
One of the projects involved the digital up-
grade of the reactor protection system (RPS)
and engineering safeguards (ES) system. The
digital upgrades to nonsafety systems such as
the integrated control system could be per-
formed without modifying the plants exist-
ing operating license, but the safety-related
RPS/ES digital upgrade project required
NRC review and approval. After several years
Courtesy: Duke Energy
With license extensions for its three units in
hand, Duke Energys Oconee Nuclear Station
began a digital controls upgrade program in
2006, and in January 2010, AREVA became
the first supplier to receive Nuclear Regula-
tory Commission approval for a safety-related
digital instrumentation and controls system.
That set the stage for the first digital control
system in a U.S. nuclear plant.
TOP PLANTS
TOP PLANTS
November 2012
|
of planning and design, the NRC finally gave
Duke the go-ahead in January 2010, allowing
the upgrade project to move forward. With
that decision, AREVA also became the first
supplier to receive NRC approval for a safe-
ty-related digital I&C system. The upgrades
to Unit 1 were scheduled for a refueling out-
age in April-May 2011.
Core Challenges
Upgrading the RPS and ES systems was not
a job to undertake lightly. The RPS is the
key system controlling reactor operation and
safety, as it monitors inputs related to reac-
tor core operation (core power and coolant
pressure, flow, and temperature, among other
parameters), and is the system that will shut
down the reactor (by automatically tripping
the control rods) any time safe values or com-
binations of values are exceeded.
Likewise, the ES system monitors inputs
such as coolant pressure and containment pres-
surethat would indicate the occurrence of
certain design basis events. The ES system also
actuates safety features such as cooling water
injection, containment isolation, and contain-
ment cooling that would be necessary to prevent
damage to the plant or release of radioactivity
in the event of an accident (Figure 1).
In addition to addressing the obsolescence
of the existing analog equipment, the digital
upgrades incorporated some significant en-
hancements into the design. These included an
additional set of ES channels, which created a
fully redundant ES system. Having two com-
plete ES systems offers substantial operational
and maintenance benefits that allow staff to
perform testing and maintenance without tak-
ing reactor safety features offline.
The systems are also smart in the sense
that theyre capable of recognizing when a
sensor has failed or is malfunctioning. This
means that a dodgy sensor wont cause the
reactor to trip when conditions are actually
okay. That offers significant long-term bo-
nuses for reliability and capacity factor and,
thus, revenue.
Another major benefit of the digital up-
grade project was the addition of online mon-
itoring and diagnostic capabilities, which
allow for the elimination of periodic operator
checks of system performance. This elimi-
nated the need for functional testing of the
ES system, which had to be performed online
at each unit. Elimination of online functional
testing greatly reduced the potential for in-
advertent actuation of the engineered safety
features, something that had occurred at
Oconee in the past.
In addition, reducing the need for manual
online testing meant reduced expenses and
man-hours that had previously been neces-
sary with the analog controls. Oconee was
thus able to eliminate quarterly functional
testing and daily channel checks.
Regulatory Innovations
The changes brought about by the digital
upgrades meant that the NRC needed to de-
velop new regulatory guidance for safety-re-
lated digital applications, as the new features
and capabilities of the digital signals were
not fully addressed by existing regulations.
NRC officials worked extensively with Duke
and AREVA staff to update their regulatory
oversight during the project review. The proj-
ect team ultimately had to respond to more
than 100 Requests for Additional Informa-
tion from the NRC, and a total of more than
38,000 pages of documents were provided to
the NRC for review.
As with any digital system, cybersecurity
was a key issue. During the design and ap-
proval process, Duke and AREVA conducted
thorough reviews of the systems ability to
mitigate communications faults between var-
ious subsystems and its ability to maintain
reliability of the safety-related functions. The
new system includes physical and software
barriers as well as defense-in-depth and di-
versity methods to provide cybersecurity for
critical assets.
The upgrades were completed and brought
online in June, and Unit 1 has since been op-
erating with no major issues. The project was
completed without a single lost-time accident
or near miss. The success of the upgrade led
the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) to give
Oconee its 2012 Best of the Best Top Indus-
try Practice award in May.
Leading the Way
Duke has set out to share the lessons learned
by Oconee during the licensing process with
the rest of the industry in seminars, con-
ferences, and interim staff guide working
groups. These have been used to provide en-
hancements to the NRC licensing process for
digital upgrades.
As the first plant in the nation to add this
new equipment, Oconee is demonstrating its
commitment to continuous improvement as
new systems and technologies become avail-
able, said Oconee VP Preston Gillespie. Its
enhancements like these that have us well posi-
tioned to operate a safe, reliable, efficient plant
through the duration of our license extension.
Details matter when youre a trailblazer in
the nuclear sector. When I look back over
the decisions of leaders that I worked for
10 years ago, who had the vision of what it
would take to install a safety-related digital
system, I stand very much in respect of what
those leaders did, Gillespie said. They knew
it would be hard; they knew the cost would
be great; they knew they had to find the right
partner; they knew they had to get it through
the licensing process. All of this, they knew,
would result in reliable and safe operation of
the plant. Because of that vision, the trail is
now blazed for the rest of the industry to take
advantage of the fruits of their labor.
Upgrades to the I&C systems on Unit
3 were carried out earlier this year and are
planned for Unit 2 during a refueling outage
in 2013.
Innovation at Oconee has not been limited
to the I&C upgrade. The NEI also honored
the plant for its development, with Babcock
& Wilcox, of a robotic steam generator tube
inspection system. The single-pass, fully au-
tomated system incorporates a robot and ana-
lytical tools that enhance safety and reduce
the time and labor needed to perform steam
generator inspections. The data is so accurate
that it eliminated the need for a second, con-
firmatory analysis of the inspection results.
These two awards recognize the achieve-
ments of the project teams at Oconee and our
corporate headquarters. Engineers, techni-
cians and others worked diligently to install
and ensure these systems functioned as de-
signed, said Gillespie.
A video about the digital upgrades can be
viewed on the Duke Energy website at http://
bit.ly/PHG4vh.
Thomas W. Overton, JD is POWERs gas
technology editor.
1. Crossing to the digital side.
The digital engineering safeguards system at
Oconee (here, opened to show the incoming
power distribution wiring) manages various
safety features around the plant. Courtesy:
Duke Energy
|
November 2012 34
NUCLEAR POWER
Dominions North Anna Station
Sets New Standard for
Earthquake Response
On August 23, 2011, at 1:51 p.m., a magnitude 5.8 earthquake knocked both
units at Dominions North Anna Power Station off-linethe first time such
an event has occurred in the U.S. After 80 days of extensive evaluation
and inspection by plant staff and representatives from the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, both units were back online. What occurred dur-
ing those days is a remarkable story.
By Dr. Robert Peltier, PE
D
ominion is one of the nations largest
producers and transporters of energy
and routinely prepares for threats to
service. But when the companys North Anna
Power Station experienced a magnitude 5.8
earthquakethe largest ever in Central Vir-
giniait became the first operating nuclear
station in the U.S. to shut down because of a
temblor and the first to experience an event
that exceeded its design basis.
This event was also a first for the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),
which would oversee remediation work af-
ter the event. Despite immense challenges,
Dominions disciplined culture of safety,
preparedness, operational excellence, and
transparency successfully enabled it to work
through the crisis on every level: engineering,
public, and regulatory. As a result, the units
returned to service in under three months
(Figure 1).
Dominions culture is to be prepared
for emergencies, said David A. Christian,
chief executive officer of Dominion Genera-
tion, the Dominion unit that operates North
Anna. We understood right away this would
be a significant test. Our corporate values
safety, excellence, doing the right thing and
teamworkguided us in our response. He
added, We wanted the operations, engineer-
ing, regulatory and public response to be the
best we could possibly make it. We knew we
had the right team and the know-howand
we knew that both Dominions reputation and
the industrys reputation were on the line.
Record-Breaking Earthquake
North Anna Power Stations 1,865-MW twin
pressurized water reactors were at full power
when the quake struck on August 23, 2011, at
1:51 p.m. The quakes epicenter was 11 miles
southwest of the station in Mineral, Va. Both
of the stations units shut down immediately,
automatically, and safely. As a result of the
earthquake, the plant lost off-site power from
the switchyard, but back-up power from die-
sel generators picked up the load within 8
seconds, as designed. The station returned to
off-site power later that evening.
The station declared an Alert, the next to
lowest of the NRCs four emergency classi-
fications. Immediately, the company focused
on ensuring that station workers and the pub-
lic were safe. Then it began a thorough plant
inspection process and proactively and trans-
parently communicated with internal and ex-
ternal stakeholders that the reactors were in a
safe and stable condition.
On the morning of August 24, North Anna
downgraded from an Alert to a Notice of Un-
usual Event, the lowest of the four emergency
classification levels, while the reactor cool-
down and inspections of plant equipment and
systems continued. The plant exited the Un-
usual Event that afternoon, after completing
all walkdown inspections of the equipment
that is most susceptible to seismic activity.
Those inspections found that the equipment
was in satisfactory condition.
Due to additional seismic activity, North
Anna declared a second Unusual Event on
August 25 following a reported magnitude
4.5 aftershock. The plant exited that Unusual
Event later in the week. North Anna again
declared an Unusual Event on the morning
of September 1 for an aftershock, exiting the
event shortly after noon that day. Over sev-
eral weeks after the initial earthquake, the
plant experienced a number of aftershocks,
none resulting in any impact to plant struc-
tures, systems, or components.
This quake was felt from the South to the
Midwest to New York City to Canada. It was
felt at 13 locations with nuclear power plants,
from North Carolina to Michigan (including
Dominions other nuclear power station in
Surry, Va., less than 100 miles from the North
Anna location). Apart from North Anna, each
of the affected stations notified the NRC of
the unusual event and that they had not sus-
tained any plant damage, interruption of ser-
vice, or public safety issues.
Numerous buildings in the quake area sus-
1. A day to remember. On August 23, 2011, at 1:51 p.m., a magnitude 5.8 earthquake
knocked both units at Dominions North Anna Power Station off-line. Although the plant did not
experience any permanent damage, the process to gain approval for restart of the two units
took 80 days. Courtesy: Dominion Generation

Capable. Flexible. Dependable.
At the core of every relationship and behind
each task we perform, youll nd a culture
based on safety, quality and reliability. This is
how we serve our customers and why they
come back to us year after year. Today, we are
bringing these high standards and values to
new markets and more customers. Welcome
to the new Matrix SME.
Move to a higher standard
SM
matrixsme.com
Electrical Infrastructure
Power Generation
Oil, Gas & Chemical
Storage Solutions
Business Sectors:
Capable. Flexible. Dependable.
At the core of every relationship and behind
each task we perform, youll nd a culture
based on safety, quality and reliability. This is
how we serve our customers and why they
come back to us year after year. Today, we are
bringing these high standards and values to
new markets and more customers. Welcome
to the new Matrix SME.
Move to a higher standard
SM
matrixsme.com
|
November 2012 36
NUCLEAR POWER
tained damage. Cracks even appeared in the
Washington Monument in the nations capi-
tal, and the rumbling of the initial shock and
aftershocks were felt throughout the Mid-
Atlantic and Northeast U.S.
It is important to recall that the Central
Virginia temblor occurred six months after
the devastating earthquake and tsunami that
crippled Japans Fukushima Daiichi nuclear
station. The Japanese accident caused gov-
ernments around the world to reevaluate their
nuclear energy policies, and public interest in
nuclear energy greatly intensified. This was
new and unexplored territory for Dominion
and the NRC. There was never any doubt that
the companys first priority was to ensure pub-
lic safety. But Dominion also knew that in this
time of extreme sensitivity to nuclear energy,
the companys response could very well set the
tone for the future of nuclear energy policy.
Dominion soon realized the company
would need to develop and obtain approval
from the NRC for the appropriate process to
restart the two units. (See the sidebar for a
summary of the steps taken to restart the two
units.) Dominion also knew that the NRC
had little experience in dealing with a nuclear
plant shutting down as a result of a beyond-
design-basis earthquake. In fact, no nuclear
unit in U.S. history had ever experienced a
shutdown caused by a temblor.
Recovery and Restoration
Within 24 hours, the companys North Anna
Power Station restored off-site power and
exited the emergency plan after completing
all walkdown inspections of equipment most
susceptible to seismic damage. This was in
keeping with the companys formal Corporate
Emergency Response Plan, which includes an
extensive public communications program.
No damage was reported to systems required
to maintain the station in a safe condition.
While the ground force accelerations
from the earthquake did exceed North An-
nas licensed design basis for about 3 sec-
onds, the stationbuilt with multiple layers
of safetysustained no functional damage
to safety systems, structures, or compo-
nents. In fact, the extensive engineering
analysis completed by the company demon-
strated that it could have safely withstood a
quake well above that experienced.
Using an NRC-endorsed document prepared
by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI),
the company assessed the overall impact on the
station. On a scale from zero (where no func-
tional damage is observed) to three (where very
significant damage has occurred), the com-
panys detailed inspections determined that the
earthquake ranked as zero impact for North
Anna. However, to be extra thorough and safe,
the company proceeded to evaluate the station
as if the quake had an impact of one on the scale.
This required far more extensive engineering in-
spections, testing, and analysis. That decision
went a long way to establish up front that the
company would be conservative and systemat-
ic. Dominion has since been lauded by nuclear
safety experts as a prime example of an excel-
lent nuclear safety culture.
Additionally, the company immediately
brought in some of the top external seismic
experts to walk down the station and put eyes
on important adjacent structures to make sure
the station was safe and that the company
was not overlooking anything.
In the days and weeks that followed, a spe-
cial NRC inspection team, with full coopera-
tion from Dominion, thoroughly evaluated
the companys response to the earthquake,
including initial actions by control room op-
erators to place the unit in a safe and stable
condition. They concluded that:
Control room operators and station em-
ployees responded to the quake as trained.
Safety systems engaged as designed and
expected.
No significant damage occurred to safety-
related systems at the power station.
Additional inspections and analysis were per-
formed by the NRC, and the company thorough-
ly documented its own inspections and analysis
and responded to every question posed to it by
NRC inspectors, engineers, and seismic experts.
Before the NRC allowed the units to restart, the
company had provided the NRC with more than
1,000 pages of documentation (Figure 2).
Examples of minor damage included non-
structural concrete cracking, insulation that
was shaken off some pipes, and broken seals on
electrical insulators attached to the main station
transformers. These were repaired or replaced
prior to restarting the units (Figures 3 and 4).
2. Rigorous inspections. Dominion visually inspected 100 feet of safety-related buried
pipe with wall thickness verified by ultrasonic measurements. Courtesy: Dominion Generation
3. Minor repairs required. The minor damage experienced by the two stations cracked
mortar and concrete. The necessary repairs were completed prior to restart. Courtesy: Domin-
ion Generation
4. Short trip. The dry casks holding spent nuclear fuel moved from 1 to 4 inches during
the earthquake. Courtesy: Dominion Generation
|
November 2012 38
NUCLEAR POWER
As the reactors were returned to service,
various measurements were taken each step
of the way toward full-power operations to
ensure that the equipment was operating as
designed. Dominion developed a special
Unit Restart Readiness Procedureusing
information from other nuclear units that
had been shut down by hurricanes, floods,
and other external eventsto control restart
readiness and provide for system monitoring
and plant performance oversight. These les-
sons were blended with Dominions already
robust restart review and monitoring process.
System Engineering and Operations physi-
cally observed and monitored the systems
as they were placed in service, as well as the
containment building, to make sure all com-
ponents were working properly and as ex-
pected. At various phases, power escalation
was stopped so additional testing could be
performed to validate that equipment used to
measure reactor power was all working pre-
cisely. All of this was documented.
Dominion placed its greatest emphasis on
delivering the highest margin of safety and re-
liability as the North Anna units were returned
to service. This process required significantly
increased staffing, with representation from
Engineering, Operations, Outage and Plan-
ning, Maintenance, and Management onsite
24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Dominion performed additional seismic
analysis and update of licensing basis, added
a free-field seismic instrument in a field,
where its readings would be unaffected by
any buildings, and added an uninterruptible
power supply to one of the existing seismic
detection systems to prevent power loss.
When the quake struck, North Annas
people responded as they were trained and the
safety equipment operated as it was designed
and built, said David A. Heacock, presi-
dent and chief nuclear officer of Dominion
Virginia Power, a unit of Dominion. They
responded with every bit the same talent and
dedication to inspect it afterwards, effect
repairs and make it ready for safely resum-
ing operation in what was really a very short
amount of time under the circumstances.
While the nuclear industrys standard in
evaluations of potential plant effects from an
earthquake normally focuses on design basis
ground motion response spectraplotting
measured accelerations (Figure 5) against
shaking frequencythe latest and more so-
phisticated tool to gauge expected damage
from an actual earthquake is called cumu-
lative absolute velocity (CAV). CAV is the
integrated absolute value of the acceleration
time history for the earthquake. According
to EPRI, CAV provides a better measure of
the potential for damage to plant systems and
structures for a specific earthquake than does
a comparison of the experienced accelera-
tions to the design response spectra.
CAV values for the August 23 earthquake
indicated it was essentially at the level at which
no significant damage had ever been observed
for engineered structures. This is conserva-
tively based on an analysis of damage to struc-
tures from hundreds of earthquakes around the
world. It indicated that virtually no damage to
safety-related systems and structures should be
expected and that only very minimal damage
should occur to other components. This was
consistent with the findings of Dominions hun-
dreds of inspections: no significant damage to
seismically designed structures and systems or
to conventionally designed structures.
The company and the NRC conducted
thousands of inspections and exhaustive
safety analyses, including of structural com-
ponents, low-margin components, electrical
systems, the Lake Anna Reservoir, the Waste
Heat Treatment Facility, the North Anna
Dam, the Independent Spent Fuel Storage In-
stallation concrete pads and steel casks, and
fuel and reactor vessel internal inspections.
They specifically focused on potential hid-
den damage. Dominion completed:
134 system inspections.
141 structure inspections.
More than 445 surveillance tests when the
units were in a cold shutdown condition.
More than 29 tests after the units were heated
up to operating pressures and temperatures.
The overall effort to inspect and analyze
the thousands of structures, systems, and
components prior to returning the units to
service required more than 110,000 person-
hours and an expenditure of more than $21
million to fully ensure safety, repairs, and a
station that was demonstrated to be ready for
restart and continued safe operation.
Establishing a Protocol
with the NRC
Before the August 23 quake, the NRC had
spent two decades reviewing and evaluating
U.S. Geological Survey earthquake hazard
estimates for the central and eastern U.S. All
operating nuclear units in the U.S. were built
to withstand predicted maximum earthquake
motion based on methods and techniques de-
veloped using data from the seismically active
California region. This was because compara-
tively little was known at the time about the
seismology of the eastern half of the U.S. The
NRC had earlier reviewed seismic estimates
for the central and eastern U.S. in a fact sheet
issued by the agency in May 2011.
Over the past several years, a project
jointly funded by the NRC, the Department
of Energy, and EPRI developed new meth-
odologies and data to determine the seismic
hazard for this region. The NRC acknowl-
edged in a post-Fukushima Daiichi accident
fact sheet that seismic hazard estimates at
some current Central and Eastern U.S. op-
erating sites may be potentially higher than
what was expected during design and previ-
ous evaluations, although there is adequate
protection at all plants.
When the quake occurred, between the
time that the earthquake hit Japan and the
growing realization that the seismic hazard
for some U.S. nuclear plants was greater than
what they had been originally designed for,
the stage was set for a potentially long and
difficult review of North Annas readiness for
restart. Dominion was able to demonstrate
that the proposed startup plan would lead to
safe and successful restoration of the station.
In fact, the company went beyond established
protocol to first convince itself that the station
5. Three-second ride. The intensity of the earthquake was high but exceeded the plants
design basis for only about 3 seconds. Source: Dominion Generation
PERFORMANCE
H
i
g
h
-
C
o
n
t r ast V
i s
u
a
l

I
n
d
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

+

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

G
u
i
d
e
d W
a
v
e

R
a
d
a
r
THE ORIGINAL INNOVATORS
The patented Aurora
magnetic level
indicator from Orion Instruments

provides high-visibility local
indication while supplying real-
time Guided Wave Radar digital
feedback to the control room.
This combination of application-
proven technologies relies on
completely different properties
of the liquid (density and
dielectric), therefore providing you
a safety net of redundancy
...all in a single device.
Magnetic Float
GWR Probe
Perforated Bafle
www.orlonlnsLrumenLs.com - 2103 Cak vllla 8oulevard - 8aLon 8ouge, Loulslana - 70813 - 866-33-C8lCn
PA81 ls a reglsLered Lrademark of Lhe PA81 Communlcauon loundauon. | lCunuA1lCn eldbus` ls a Lrademark of lleldbus loundauon.
Crlon lnsLrumenLs, Crlon logoLype, MagneLrol logoLype, Lcllpse, 8eveal, and Aurora are reglsLered Lrademarks of MagneLrol lnLernauonal, lnc.
NOW
w
l
d
e

v
l
e
w

l
n
d
l
c
a
L
o
r
f
e
a
L
u
r
l
n
g
Orlando, FL
2012
Booth # 1668
Visit Us In December
PERFORMANCE
H
i
g
h
-
C
o
n
t r ast V
i s
u
a
l

I
n
d
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

+

I
n
t
e
g
r
a
t
e
d

G
u
i
d
e
d W
a
v
e

R
a
d
a
r
THE ORIGINAL INNOVATORS
The patented Aurora
magnetic level
indicator from Orion Instruments

provides high-visibility local
indication while supplying real-
time Guided Wave Radar digital
feedback to the control room.
This combination of application-
proven technologies relies on
completely different properties
of the liquid (density and
dielectric), therefore providing you
a safety net of redundancy
...all in a single device.
Magnetic Float
GWR Probe
Perforated Bafle
www.orlonlnsLrumenLs.com - 2103 Cak vllla 8oulevard - 8aLon 8ouge, Loulslana - 70813 - 866-33-C8lCn
PA81 ls a reglsLered Lrademark of Lhe PA81 Communlcauon loundauon. | lCunuA1lCn eldbus` ls a Lrademark of lleldbus loundauon.
Crlon lnsLrumenLs, Crlon logoLype, MagneLrol logoLype, Lcllpse, 8eveal, and Aurora are reglsLered Lrademarks of MagneLrol lnLernauonal, lnc.
NOW
w
l
d
e

v
l
e
w

l
n
d
l
c
a
L
o
r
f
e
a
L
u
r
l
n
g
Orlando, FL
2012
Booth # 1668
Visit Us In December
|
November 2012 40
NUCLEAR POWER
sustained no functional damage and could be
restarted safely before presenting its finding
to the NRC, which had to give permission for
the units to return to service.
Dominion took the initiative to determine
the process, communicate the details to the
NRC and the public, systematically carry out
the plan, and, finally, present the results in a
clear, convincing manner. The plant tells the
story, Heacock said. We went over North
Anna very systematicallyevery safety sys-
tem, structure and componentand found no
safety-related functional damage. Right from
the beginning, we decided that we would not
bring the station back up until both we and
the NRC independently were fully satisfied
as to its complete safety.
Effective Crisis Management
In Dominions management of the restoration
effort, safety was never compromised and elec-
trical service to customers was never interrupt-
ed, even though the large generation station was
out of service for nearly three months.
Dominion followed extensive safety veri-
fications in restarting the units and worked
very closely with the NRC and other organi-
zations to involve them in the restart process
and keep them informed step by step. Ongo-
ing communications efforts included daily
internal updates through conference calls
as well as coverage in the companys em-
ployee online Connect Today news service,
in its newsmagazine Connect, and in inter-
nal briefings. Company representatives made
presentations to civic organizations about the
earthquake and activities undertaken to re-
turn the units to service.
The NRC conducted and Dominion par-
ticipated in four public meetingstwo in
Louisa County and two at NRC headquarters
in Rockville, Md. The company hosted North
Anna tours for local and national news me-
dia to show them the station and the small
amount of minor of damage incurred at the
site and to counteract any criticism and mis-
information by anti-nuclear organizations.
Coverage was local, regional, national, and
international, with company representatives
issuing no fewer than four formal media an-
nouncements and participating in several
hundred interviews.
Dominion was also proactive in com-
municating with state and local government
officials. The day after the quake, the North
Anna Power Station was visited by both Vir-
ginia Gov. Robert F. McDonnell and House
Majority Leader Eric Cantor, whose Seventh
Congressional District includes the site.
Dominions leadership moved the indus-
try forward. The company worked with the
NRC to establish the protocol for recovering
from a nuclear station shutdown caused by an
earthquake. The agency oversaw the process
and approved the restart within three months
of the quake. In contrast, repairs to the Wash-
ington Monument are scheduled to begin late
this year and are expected to require 12 to
18 months to complete, even though a local
philanthropist donated half the cost of repairs
shortly after the quake.
Shaping the Nuclear Power
Industrys Present and Future
All in all, Dominions rapid and effective re-
sponse to the record Central Virginia quake
prevented an unreasonably extended outage.
It also avoided lingering questions about
nuclear safety and damage to the companys
and the industrys reputations. The company
went above and beyond regulatory require-
ments and in short, efficient order estab-
lished the safety of its units and had them
back online to produce low-cost, emissions-
free power for its customers. In the process,
it demonstrated that Dominion and the U.S.
nuclear industry are capable of handling ex-
treme, nature-induced emergencies in a safe,
effective, and transparent mannerjust as
the public rightfully expects.
Leadership in the nuclear industry cant
be just in science, engineering and technol-
ogy, said Christian. A nuclear operating
company has to be able to perform across
the board, from safety and management to
financial results, from complex regulatory is-
sues to working effectively with a skeptical
and sometimes hostile news media. I believe
our results in this event demonstrated that we
were up to the challenge.
Clearly, the events of August 23 presented a
challenge not only to Dominion but also to the
entire nuclear power industry. Dominions com-
mitment to safety first and the companys lead-
ership in establishing the standards for recovery
from a crisis of this magnitude will positively
affect the future of nuclear power generation in
the U.S. and around the world.
editor-in-chief. The substantial assistance
provided by many Dominion employees in
the preparation of this article is gratefully
acknowledged.
North Anna Power Station Restart Timeline
Aug. 23, 1:51 p.m.: A magnitude 5.8
earthquake occurs in Mineral, Va., ap-
proximately 11 miles from North Anna
Power Station. Both reactors shut down
automatically. Safety systems function as
designed to keep the reactors safe.
Aug. 29: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com-
mission (NRC) sends an Augmented In-
spection Team (AIT) to North Anna.
Sept. 8: At the first of what will be four
public meetings, Dominion makes an initial
presentation on the earthquake and its im-
pact on North Anna Power Station to NRC
staff in Rockville, Md. The company states
no significant damage has been found.
Sept. 30: NRC issues Confirmatory Ac-
tion Letter, stating that North Anna will
not restart until the Commission has
completed its review of your information,
performed confirmatory inspections, and
completed its safety evaluation review.
The permission to resume operations will
be formally communicated . . . in a written
correspondence.
Oct. 3: At the second public meeting,
the NRCs AIT presents its report at the
North Anna Nuclear Information Center
in Mineral, Va. The NRC also announces
that it will dispatch a Restart Readiness
Inspection team to the station. The AIT
finds that Dominion responded appropri-
ately to protect the public and that the
units are safe.
Oct. 21: Dominion makes its third pub-
lic meeting appearance with the NRC, this
time in front of the NRC commissioners at
NRC headquarters in Rockville. The com-
pany confirms no functional damage was
found after more than 100,000 hours of
inspection and units are ready to restart,
pending NRC approval. The company states
that while some ground force acceleration
frequencies exceeded the stations design
basis for about 3 seconds, the overall im-
pact to the station was well below the de-
sign basis, and the minor damage found
bears this out.
Nov. 1: The NRC has its fourth public
meeting, this time in Louisa County, to
present its Restart Readiness Inspection
Team report. Dominion confirms no func-
tional damage was found, and units are
ready to restart, pending NRC approval.
Nov. 11: Dominion receives NRC letter
granting it permission to restart North
Anna Power Station.
Nov. 15: Unit 1 is restarted and con-
nected to the grid.
Nov. 22: Unit 2 is restarted and con-
nected to the grid.
A change has just

occurred in your
nuclear power plant.
How long will it take you to nd it?
Change is constant in a nuclear power plant. Unfortunately, information is not. Its critical
that the most current information be available to every stakeholder at any given moment.
AssetWise makes this possible. Its the rst system designed to manage the interdependent
information critical to the performance of a highly engineered nuclear facility over its complete
lifecycle. AssetWise converts information from a liability to an asset, and improves efciency,
safety, and regulatory compliance.
2012 Bentley Systems, Incorporated. Bentley and the B logo are registered trademarks of Bentley Systems, Incorporated or one of its
direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries. Other brands and product names are trademarks of their respective owners.
Proactive Management
of Change
Effective Change Management
requires a robust information
management system that provides
critical capabilities, including:
Engineering
Information Management
Asset Lifecycle
Information Management
Conguration Management
www.bentley.com/structural For white papers and case studies visit:
www.Bentley.com/AW-Nuclear
Because what you need to know changes in an instant ASSETWISE
|
November 2012 42
NUCLEAR POWER
What Worldwide Nuclear
Growth Slowdown?
Data detailing plans for new nuclear reactors worldwide show few effects of
the March 2011 Fukushima accident. China and Russia in particular con-
tinue to be hot spots for nuclear development, but cost overruns, con-
struction glitches, and ongoing safety reviews are slowing construction
projects elsewhere.
By David Wagman
O
n paper at least, the March 2011 ac-
cident at Japans Fukushima Daiichi
nuclear power plant that followed a
devastating earthquake and tsunami barely al-
tered the list of operating power reactors and
nuclear projects planned for construction.
At the end of 2011, there were 435 power
reactors in operation with a total capacity of
369 GWe, 2% fewer than at the beginning
of the year, according to the International
Atomic Energy Agencys (IAEAs) annual
report published in August. The decrease in
generating capacity was due to the permanent
retirement of 13 reactors. Twelve of the 13
traced their closure to the accident at Tokyo
Electric Power Co.s Fukushima plant. The
tally included four reactors at the Fukushima
plant itself and eight in Germany. A 13th re-
actor was shuttered in the United Kingdom
due to its age.
Those closures were offset somewhat as
seven new reactors were connected to the
grid in 2011, an increase from five reactors in
2010, two in 2009, and none in 2008.
The IAEA said the Fukushima accident
slowed nuclear powers expansion but did
not reverse it. Its post-accident projection of
global nuclear power capacity in 2030 was
7% to 8% lower than what was projected be-
fore the accident. The agency now expects
nuclear capacity to grow to 501 GWe in 2030
in its low projection and to 746 GWe in its
high projection.
Most of the projected growth will occur in
countries that already have operating nuclear
power plants. Countries in Asia as well as
Russia are expected to be the focus of new
expansion projects. Of the 64 new power reac-
tors under construction at the end of 2011, 26
were in China, 10 in Russia, six in India, and
five in the Republic of Korea (South Korea).
Despite these plans for new reactors,
nuclear power projects face a laundry list
of challenges.
French power company lectricit de
France SA (EDF) said in August it will delay
construction of four planned nuclear reactors
in the UK. EDF had planned to start building
the first reactors next year. Published reports
said EDF now plans to take time to evaluate
the consequences of delays at a French reac-
tor under construction in Flamanville as well
as the Fukushima accident. EDF is expected
to release a new timetable for the UK proj-
ects this fall.
Other countries such as Belgium, Italy,
and Switzerland have reevaluated their nu-
clear programs since March 2011. And coun-
tries such as Austria, Denmark, Greece, and
New Zealand continue to exclude the nuclear
power option outright.
In Asia, plans for more than 12.7 GW of
new nuclear capacity in South Korea have
been delayed amid Fukushima-inspired
safety concerns. Korea Hydro & Nuclear
Power Co. Ltd. pushed back the date for
completing two reactors by at least 10
months due to a delay in government ap-
proval. The reactors were first scheduled to
enter service in 2016 and 2017. In addition,
construction of four other reactors has been
pushed back by at least one year. And plans
for two other reactors have been scrapped
altogether, according to local news reports
quoting company officials.
In Japan, nonbinding plans (that could be
reversed) were announced by the govern-
ment in mid-September to phase out nuclear
power by 2040. The policy goal called for
all 50 of the countrys reactors to close once
they reach 40 years in operation. In addition,
no new reactors would be built. At a press
briefing in Tokyo, National Policy Minister
Motohisa Furukawa said, We will introduce
policies to bring nuclear power generation
down to zero within the 2030s . . . so that
we can build a society that does not rely on
nuclear power as early as possible. Before
1. Steady progress. The new Units 3 and 4 at Plant Vogtle are beginning to take shape. In
the foreground is the foundation for the turbine building (right) and the containment vessel (left).
In the middle of the photo are the same foundations for Unit 4. On the far left are the founda-
tions for the hyperbolic cooling towers, one per unit. In the background, the prefabrication of the
containment shells continues. The photo was taken in August 2012. Courtesy: Southern Co.
November 2012
|
NUCLEAR POWER
the March 2011 accident, nuclear supplied
26% of the countrys electricity. Long-term
plans had been in place to raise that contribu-
tion to 53% by 2030.
Higher Costs and Delayed Starts
Closer to home, the first new nuclear plants
in the U.S. in years are costing more to build
than first thought and are experiencing con-
struction delays that are pushing back their
projected in-service dates. Some plans for
new reactors have been scrapped altogether.
For example, NRG Energy wrote off a $481
million investment in two planned reactors in
Texas shortly after the 2011 Fukushima ac-
cident, citing uncertainties.
The Associated Press reviewed public re-
cords and regulatory findings and said licens-
ing delay charges, rising construction costs,
and construction errors are driving up the
costs of reactors in Georgia, South Carolina,
and Tennessee anywhere from hundreds of
millions of dollars to as much as $2 billion.
Some of the news agencys reporting focused
on work at the Vogtle, V.C. Summer, and
Watts Bar stations:
Plant Vogtle. The Associated Press report-
ed that the Georgia Powerled Vogtle proj-
ect, initially estimated to cost $14 billion,
has run into more than $800 million in ex-
tra charges related to licensing delays. A
construction monitor hired by state regu-
latory authorities has said that co-owner
Southern Co. is having trouble holding to
its budget. The plant, whose first reactor
was supposed to be operational by April
2016, is now delayed seven months (Fig-
ure 1). Southern Co. and others say cost
overruns are to be expected in projects
this complex, and that overruns are bal-
anced by other savings over the life of the
plant. Southern Co. expects Plant Vogtle
will cost $2 billion less to operate over its
60-year lifetime than initially projected
because of tax breaks and historically low
interest rates.
V.C. Summer Nuclear Station. This South
Carolina reactor was expected to cost
around $10.5 billion but has experienced
cost increases of around $670 million, the
news agency said. Owners say the project
remains on or under budget, helped by fa-
vorable interest rates and labor costs that
are lower than expected. The first reactors
in-service date has been delayed from
2016 to 2017; the second reactor reported-
ly is eight months ahead of schedule with
an in-service date targeted for early 2018.
Watts Bar Nuclear Plant. Completing
work on the long-mothballed Watts Bar
plant in eastern Tennessee, initially bud-
geted at $2.5 billion, will cost up to $2 bil-
lion more, the Tennessee Valley Authority
(TVA) said this past spring. The utility
said its initial budget underestimated how
much work was needed to finish the plant,
and the utility wasted money by not com-
pleting more design work before starting
construction. The project had been tar-
geted to finish this year but has been post-
poned until 2015.
Another utility in line to build, Progress
Energywhich completed its merger with
Duke Energy this summerpushed back
construction plans for two reactors in Florida
because of economic uncertainty, low de-
mand growth, and inexpensive natural gas for
power generation. Progress now expects its
first new reactor to be finished in 2024.
Meanwhile, Progress faces problems with
its existing Crystal River nuclear plant. The
reactor went offline in September 2009 for
maintenance and upgrades, but the plants
42-inch-thick concrete containment building
cracked during the outage. Efforts to repair
the damage cost $500 million and resulted in
more cracks. Repairing the new cracks was
first estimated to cost another $900 million
to $1.3 billion, plus more than $1 billion for
replacement power.
In early August, Duke Energy CEO Jim
Rogers said the previous high-end estimate
of $1.3 billion is likely too low. The utility
has not decided whether to repair the plant
or permanently shut it down. An indepen-
dent technical evaluation commissioned by
Dukes board was expected to be complet-
ed in early September, Rogers told a local
newspaper. The cost estimate is trending
higher, Rogers was quoted as saying. The
repair plan appears to be technically feasible
but issues remain.
Spent Fuel Storage Dilemma
Further complicating new nuclears out-
look, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion (NRC) in early August put a hold on
requests for new reactor construction and
license renewals after a federal court ruling
questioned the agencys plans for storing
spent nuclear fuel (SNF).
The NRCs moratorium will delay almost
20 requests by utilities for new construction
and operating licenses or license renewals.
Those projects include Ameren Corp.s bid
for a 20-year license renewal at its Callaway
plant in central Missouri, a renewal request
by the Calvert Cliffs power plant in Mary-
land, and a request by Florida Power & Light
to build two reactors at its Turkey Point nu-
clear plant south of Miami.
Some two dozen environmental groups
sought the delay after a federal appeals
court ruled in June that the NRCs plans for
long-term storage of SNF at individual re-
actors were insufficient. The ruling came in
response to a lawsuit by attorneys generals
in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and
Vermont over a relicensing application for
the Indian Point nuclear plant. The federal
appeals court found that spent nuclear fuel
rods stored onsite at power plants pose a
dangerous, long-term health and environ-
mental risk.
The NRC sought for decades to build a na-
tional waste storage site at Yucca Mountain in
the Nevada desert, but that plan was scrapped
two years ago by the Obama administration.
A decision in August offered good news
to North Americas nuclear industry when
Canadian nuclear regulators issued a site
preparation license to Ontario Power Genera-
tion (OPG) for new reactors proposed at the
Darlington site in Ontario. The license was
the first to be issued in Canada in 25 years
and will be valid for 10 years. It means that
preconstruction activities such as clearing,
excavating, and grading the land adjacent to
the companys existing four-unit Darlington
station can begin.
Two potential vendors are preparing de-
tailed construction plans, schedules, and
cost estimates under service agreements
signed with OPG in June. SNC Lavalin/
Candu Energy Inc. and Westinghouse have
a year to complete their reports for the En-
hanced Candu 6 and AP1000 reactor designs
respectively. The reports will be submit-
ted to the Ontario provincial government,
which will decide whether to move forward
with the project.
Planned Reactor Construction
The U.S. currently has 104 operating nucle-
ar reactors at 64 plants across the country.
Around half of those units are more than 30
years old. The Nuclear Energy Institute says
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
in early August put a hold on requests
for new reactor construction and license
renewals.
|
November 2012 44
NUCLEAR POWER
19 companies and consortia are studying, li-
censing, or building more than 30 reactors.
The NRC is reviewing 10 combined license
applications from nine companies and con-
sortia for 16 nuclear power units. Even so,
work is actively under way at just a handful
of sites, and one major international nucle-
ar groupthe World Nuclear Association
(WNA)counts only the Watts Bar reactor
as currently under construction. It considers
a plant under construction only after first
concrete for the reactor has been poured.
By that measure, neither Vogtle unit appears
on the WNAs tally even after three years of
work at the site.
Research by POWER on data maintained
by the WNA suggests that globally, plans
for new nuclear generating capacity rose be-
tween 2008 and 2012 despite the effects of
the worldwide economic crisis and the Fuku-
shima accident.
As Table 1 shows, almost 74 GW of
planned capacity representing 65 reactors
were added to the list of planned reactors
worldwide between 2008 and August 2012.
China added the most planned units, 27,
which if built, would add more than 31 GW
of nuclear generating capacity. (See p. 48 for
more on Chinas nuclear plans.) The WNA
said China had 26 reactors under construc-
tion as of August, with a combined 27.6 GW
of generating capacity. China currently has
15 reactors in service with a combined gen-
erating capacity of 11.9 GW.
Russia increased the number of its
planned nuclear units by seven between
2008 and 2012. It now plans to build 17
reactors with a combined 20 GW capacity.
Russia has 10 reactors under construction at
present, representing almost 9.2 GW of ca-
pacity. Its installed capacity is almost 24.2
GW at 33 reactors.
WNA data show that 16 countries in-
creased the number of planned nuclear reac-
tors between 2008 and 2012. Those increases
account for 74 reactors and a combined gen-
erating capacity of more than 82.5 GW.
At the other end of the spectrum, WNA
data show that the number of planned reac-
tors fell by one each between 2008 and 2012
in South Africa, Argentina, Bulgaria, North
Korea, Japan, Brazil, the United States, and
Canada. Those losses equal around 8.7 GW
of generating capacity. Pakistan was the only
country to cut its number of planned reac-
tors by two during the four years between
2008 and 2012. It currently has no plans to
Nuclear
electricity
generation
(2011 bil-
lion kWh)
Percent-
age of
electric-
ity supply
No. of
operable
reactors
(Aug.
2012)
MWe net
capacity
(Aug. 2012)
Number of
reactors
under
construc-
tion (Aug.
2012)
MWe
gross
Number
of
reactors
planned
(Aug.
2012)
MWe
gross
Change in
number of
planned
units (2012
vs. 2008)
Change
in
planned
capacity
(2012 vs.
2008)
Change in
uranium
demand
(2012 vs.
2008 metric
tons U)
China 82.6 1.8 15 11,881 26 27,640 51 57,480 27 31,160 5,154
Russia 162.0 17.6 33 24,164 10 9,160 17 20,000 7 8,040 2,123
United Kingdom 62.7 17.8 16 10,038 0 0 4 6,680 4 6,680 -103
India 28.9 3.7 20 4,385 7 5,300 18 15,100 8 6,540 -41
Poland 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6,000 6 6,000 0
Turkey 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4,800 4 4,800 0
UAE 0.0 0 0 0 1 1,400 3 4,200 3 4,200 0
Vietnam 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4,000 4 4,000 0
Czech Republic 26.7 33 6 3,764 0 0 2 2,400 2 2,400 -36
Bangladesh 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2,000 2 2,000 0
France 423.5 77.7 58 63,130 1 1,720 1 1,720 1 1,720 -1,273
Lithuania 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1,350 1 1,350 -225
Armenia 2.4 33.2 1 376 0 0 1 1,060 1 1,060 13
Egypt 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1,000 1 1,000 0
Jordan 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1,000 1 1,000 0
Kazakhstan 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 2 600 2 600 0
South Korea 147.8 34.6 23 20,787 4 5,205 5 7,000 0 400 858
Iran 0.0 0 1 915 0 0 2 2,000 0 100 27
South Africa 12.9 5.2 2 1,800 0 0 0 0 -1 -165 1
Pakistan 3.8 3.8 3 725 2 680 0 0 -2 -600 52
Argentina 5.9 5 2 935 1 745 1 33 0 -707 1
Bulgaria 15.3 32.6 2 1,906 0 0 1 950 -1 -950 52
North Korea 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 -950 0
Japan 156.2 18.1 50 44,396 3 3,036 10 13,772 -1 -1,173 -2,933
Brazil 14.8 3.2 2 1,901 1 1,405 0 0 -1 -1,245 18
USA 790.4 19.2 104 101,930 1 1,218 11 13,260 -1 -1,740 806
Canada 88.3 15.3 17 12,044 3 2,190 2 1,500 -1 -1,800 29
World 2,518 13.5 433 371,745 65 64,979 158 175,115 65 73,720 3,375
Table 1. Nuclear remains a part of generation plans worldwide. Source: World Nuclear Association
become a member today!
Access a Robust Suite of Member-Only Benets:
Access to user guidelines and best practices written by experienced members.
Access to e-media educational tools such as an impressive vented and unvented
dust collector explosion, PRB Coal basics, electrical practices, etc.
Access to an archive of 12+ years of annual meeting presentations
Targeted networking opportunities with generating companies and leading service
providers around the world
Interact with your peers, share ideas, seek answers, and enhance communications
in the exclusive Member forum - www.prbcoalsforum.com
Increased industry exposure through prominent logo placement on the user group
website, print and annual meeting signage
Featuring Two World-Class User Group Meetings
CONNECT with the
WORLD-WIDE LEADERS
Focusing on the
SAFE & EFFICIENT use of coal
For more information,
contact us at
prb@tradefairgroup.com
or 832-242-1969

Annual Meeting
November 6-8, 2012
Hong Kong
Harbour Grand Hotel, HK
www.asiansbcusers.com
Annual Meeting
May 14-16, 2013
Rosemont, IL
Donald E. Stephens
Convention Center
www.prbcoals.com
NEW! Combustible Coal Dust Awareness e-Learning Course
(for member/non-member contractors and employees)
|
November 2012 46
NUCLEAR POWER
add more nuclear power. Pakistan has two
reactors under construction with a combined
capacity of 680 MW and three reactors cur-
rently operating with a combined capacity of
725 MW.
The Fukushima accident had little effect
on the gross amount of new nuclear capacity
under construction worldwide, even in Japan,
where the accident took place. According to
WNA data in Table 2, three reactors with a
combined 3,036 MW of capacity were under
construction in Japan as of August 2012. That
was up from two reactors and a combined
2,756 MW reported in 2011. Worldwide, al-
most 65 GW of nuclear generating capacity
was under construction in August. That was
up 945 MW from 2011.
The WNA expects almost 10.6 GW of nu-
clear capacity to enter service this year (Table
3). That includes three units in India, two in
South Korea and China, and one each in Rus-
sia, Argentina, and Iran. The WNA also counts
in its 2012 total the completion of refurbish-
ment work on three units in Canada: Bruce
A1, Bruce A2, and Point Lepreau Unit 1.
Next year, some 14.9 GW of capacity
are expected to be completed, representing
13 reactors. The count includes seven re-
actors in China, two each in Slovakia and
South Korea, and one in Russia. One U.S.
completion included in the WNAs count for
2013Watts Bar Unit 2is likely to slip to
2015 after TVA revised its expected comple-
tion date earlier this year.
Uranium Supplies
Increased nuclear generating capacity seems
unlikely to tax global supply channels for
uranium. World uranium resources appear
ample to meet requirements for the foresee-
able future, but timely investment in facili-
ties will be needed to make sure production
keeps pace with growing demand, according
to a new edition of the Red Book published
jointly by the IAEA and the Organization of
Economic Cooperation and Developments
Nuclear Energy Agency.
The latest Red Book edition concluded
that total identified uranium resources have
increased by more than 12% since the last
edition, which included data up to 2009. Even
so, lower-cost uranium resources were found
to have decreased significantly due to in-
creased mining costs. Nevertheless, with to-
tal identified resources standing at 7,096,600
metric tons (mt) of uranium (U) recoverable
at costs of up to $260 per kilogram, identified
resources reportedly are sufficient for at least
100 years of supply for the worlds nuclear
fleet. So-called undiscovered resources (de-
fined as resources thought to exist based on
existing geological knowledge but requiring
significant exploration to confirm and define
them) stand at 10,400,500 mt.
WNA data suggest that growth in global
demand for uranium for electricity genera-
tion rose 3,375 mt between 2008 and 2012,
as shown in Table 1. The increase occurred
even as Japan cut its demand for the fuel by
almost 3,000 mt over the period. That drop
was more than offset by demand growth in
China (up 5,154 mt from 2008 to 2012) and
Russia (up 2,123 mt). U.S. demand rose 806
mt and Canadian demand rose 29 mt.
The Red Book said the increase in the ura-
nium resource base stems from concerted ex-
ploration and development efforts. Some $2
billion was spent on uranium exploration and
mine development in 2010, a 22% increase
from 2008 figures, with a focus on areas with
the potential for hosting in-situ leach (ISL)
recovery operations.
The report ranked Kazakhstan as the
worlds leading uranium producerstand-
ing at 54,670 mt in 2010in a period when
global production has increased by more than
25% since 2008. Two countries joined the list
of those reporting uranium production fig-
ures since the previous Red Book: Malawi,
which started uranium production in 2009,
and Germany, where uranium production re-
sumed through uranium recovery from mine
remediation work.
Globally, ISL is now the dominant min-
ing method, accounting for almost 40% of
2010 production, the result of ISL produc-
tion increases in Kazakhstan. Underground
minings share stood at 32%, open pit mining
at 23%, and co-product and byproduct recov-
ery from gold and copper mining operations
made up 6%.
The worlds operating commercial nuclear
power reactors cumulatively required 63,875
mt of uranium per year in 2010. By 2035, this
is forecast to grow to between 97,645 mt and
136,385 mt, depending on growth scenarios.
The scenarios take into account the effects of
policies introduced by some countries fol-
lowing the March 2011 Fukushima accident.
Currently defined uranium resources are
more than adequate to meet the high case
demand as far out as 2035, but not without
timely investments in uranium production
facilities, the report said. Significant invest-
ment and technical expertise will be required
to bring these resources to the market and
to identify additional resources. Sufficiently
high uranium market prices will be needed to
fund these activities, especially in light of the
rising costs of production, it said.
In August, Canadas minister of environ-
ment approved a deep open pit mine at Mid-
west, near McClean Lake in Saskatchewan.
AREVA Resources and Denison Mines are
also evaluating other potential mining meth-
ods, including conventional underground
and surface jet bore drilling, using Surface
Access Borehole Resource Extraction min-
ing technology. The deposit has indicated
resources of 16,500 mt of uranium at 4.66%
U. Milling will be at McClean Lake, 15 ki-
lometers away. There are no current plans to
start mining.
August 2011 August 2012
MWe gross
change
No. under
construction MWe gross
No. under
construction MWe gross
China 26 28,710 26 27,640 -1,070
Iran 1 1,000 0 0 -1,000
Korea RO (South) 5 5,800 4 5,205 -595
United Kingdom 0 0 0 0 0
France 1 1,720 1 1,720 0
Finland 1 1,700 1 1,700 0
Slovakia 2 880 2 880 0
Argentina 1 745 1 745 0
Brazil 1 1,405 1 1,405 0
USA 1 1,218 1 1,218 0
Russia 10 8,960 10 9,160 200
Japan 2 2,756 3 3,036 280
Pakistan 1 340 2 680 340
Canada 2 1,500 3 2,190 690
India 6 4,600 7 5,300 700
UAE 0 0 1 1,400 1,400
World 62 64,034 65 64,979 945
Table 2. Fukushima had little impact on global reactor construction
plans. Source: World Nuclear Association
November 2012
|
NUCLEAR POWER
Secondary sources of uranium (stockpiles
of natural and enriched uranium, downblend-
ed weapons-grade uranium, reprocessed
used fuel, and the reenrichment of depleted
uranium tails) will continue to be required,
although their role is expected to decline
post-2013, when agreements between Russia
and the U.S. to downblend highly enriched
uranium from nuclear weapons for use in
nuclear fuel expire.
David Wagman is executive editor of

POWER.
Country Reactor Type MWe (net)
Commercial operation 2012
Argentina, CNEA Atucha 2 PHWR 692
Canada, Bruce Power Bruce A1 PHWR 769
Canada, Bruce Power Bruce A2 PHWR 769
Canada, NB Power Point Lepreau 1 PHWR 635
China, CGNPC Hongyanhe 1 PWR 1,080
China, CNNC Qinshan phase II-4 PWR 650
India, NPCIL Kaiga 4 PHWR 202
India, NPCIL Kudankulam 1 PWR 950
India, NPCIL Kudankulam 2 PWR 950
Iran, AEOI Bushehr 1 PWR 950
Korea, KHNP Shin Kori 2 PWR 1,000
Korea, KHNP Shin Wolsong 1 PWR 1,000
Russia, Rosenergoatom Kalinin 4 PWR 950
China, CGNPC Ningde 1 PWR 1,080
China, CGNPC Yangjiang 1 PWR 1,080
China, CGNPC Taishan 1 PWR 1,700
China, CNNC Sanmen 1 PWR 1,250
China, CNNC Fangjiashan 1 PWR 1,080
China, CNNC Fuqing 1 PWR 1,080
Korea, KHNP Shin Wolsong 2 PWR 1,000
Korea, KHNP Shin-Kori 3 PWR 1,350
Russia, Rosenergoatom Leningrad II-1 PWR 1,070
Slovakia, SE Mochovce 3 PWR 440
Slovakia, SE Mochovce 4 PWR 440
USA, TVA Watts Bar 2 PWR 1,180
China, CGNPC Taishan 2 PWR 1,700
China, CNNC Sanmen 2 PWR 1,250
China, CNNC Fangjiashan 2 PWR 1,080
China, CNNC Changjiang 1 PWR 650
China, CPI Haiyang 1 PWR 1,250
Finland, TVO Olkilouto 3 PWR 1,600
India, Bhavini Kalpakkam FBR 470
Japan, Chugoku Shimane 3 ABWR 1,375
Table 3. Nuclear reactor expected in-service dates. Source: World Nuclear Association
Country Reactor Type MWe (net)
Commercial operation 2014 (contd)
Japan, EPDC/J Power Ohma 1 ABWR 1,350
Korea, KHNP Shin-Kori 4 PWR 1,350
Russia, Rosenergoatom Vilyuchinsk PWR x 2 70
Russia, Rosenergoatom Novovoronezh II-1 PWR 1,070
Russia, Rosenergoatom Rostov 3 PWR 1,070
Russia, Rosenergoatom Beloyarsk 4 FNR 750
Taiwan Power Lungmen 1 ABWR 1,300
China, CGNPC Fangchenggang 1 PWR 1,080
China, China Huaneng Shidaowan HTR 200
China, CNNC Changjiang 2 PWR 650
China, CNNC Hongshiding 1 PWR 1,080
China, CPI Haiyang 2 PWR 1,250
India, NPCIL Kakrapar 3 PHWR 640
Taiwan Power Lungmen 2 ABWR 1,300
France, EdF Flamanville 3 PWR 1,600
India, NPCIL Kakrapar 4 PHWR 640
India, NPCIL Rajasthan 7 PHWR 640
Korea, KHNP Shin-Ulchin 1 PWR 1,350
Pakistan, PAEC Chashma 3 PWR 300
Romania, SNN Cernavoda 3 PHWR 655
Russia, Rosenergoatom Novovoronezh II-2 PWR 1,070
Russia, Rosenergoatom Rostov 4 PWR 1,200
Ukraine, Energoatom Khmelnitsky 3 PWR 1,000
Bulgaria, NEK Belene 1 PWR 1,000
China, CNNC Taohuajiang 1 PWR 1,250
India, NPCIL Rajasthan 8 PHWR 640
Japan, JAPC Tsuruga 3 APWR 1,538
Korea, KHNP Shin-Ulchin 2 PWR 1,350
Pakistan, PAEC Chashma 4 PWR 300
Romania, SNN Cernavoda 4 PHWR 655
Russia, Rosenergoatom Baltic 1 PWR 1,200
Ukraine, Energoatom Khmelnitsky 4 PWR 1,000
Notes: ABWR = advanced boiling water reactor, FNR = fast neutron reactor, HTR = high-temperature reactor, PHWR = pressurized heavy water
reactor, PWR = pressurized water reactor.
|
November 2012 48
POWER IN CHINA
Post-Fukushima Nuclear Power
Development in China
China regards nuclear energy as a critical part of its strategic goal of achieving
sustainable economic development while reducing environmental pollu-
tion. An analysis by North China Electric Power University predicts that
the pace of nuclear power development may slow for a short time as a
result of the Fukushima accident, but nuclear power is still a top develop-
ment priority.
By Zeng Ming, Chen Li-min, Xue Song, Wei Yang, and Wang Lei, North China Electric Power University
P
romoting the development of cleaner
energy has become one of the most
efficient ways of enabling energy-sus-
tainable development and mitigating environ-
mental pollution problems. Because nuclear
energy is clean and reliable, it has attracted
worldwide attention, and many countries
have made it a significant strategy in their
efficient energy production and pollution re-
duction plans. However, the nuclear incident
at Japans Fukushima plant caused by the
earthquake and tsunami in March 2011 sig-
nificantly slowed development of the nuclear
power industry in some countries, and others
are on course to soon eliminate nuclear pow-
er. We have investigated the short- and long-
term effects the Japanese accident has had on
development of Chinas nuclear industry and
its energy strategy, particularly with respect
to Chinas future plans for nuclear power and
the immediate measures the government and
energy enterprises put into practice shortly
after the earthquake.
The result of our analysis of Chinas com-
mitment to nuclear power is summarized in this
article. In sum, the pace of nuclear power de-
velopment will be slowed in the short run, but
nuclear power will remain a key technology in
Chinas long-term development priorities.
Historical Perspective
In March 2011, the Daiichi plant at Japans
Fukushima complex was hit by an earthquake
and subsequent tsunami, causing a leakage of
radioactivity. The accident, thought to be the
most serious recorded since the Chernobyl di-
saster, has reverberated through the global nu-
clear power industry and has forever changed
the nuclear power development strategy of
many countries.
After Fukushima, French President Nico-
las Sarkozy made it clear that France would
neither give up the exploitation and utiliza-
tion of nuclear energy nor evade any nuclear
security issue. The United States announced
that it would continue with its nuclear re-
naissance strategy and invest more financial
resources in nuclear energy research as well.
Conversely, Germany announced it would
temporarily shut down seven nuclear power
plants and permanently close all its nuclear
plants by 2022.
The Chinese government and its nuclear
energy experts also reexamined the future de-
velopment of nuclear power and the impor-
tant role it plays in Chinas energy strategy.
With rapid economic development, many
countries, including China, are facing severe
energy and environmental stresses. In recent
years, environmental pollution and ecological
imbalance problems caused by coal, oil, and
other forms of fossil energy utilization have
become important factors restricting Chinas
economic development. As a country with
high energy consumption and equally high
air emissions, Chinas electricity suppliers
are facing mounting pressure to support eco-
nomic growth while also reducing emissions.
(See Chinas 12th Five-Year Plan Pushes
Power Industry in New Directions in the
January 2012 issue of POWER, available in
the archives at www.powermag.com.)
Compared with traditional fossil energy,
nuclear power is more efficient and less pol-
luting. It is considered the most promising
form of energy to help alleviate the energy
crisis and improve the energy infrastruc-
ture, thus controlling environmental pol-
lution and climate change threats. In 2007,
Chinas State Council approved the National
Development and Reform Commissions
Medium- and Long-Term Nuclear Power
Development Plan (20052020). It outlines
Chinas plans to increase the nations nuclear
capacity to about 40 GWe by 2020 and in-
crease nuclears share of total capacity to
4%. A 2007 State Council Information Office
white paper, Chinas Energy Conditions and
Policies, further enshrined nuclear energy as
an indispensable energy option.
Nuclear Power in China
As energy supply is becoming a bottleneck
restricting Chinas economic and social devel-
opment, nuclear energy has become Chinas
consensus choice for alleviating energy short-
ages. As early as the 1970s, the State Coun-
cil made the decision to develop the nuclear
industry. In 2004, China changed its nuclear
power development strategy from moderate
development to positive development. By
introducing technology and independent in-
novation, the production capacity of Chinas
nuclear fuel cycle system continued to ex-
pand. Today, China has become one of the
few countries possessing a relatively complete
nuclear industry system and already has the
technical conditions to speed up development
of nuclear power. The following sections ex-
amine key characteristics of Chinas nuclear
power development program.
Installed Capacity. The first nuclear reac-
tor put into commercial operation was Unit
1 of Qinshan Nuclear Power Plant, built in
1991, with a net installed capacity of 279
MWe (Figure 1). Since 2000, Chinas nuclear
development plan has been to develop in-
stalled capacity 40 GW, and under construc-
tion 18 GW by 2020, directed by the policy
of promoting the development of nuclear
power actively. With financial and political
support, the bulk of new nuclear power sta-
tions have been recently built in Guangdong,
Zhejiang, Liaoning, Fujian, and Shandong
coastal areas. Driven by massive electric de-
mand, nuclear power stations also have been
constructed in Hubei, Hunan, Jiangxi, Anhui,
Sichuan, Chongqing, and other inland prov-
inces, breaking the pattern of building nuclear
power stations only in coastal areas.
By the end of 2010, the total capacity of
the 13 generation units in operation was more
than 10 GW, and the capacity of the 32 gener-
ation units under construction was more than
30 GW. Still, there are more than 30 stations
with almost 100 generating units pre-planned
November 2012
|
POWER IN CHINA
or waiting for approval. The nuclear reactors
built or under construction in China are sum-
marized in Table 1.
According to data from the International
Energy Agency (IEA), by the end of January
2011 there were 442 nuclear power units in
operation around the world, mainly distrib-
uted in North America, Asia, and Europe, ac-
counting for 16% of the worlds total power
production (see What Worldwide Nuclear
Growth Slowdown? p. 42). There also were
65 units under construction, including Chinas
30 units. At present, there are 14 nuclear re-
actors in operation in China, with a total net
installed capacity of 11.169 GW, accounting
for 1.16% of Chinas total installed capacity,
with its power production equivalent to 31.72
million tons of coal.
According to data from the China Electricity
Council and the Medium- and Long-Term Nu-
clear Power Development Plan, Chinas nuclear
power installed capacity currently ranks 11th in
the world. China will maintain a steady growth
rate in the next decades, reaching an estimated
86 GW by 2020, an average annual growth rate
of 6.5 GW, 2.5 times the total of 2.6 GW placed
in operation from 2002 to 2007, ranking the first
in the world. Chinas new added nuclear capac-
ity in operation and the installed capacity fore-
casts are shown in Figures 2 and 3.
Power Production. Nuclear electricity
production accounted for 15.5% of the worlds
total electricity production in 2010. For indi-
vidual countries, France produces 75.9% of its
electricity using nuclear energy, followed by
the Ukraine (47.3%), South Korea (29.9%),
and Japan (26.0%), according to the IEAs Key
World Energy Statistics 2012.
In China, the power system remains highly
dependent on thermal power plants. Though
the total production of hydropower, nuclear
power, and wind power has increased more
than sevenfold from 1985 to 2009, thermal
power still accounts for 78% of the total elec-
tricity produced in China (see Chinas Power
Generators Face Many Business Barriers, in
the September 2012 issue).
With its shortage of coal resources, devel-
oping clean energy like nuclear power has
become one of the key measures to realizing
Chinas sustainable development goals. As
shown in Figure 4, in the past nine years nucle-
ar power production in China shows a grow-
ing trend and reached 87,400 GWh in 2011.
However, this accounts for just 1.85% of total
power production at presenta level that still
lags behind the level of developed countries.
Even so, the combined capacity of reactors
under construction, planned, and proposed in
China amounts to 184,540 MWe, accounting
for 32% of the world total and ranking first in
capacity, offering China the most potential to
develop nuclear power in the future.
Development Plans. In general, future
nuclear projects approved are mainly coastal
and expansion projects. In 2020, the construc-
tion of AP1000 units is expected to account
for about 30%, and the capacity of second
generation units will still account for more
than 50%. Based on the Medium- and Long-
1. Chinas first reactor. Qinshan Nucle-
ar Power Plant Unit 1 was the first nuclear plant
designed, constructed, operated, and managed
by China. The 310-MW Unit 1 entered service
in 1991. Four additional units have since en-
tered service on adjoining sites, with the sixth
unit expected to complete construction the
end of this year. Three additional units are un-
der construction. Courtesy: China Guangdong
Nuclear Power Holding Co., Ltd.
Plant Location
Reactor
design Units
Rated
power
(GW)
Designed
lifetime
(years)
Investment
(billion RMB)
a
Construction
start
(year.month)
Qinshan I-1 Zhejiang CNP300 1 0.30 30 1.2 1985.3
QinshanII-2 Zhejiang CNP600 2 0.65 40 14.8 1996.6
Qinshan II-3 Zhejiang CANDU6 2 0.73 40 2.6 1998.6
Daya Bay Guangdong M310 2 0.98 40 4.0 1987.8
Lingao 1 Guangdong CPR1000 2 0.99 60 4.0 1997.5
Tianwan 1 Jiangsu AES+91 2 1.06 40 3.2 1999.1
Qinshan II-2 Zhejiang CNP600+ 2 0.65 40 14.4 2006.4
Lingao 2 Guangdong CPR1000 2 0.99 60 26.0 2005.12
Hongyanhe Liaoning CPR1000 4 1.00 60 48.6 2007.8
Ningde 2 Fujian CPR1000 4 1.00 60 49.0 2008.2
Fuqing 1 Fujian CPR1000 2 1.00 40 26.7 2008.11
Yangjiang 1 Guangdong CPR1000 6 1.00 60 74.0 2008.12
Fangjiashan Zhejiang CPR1000 2 1.00 60 26.8 2008.12
Sanmen1 Zhejiang AP1000 2 1.25 60 40.0 2009.4
Taishan 1 Guangdong EPR 2 1.75 60 50.0 2009.12
Haiyang 1 Shandong AP1000 2 1.25 60 43.0 2009.12
Shidao Bay Shandong HTGR 1 0.20 40 3.0 NA
Changjiang 1 Hainan CNP600+ 2 0.65 40 16.0 2010.5
Fanchenggang Guangxi CPR1000 2 1.00 60 25.6 2010.7
Total 44 17.45 440.0
Table 1. Nuclear plants in service or under construction in China.
Source: China Guangdong Nuclear Power Holding Co., Ltd.
Notes: a. RMB = $0.16. NA = not available.
2. New nuclear capacity addition
amounts and growth rate of new
nuclear construction. Source: China
Electricity Council
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
200%
150%
100%
50%
0%
-50%
2010 2012E 2014E 2016E 2018E 2020E
M
i
l
l
i
o
n

k
W
New capacity

Growth rate
3. Total installed nuclear capacity
by year and total nuclear capacity
growth rate. Source: China Electricity
Council
100
80
60
40
20
0
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2010 2012E 2014E 2016E 2018E 2020E
M
i
l
l
i
o
n

k
W
Installed capacity

Growth rate
|
November 2012 50
POWER IN CHINA
Term Nuclear Power Development Plan, Chi-
nas nuclear power development will maintain
a rapid growth rate into the future.
Since 2005, Guangdong, Zhejiang, Lia-
oning, Fujian, Shandong, and other coastal
provinces in China have accelerated the pace
of nuclear power development. Moreover, Ji-
angxi, Hunan, Hubei, Anhui, Jilin, Chongqing,
Henan, and other central provinces are also
actively implementing nuclear power projects
driven by surging power demand in each re-
gion. In China, nuclear power development in
inland and coastal cities will occur simultane-
ously, forming an east-central nuclear belt
(Figure 5).
4. Nuclear power production in
China during the period 20032011.
The absolute amount of nuclear-generated
electricity is growing rapidly in China. Source:
China Electricity Council
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
4
2
0
0
5
2
0
0
6
2
0
0
7
2
0
0
8
2
0
0
9
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
1
N
u
c
l
e
a
r

p
o
w
e
r

p
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
(
x
1
0
0

G
W
h
)
Year
5. Nuclear power in China. Illustrated are the locations of plants pre-planned, approved,
under construction, or in operation. Source: Department of Environmental Protection of Nuclear
and Radiation Safety Center
Nuclear power plants in operation
Nuclear power plants under construction
Nuclear power plants approved
Nuclear power plants pre-planned
Covering over 34.000 generating units from over 160 countries and territories
This unique database globally covers over 34,000 installed or projected generating units including details as geographic
location, capacity (MW), age, technology, fuels, boiler, turbine, generator and emissions control equipment. You also
gain access to over 4,200 plant management and support contacts including titles and job functions.

This data set comes in Microsoft Excel, an easy to use application that allows you to manipulate data and import
easily into your own database.
TO DOWNLOAD A FREE SAMPLE ONLINE, VISIT WWW.PLATTS.COM/PRODUCTS/UDICCGT
2012 Combined-Cycle/Gas Turbine Dataset
November 2012
|
POWER IN CHINA
In recent decades, China has accumulated
a wealth of experience in nuclear power de-
velopment in engineering design, equipment
manufacturing, construction, operation, and
management, cultivating a great number of
technology and management personnel with
high professional standards and practical
experience. This is especially important for
the introduction of third-generation Chinese
nuclear power technology and increasing the
proportion of local nuclear power equipment.
Nuclear fuel procurement is also an im-
portant part of Chinas accelerating nuclear
program. More than 200 uranium mines have
been identified in Jiangnan, Qinling, Tianshan
Mountain, Qilian, Yanliao, western Yunnan,
and other regions in China, with total proved
reserves of 44,000 metric tons (t), accounting
for about 2% of the worlds total reserves, ac-
cording to the International Atomic Energy
Agency. However, Chinas uranium output
has always been at low levels, even declining
at times compared with several years ago. In
2008, Chinas uranium output was merely 769
t, and the shortage was met largely through
imports from Kazakhstan, Russia, Namibia,
and Australia.
Chinas Post-Fukushima Response
The March 2011 Fukushima accident brought
the issue of nuclear power security and sus-
tainability to worldwide attention. With nearly
40% of the worlds nuclear reactors under
construction in China, the focus of Chinas
nuclear development strategy is to learn les-
sons from this event and ensure the same mis-
takes arent repeated in China. Some of the
measures taken in China are described below.
Make Policy Shifts. On March 16, 2011,
Premier Wen Jia-bao presided over a State
Council executive meeting that decided to or-
ganize immediately a comprehensive safety
inspection of all nuclear facilities. Specifi-
cally, it was decided that safety management
of the nuclear facilities in operation should
be strengthened, new nuclear power projects
should undergo a more strict approval process,
and nuclear safety plans and a medium- and
long-term nuclear development plan should be
drawn up and improved as quickly as possible.
The meeting also determined that approval of
all the new nuclear power projects, including
those with preparatory work already carried
out, should be suspended until the nuclear
safety plan is established. In short, measures
should be taken to ensure the absolute safety
of nuclear power development.
On the same day, Chinas Environmental
Protection Department issued new regula-
tions for environmental radiation protection of
nuclear power plants, which defined the nec-
essary site conditions for new nuclear power
plants. According to the new regulations,
environmental characteristics such as geol-
ogy, earthquakes, and other potential hazards
caused by nature or by humans should be con-
sidered when evaluating a sites suitability for
a nuclear plant.
Develop New Regulations. To perfect
nuclear safety laws and regulations, China is
speeding up legislative work on the Atomic
Energy Act and its supporting regulations, for-
mulating and perfecting management methods
related to scientific research, exploitation, and
construction, as well as the safety of nuclear
power and nuclear fuel industries. Meanwhile,
the market access system of uranium explora-
tion and mining will continue to be perfected.
Also, the qualification system for production
and servicessuch as for nuclear fuel puri-
fication, conversion, concentration, elements
processing, reprocessing, waste treatment, and
decommissioningwill be enhanced.
In the future, China will consider nuclear
safety and reliability as top issues in the nucle-
ar power development process. To ensure the
quality and safety of nuclear power construc-
tion, China is devoted to establishing com-
plete regulations and rules for nuclear power
safety, thus forming a complete set of nuclear
power safety supervision systems, environ-
mental protection supervision systems, and
nuclear power emergency response systems.
With these regulations and the organization
systems, China will be able to take a compre-
hensive approach to site selection, design, and
construction of nuclear power plants.
Implement Technical Innovation. In the
final analysis, Japans nuclear accident was
a technology and design problem. After the
shock, the first response of the Fukushima
safety systems was normal: first, the safety
shutdown system was triggered even as the
self-contained emergency generator started
to help discharge the cores residual heat. But
in less than an hour, a tsunami caused by the
earthquake destroyed the emergency response
power generation system, resulting in a reactor
explosion. However, a second-generation nu-
clear power plant whose active safety systems
are supported by external power are not com-
parable to Chinas third-generation AP1000
plants under construction that have passive
safety systems. This plant design would not
have experienced the nuclear leakage events
like those at Fukushima, even faced with the
additional effects of earthquake and tsunami.
To ensure nuclear safety, several countries
well-developed nuclear power programs have
already started fourth-generation nuclear
power reactors with even higher safety perfor-
mance levels, and so has China. Furthermore,
China will accelerate construction of large-
scale advanced pressurized water reactors and
promote pressurized water reactor and fast
reactor technologies, as well as research and
development on advanced nuclear fuel cycle
core technologies. The largest energy project
in Chinas 863 projectsthe China experi-
mental fast reactorreached critical condi-
tions for the first time, indicating that China
has basically mastered the key technologies of
fourth-generation nuclear power systems, the
worlds eighth country that has mastered fast
reactor technology.
Cultivate New Nuclear Talent. The scale
of Chinas nuclear construction ranks it as
first in the world, which requires a very well-
trained workforce. National Defense Technol-
ogy Industry Ministry statistics show that if a
million-kilowatt-class (1 GW) nuclear power
plant needs 400 workers, then more than
12,000 workers will be needed for 30 GW of
new nuclear power plants by 2020. Because
the personnel training cycle is long and the
modes of training and practical application
dont match well, students cannot adapt to the
fast development of nuclear power.
In order to speed up the cultivation of nu-
clear talent, China has established nuclear en-
ergy training programs in many colleges and
will provide financial support for universities
that have nuclear power programs.
Implement Daily Supervision Manage-
ment Measures. The earthquake was not the
only factor that raised concern following the
Fukushima nuclear accident; problems such
as aging facilities should also be considered.
In China, there are 13 nuclear power plants
in operation. Although strict monitoring and
maintenance mechanisms were established,
cautious attitudes should be kept to ensure that
problems are solved as they are found. At the
same time, the government should strengthen
the popularization of nuclear safety knowl-
edge and perform training exercises regularly.
All the measures and policies discussed
above are aimed at avoiding an accident simi-
lar to what happened in Japan, or to at least
minimize losses if an accident does occur.
China has learned lessons from the Fukushi-
ma accident.
What Will Be Fukushimas Impact
on Chinas Nuclear Industry?
Some of the effects of Fukushima on Chinas
nuclear program were felt immediately, but
the long-term goals of the program remain
unchanged.
Some Short-Term Impact. China has
temporarily slowed the speed of construction
of nuclear power stations and has reexamined
its safety programs. In addition, it has changed
the development strategy of nuclear power
from positive development to safe devel-
opment. Specifically, on March 16, 2011, the
executive meeting of the State Council noted
that all project approvals should be suspend-
ed until a nuclear safety plan could be put in
|
November 2012 52
POWER IN CHINA
place. As a result, new nuclear power projects cannot be carried out and
the timing of nuclear power development goals will be delayed, which
will also influence the realization of the nuclear power planning goal
in Chinas 12th and 13th Five-Year Plans. Simultaneously, the nuclear
power plants approved as part of the 12th Five-Year Plan will be re-
vised to consider more safety factors. In addition, China will reconsider
locating nuclear power plants in central China, and the nuclear power
plant sites in Hunan, Chongqing, Shanxi, and Gansu Provinces will be
reevaluated to determine if these regions have ever experienced earth-
quakes or are prone to earthquakes.
On the other hand, nuclear power wont replace traditional energy
in the short term. Chinas economy is in an industrializing stage and
requires large energy supplies, causing high energy demand growth.
Traditional fossil energy, especially coal and oil, will still be the main
energy sources. Meanwhile, the development of the natural gas and
renewable energy industries will also enjoy high growth. However, it
is hard to change the basic pattern of any countrys energy use over-
night. So, in the short term, nuclear power will remain a small part of
Chinas overall energy supply.
Though Japans nuclear accident further strengthened the concept
of safety first, it doesnt change the medium long-term strategy of
Chinas nuclear industry. Chinas goal to reduce the use of fossil fu-
els, meet energy conservation goals, and reduce air emissions requires
long-term development of nuclear power.
Continue to Actively Promote Nuclear Industry. Shortly af-
ter the Fukushima nuclear crisis happened, the State Council required
a comprehensive safety inspection of all nuclear facilities and limited
the project approval to strengthen safety management; thereafter, all
nuclear power construction will return to normal.
The long-term goal of Chinas nuclear industry is to actively
promote nuclear power construction based on safety, a unified de-
velopment route, economic efficiency, an insistence on a strategy of
self-independence and Sino-foreign cooperation, the import of ad-
vanced technology from abroad, and realizing innovation and auto-
mation of key nuclear power technologies.
Slowed Pace of Investment. In the past few years, nuclear
power development in China has seen rapid growth. Since 2005, 13
nuclear power projects and 34 nuclear power units were approved
for construction, totaling 37.02 GW. So far, 30 units have been con-
structed, and the capacity under construction is over 30 GW, which
accounts for about 40% of the worlds total. However, the nuclear ac-
cident in Fukushima led to the suspension of nuclear power projects
and thus affected the confidence of investors, causing an investment
slowdown. In the long term, China will still adopt a positive attitude
towards nuclear power development, but restoring investors confi-
dence will take some time.
No Impact on Energy Strategy. In terms of energy policy and
strategy, nuclear power still plays an important role. According to the
12th Five-Year Plan, 40 units will be constructed by 2015. Though
the Fukushima accident affected Chinas nuclear industry to a certain
extent and prompted additional improvements in the management of
nuclear power projects, fundamentally, the general direction of Chi-
nas energy policy will not change. China will still give a high priority
to the development of the nuclear industry in the long run.
With technology improvement, nuclear power is competitive
with traditional energy resources. Also, the security and reliability
of nuclear power are under the double protection of technology and
policy, and uranium resources can meet the basic needs of nuclear
power. So in China, its a wise choice to develop nuclear power
and let it replace coal power gradually. The economic efficiency of
nuclear power plants and coal-fired power plants in different coun-
tries is shown in Figure 6.
Final Thoughts
Japans nuclear disaster has influenced recent changes in the global nu-
clear power industry. For China, the change has been from moderate
development to positive development, and now from positive devel-
opment to safe development. All of Chinas nuclear power plants are
designed to ensure the safe, clean, and efficient use of nuclear energy.
Zeng Ming, Chen Li-min, Xue Song (xuesongbjhd@163.com),
Wei Yang, and Wang Lei, North China Electric Power University,
Beijing, China. The work described in this paper was supported by
The Energy Foundation (G-1006-12630).
6. Nuclear vs coal plants. The horizontal axis represents the ratio
of plant investment, fuel costs, and production costs of nuclear versus
coal-fired power plants. Source: Liang X., Qiu A., Sun C., 2009. China
Electrical Engineering Canon, China Electric Power Press, pp. 115118.
Investment (nuclear/coal-fired) Fuel costs (nuclear/coal-fired)
Production costs (nuclear/coal-fired)
0 1 2
Germany
France
Belgium
Hungary
Russia
Japan
Korea
Canada
United States
China
www.dresser-rand.com
GIMPEL
TRIP AND
THROTTLE VALVES & PARTS
Gimpel parts, service and new valves incorporate the
latest technology to provide safe, reliable throttling and
critical over-speed protection for marine, power
generation, oil & gas, and general industrial applications.
Call Dresser-Rand at Intl +1 713-467-2221 or Intl +49 208-65-6020
or visit: www.dresser-rand.com/products/gimpel/
Quality OEM parts
Exact replacement parts
Upgrades kits
Valves for new applications or to replace old, unreliable valves
November 2012
|
WATER & POWER
Potential Impacts of Closed-Cycle
Cooling Retrofits at U.S. Power
Plants
The Clean Water Act Section 316(b) rule changes regarding cooling water in-
take structures that are expected next year could affect up to 428 power
plants, representing 1,156 individual units, according to the Electric Power
Research Institute. Depending on plant size and the complexity of the ret-
rofit project, retrofit capital costs could range from very low to over $500
million for large nuclear plants. The power industry total cost is projected
to be over $100 billion.
By David Bailey, Electric Power Research Institute
P
ower plant owners face numerous chal-
lenges ensuring adequate water supplies
for operations while protecting aquatic
life in the water bodies that provide power plants
with cooling water. In the U.S., Section 316(b)
of the Clean Water Act requires plant owners to
minimize the adverse impacts of impingement
and entrainment mortality by potentially install-
ing fish protection technologies on cooling wa-
ter intake structures. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing regula-
tions under Section 316(b) that may require in-
stallation of cooling water intake fish protection
technologies or potential retrofit of closed-cycle
cooling systems (cooling towers).
On April 20, 2011, the EPA released a pro-
posed rule implementing the requirements of
Section 316(b) for existing facilities. In the
proposed rule, the EPA noted that closed-
cycle cooling systems were not a best tech-
nology available (BTA) for reducing adverse
impacts of cooling water intake structures;
however, entrainment standards developed on
a site-specific basis could require retrofits of
closed-cycle cooling systems. Furthermore,
although the EPA rejected closed-cycle cool-
ing as BTA and selected a regulatory option
that provides for site-specific development of
entrainment standards for protecting aquatic
life, it did consider two options that included
requirements for closed-cycle cooling, and one
of these options could be adopted for the final
rule, scheduled to be issued in June 2013.
EPRI recently completed a study of the
estimated costs, benefits, impacts, and en-
vironmental consequences of a potential na-
tional requirement to retrofit cooling towers
on all once-through facilities in the U.S. The
estimated costs exceed $100 billion on a net
present value basis.
Research Approach
A first key step in the research was to devel-
op an accurate list of once-through facilities.
EPRIs initial draft list was developed with
information from the EPA and the Depart-
ment of Energy. EPRI then sent the draft list
to the electric industry for review and veri-
fication. EPRI also contacted some facilities
directly to seek clarification on plant- and
unit-specific operational status.
A spreadsheet model was developed to esti-
mate the cost to retrofit 125 facilities based on
existing cost estimates and a worksheet com-
pleted by facility owners. These 125 estimates
were then extrapolated to generate the national
retrofit cost estimate for all nuclear and fossil
generating stations. The study results provided
input for an economic model used to estimate
the number of units and megawatts at risk of
premature retirement if they were required to
retrofit closed-cycle systems. The model input
parameters included unit-specific capacity uti-
lization and hourly dispatch power generation
market information.
Results of this analysis were then used to
estimate the potential risk of localized elec-
tric system security or overload violations
as a result of unit retirements. A methodol-
ogy to quantify the environmental and social
impacts of retrofitting facilities with wet
mechanical-draft cooling towers was also de-
veloped and submitted to the EPA for review.
With the exception of a single natural draft
tower, mechanical-draft towers have been
used exclusively for wet closed-cycle cool-
ing for the last two decades and were the as-
sumed retrofit choice in our study.
The study also evaluated potential impacts
associated with salt drift, human health ex-
posures, public safety, noise, aesthetics, and
terrestrial and wildlife changes. Based on a
literature review and modeling of 26 repre-
sentative facilities, impacts were qualitatively
discussed, quantified, and/or monetized. The
quantified and monetized results were then
extrapolated to a national scale for compari-
son to the cost and benefits of retrofits.
To estimate the national economic benefits
of closed-cycle cooling retrofits, a three-tiered
approach was used. In Tier 1, the economic
value of commercial and recreational losses
was either acquired or generated based on
EPA methods. In Tier 2, the same losses were
estimated based on acceptable correlations
between impingement and entrainment loss
data for those facilities that entered data in
the EPRI Impingement and Entrainment Da-
tabase. In Tier 3, estimates were based on the
relationship between cooling water flow and
data from facilities that had conducted im-
pingement and entrainment studies for various
water body types and U.S. regions.
Study Results
The EPRI report examined the impact of the
proposed 316(b) rule in terms of the cost of
the retrofits, financial impact to ratepayers,
impacts to the electric system, other adverse
environmental impacts, and an evaluation of
the costs relative to benefits for a rule that
requires closed-cycle cooling retrofits.
Cost of Retrofits. EPRI identified 428
facilities that use greater than 50 million gal-
lons per day (mgd) of once-through cooling
water, representing approximately 312,000
MW of electricity: 60,000 MW from the
39 nuclear facilities and 252,000 MW from
the 389 fossil facilities. While closed-cycle
cooling is commonly employed for new
generating facilities, the cost of retrofitting
|
November 2012 54
WATER & POWER
existing facilities can be significantly higher
due to 11 factors:
Availability of suitable on-site tower
location
Distance from turbine/condenser to tower
location
Site geological conditions (rock? soft
sand? wet?)
Existing above-ground or underground in-
frastructure
Need to reinforce existing condenser and
water tunnels
Need for tower plume abatement
Potential impact of on- or off-site salt drift
Need for noise-reduction measures
Use of alternative sources of cooling tower
makeup water
Modifications to plant equipment (such as
auxiliary cooling systems)
Condenser reoptimization
Based on these factors, the capital cost to
retrofit once-through cooled units with wet
mechanical-draft cooling towers was esti-
mated to be $42.4 billion for the 389 fossil
facilities and $19.6 billion for the 39 nuclear
facilities (Table 1). Also estimated were the
annual cost of power to operate the cool-
ing tower fans and pumps ($427 million for
fossil facilities and $141 million for nuclear
facilities) and the cost of reduced generation
output due to the loss of plant efficiency with
closed-cycle cooling systems compared to
once-through systems ($527 million for fossil
and $182 million for nuclear facilities).
Additionally, many facilities would incur
a significant loss of revenue due to extended
outages that would be required, estimated at
$9 billion for fossil facilities and $8.3 billion
for nuclear facilities. The significantly great-
er proportional cost for the 39 nuclear facili-
ties results from the fact that nuclear units are
baseloaded with an average capacity utiliza-
tion on the order of 90% compared to fos-
sil units, some of which operate in peaking
mode and thus have much lower capacity fac-
tors. The total estimated present value costs,
assuming all once-through cooled facilities
were to retrofit, was over $95 billion for the
fossil and nuclear facilities.
Individual facility costs that were not includ-
ed in the study were permitting costs, costs for
labor and chemicals to operate and maintain the
cooling towers, and the cost of capital to finance
construction. The study also estimated that up
to 5% of the fossil generation capacity (15,600
MW) was at risk of premature retirement due to
inadequate space to install closed-cycle cooling
or the inability to acquire the necessary envi-
ronmental permits to construct cooling towers.
Financial Impact. An important area of un-
certainty is the actual number of facilities and
the associated MW generation that might be
retired if they were required to retrofit. Many
of the older fossil facilities have low capacity
utilization and, due to economic inefficiency,
may operate only for a few weeks or months
per year during periods of peak power demand.
Installation of closed-cycle cooling would fur-
ther reduce efficiency, with the result that many
older units may retire for economic reasons
rather than retrofit.
In some cases, retirements may require the
addition of new generation capacity, adding
to the cost of a national requirement to retrofit
with closed-cycle cooling.
The study estimated that about 26,000
MW of generation were at risk of premature
retirement for economic reasons, and the im-
pact varies among North American Electric
Reliability Corp. (NERC) Regions (Table 2).
The study then focused on five NERC Re-
gions: PJM, New England ISO, New York
ISO, ERCOT, and MISO. A modeling analy-
sis of those regions determined that PJM and
MISO had adequate new generation coming
online to meet reserve margins. However,
new unplanned generation would be required
for ERCOT (5,683 MW), ISO New Eng-
land (2,640 MW), and New York ISO (3,441
MW). The cost of new replacement genera-
tion was estimated to be just under $7 billion,
bringing the cost of a closed-cycle cooling
requirement to over $100 billion.
Impacts to the Electric System. The
study identified some 42,000 MW at risk of
premature retirement (26,000 MW of fossil
generation due to financial impacts and 15,600
MW5% of the fossil unitsdue to lack of
space to accommodate cooling towers or be-
cause of permitting issues).
Researchers modeled the potential power
system impacts of eliminating units in PJM,
New England ISO, New York ISO, ERCOT,
and MISO (those evaluated in the financial im-
pacts study). The model results found there is a
potential risk of localized security and/or volt-
age violations in each of the five regions. The
result is that there would be an additional cost
that was not quantified to install electric system
upgrades in these localized areas in order to
maintain electric system reliability.
It is important to note that modeling poten-
tial reliability impacts has a very high level of
uncertainty. One key factor is that once one
company makes a decision to retire a unit, it im-
mediately impacts the economics of other units,
decisions on planned electric system upgrades,
potential unit retirements, and new generation.
Thus, although modeling indicates potential for
voltage and security impacts to the system, the
precise location of those effects cannot be reli-
ably predicted.
Adverse Environmental Impacts. The re-
search considered the following environmental
and social impacts of closed-cycle cooling:
Plant type
Degree of difficulty
for retrofits Allocation (%) Flow (gpm) Cost (billions)
Fossil

Easy 22 30,691,540 $5.56
Easy/average 10 13,950,700 $3.18
Average 26 36,271,820 $9.97
Average/difficult 13 18,135,910 $6.17
Difficult 24 33,481,680 $13.56
More difficult 5 6,975,350 $3.98
Total fossil 100 139,507,000 $42.42
Nuclear Less difficult 30 12,836,700 $3.52
Intermediate 40 17,115,600 $7.86
More difficult 30 12,836,700 $8.27
Total nuclear 100 42,789,000 $19.56
Total facilities 182,296,000 $62.07
Table 1. Degree of difficulty allocations and capital cost for the con-
version to closed-cycle cooling. Source: EPRI

Region
All waterbody types
Units
at risk
Capacity
(MWe) at risk
PJM 21 3,250
ERCOT 25 5,458
ISO-NE 12 2,561
Midwest ISO 7 906
NYISO 11 3,325
SERC 38 3,044
FRCC 21 2,196
SPP 20 1,475
WECC 18 2,699
MRO 8 328
RFC 33 816
Totals 214 26,058
Table 2. Regional estimates of
the number of units and capacity
at risk. Source: EPRI
November 2012
|
WATER & POWER
Human health
Terrestrial resources
Water resources
Solid waste
Public safety and security
Quality of life
Greenhouse gases
Permitting issues
The overall significance of environmental
impacts varies on a site-specific basis. Facili-
ties located in urban and suburban areas tend
to have more social impacts due to exposure to
noise, drift, fogging, and visible vapor plumes;
rural facilities tend to have greater impacts on
agriculture and wildlife, depending on prox-
imity to farmland, state parks, wetlands, or
other wildlife habitat. Table 3 provides a sum-
mary of some of the quantified impacts.
Even with drift elimination, an estimated
29,000 tons/year of particulate matter (PM2.5
and PM10) would be generated. However, no
studies on the potential human health impacts
of cooling tower particulate matter have been
conducted, and the impact likely varies de-
pending on the composition of solids in the
cooling water.
It was estimated that about 25,000 metric
tons/year of biocides would be required to main-
tain cooling tower operations and that approxi-
mately 500 billion gallons/year of freshwater
would be lost to evaporation, roughly double the
loss from once-through cooling. This volume of
freshwater is sufficient to meet the potable water
needs of the state of Illinois.
The 39 once-through-cooled, baseloaded
nuclear facilities do not emit carbon dioxide
(CO
2
). However, it would take an estimated
six months on average to retrofit these fa-
cilities with closed-cycle cooling and likely
would require replacement power generation
from fossil facilities, resulting in an estimat-
ed 163 tons of CO
2
emissions.
The total willingness to pay to avoid the
social and environmental impacts resulting
from closed-cycle cooling retrofits was esti-
mated to be $33 million nationallyin other
words, what ratepayers would be willing
to pay to maintain the status quo. What the
study did not consider was the economic im-
pact to ratepayers for the cost of closed-cycle
cooling retrofits. The social and environmen-
tal costs break down as follows:
$13,000,000 for CO
2
emissions, estimated
from voluntary carbon credit prices
$16,000,000 for noise, estimated from
noise impact studies on housing prices
$2,400,000 for aesthetic impact, estimated
from studies of viewshed impact on hous-
ing prices
$970,000 for debris removal, estimated
from water cleanup event costs.
Impact type
Freshwater
facilities Great Lakes
Oceans, estuaries
and tidal rivers Total
PM (tpy) 2,000 800 27,100 29,800
Chlorine use (mt/yr) 18,000 7,000 NA 25,000
Evaporative water loss (billion gal/yr) 372 128 NA 500
Debris removal (tpy) 328 241 281 861
CO
2
(tpy); 6-month nuclear unit outage 74 22 67 163
Table 3. Some quantified impacts of a closed-cycle cooling retrofit re-
quirement. Source: EPRI
Notes: tpy = tons per year, mt/yr = metric tons/year.
|
November 2012 56
WATER & POWER
Many environmental and social impacts, including, but not limited
to, evaporative water loss, wildlife impacts, icing on roadways, biocide
usage, and salt damage from drift could not be monetized due to lack
of information.
Cost Relative to Benefits. The results of the analysis estimate
that the annual benefits associated with the impingement and entrain-
ment (I&E) reductions resulting from a national closed-cycle cool-
ing retrofit requirement would be approximately $16 million, with a
lower bound estimate of $13.8 million and an upper bound estimate
of $22.7 million. Table 4 provides benefit estimates for 57 facilities
for various dollar ranges.
The national estimated benefit of $16 million to retrofit once-
through-cooled facilities to closed-cycle cooling is on the same order
of magnitude as the willingness to pay estimate of $33 million to avoid
closed-cycle cooling and a fraction of the estimated cost of over $100
billion to retrofit facilities with closed-cycle cooling.
It should be noted that the EPA is engaged in a national willingness-
to-pay study to estimate non-use or other societal benefits that may
accrue. Preliminary partial results for that study were reported in the
Federal Register (Vol. 77, No. 113, June 12, 2012, or at http://water.epa.
gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa/316b/index.cfm). Including non-use
benefit estimates significantly increases the national benefit estimate.
However, these estimates tend to be highly subjective for a number of
reasons, such as because survey respondents were not informed that in
the majority of cases I&E reductions may not result in any measureable
fishery benefit and were not given a choice between using any extra in-
come to save fish versus paying for better health care, education, or ad-
dressing other environmental issues. (EPRI comments submitted on the
study can be found at www.nera.com/nera-files/PUB_UWAG_0712_
final.pdf. Nuclear Energy Institute comments can be found at www.nei.
org/filefolder/NEICommentEPANODAsurvey.pdf. )
EPRI 316(b) Research Implications Relative to the
Proposed Rule
The EPAs proposed rule (Federal Register, Vol. 76, No. 76, April 20,
2011), did not propose closed-cycle cooling as BTA for existing facili-
ties as its preferred option. However, the EPA requires all facilities us-
ing more than 125 mgd actual intake flow to evaluate fine-mesh screens
and closed-cycle cooling to address entrainment. The BTA decision
would be made on a site-specific basis and could range from closed-
cycle cooling to a determination that the existing cooling water intake
structure is BTA. In the Notice of Data Availability issued in June 2012
(Federal Register, Vol. 77, No. 112, June 11, 2012), the EPA stated it
was not the agencys intention to require closed-cycle cooling as BTA
for impingement.
The EPA considered three other options, any one of which could
serve as the basis for the final rule. Two of those options (Options
2 and 3) are based on closed-cycle cooling as BTA, but they affect
a somewhat different population of facilities than those assumed
by EPRI in its research and modeling. EPRI identified 428 once-
through-cooled facilities potentially affected by a retrofit requirement
(39 nuclear and 389 fossil). Under Option 2, only those facilities
withdrawing more than 125 mgd design intake flow rate (DIF) would
require use of closed-cycle cooling as BTA. The EPRI cost of retrofits
report provides retrofit cost estimates separately for nuclear and fossil
facilities. Since all of the once-through-cooled nuclear facilities use
more than 125 mgd DIF, there is no change for the estimated costs to
retrofit these facilities under Option 2.
Selecting only the fossil facilities using 125 mgd DIF rather than 50
mgd DIF as the closed-cycle cooling retrofit basis reduces the number
of affected fossil facilities from 389 to 322 (a reduction of 67 facilities).
However, these are the smallest facilities on the list, and retrofit costs
are directly related to the size of the facility. The 67 small facilities
represent only 2.9% of the total once-through-cooled fossil facilities
based on flow, and only 2.8% of total generation capacity. The effect of
not including these 67 facilities in the nationwide analysis results in a
relatively small reduction in the retrofit cost estimates and other impli-
cations of a closed-cycle cooling BTA requirement under Option 2.
Under Option 3, the proposed rule would cover additional steam elec-
tric facilities not included in the EPRI analysis based on facilities that
use more than 50 mgd DIF. As with Option 2, there would be no effect
on the study results for nuclear facilities. Though EPRI does not have a
good estimate of the number of fossil power generation facilities that use
less than 50 mgd, EPRI believes many of these facilities already employ
closed-cycle cooling and therefore do not affect research results. (The
EPA estimated 148 in-scope facilities had closed-cycle cooling: Federal
Register, Vol. 79, p. 22191, Exhibit IV-1, April 20, 2011.)
David Bailey (dbailey@epri.com) is senior project manager, Water
and Ecosystems, Electric Power Research Institute.
Dollar range
Number of facilities
in dollar range
Percentage of facilities in
dollar range
$0$10,000 23 40%
$10,000$50,000 14 25%
$50,000$100,000 6 11%
$100,000$500,000 10 18%
<$500,000 4 7%
Total 57 100%
Table 4. Distribution of commercial and recreational
impingement and entrainment economic loss esti-
mates for 57 facilities. Source: EPRI
Statement of Ownership, Management, and Circulation (Requester Publications Only)
1. Publication Title: POWER magazine 2. Publication Number: 0032-5929 3. Filing Date:
10/4/2012 4. Issue Frequency: Monthly 5. Number of Issues Published Annually: 12 6. An-
nual Subscription Price $87. Complete Mailing Address of Known Ofice of Publication:
Access Intelligence, 4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd Floor, Rockville, MD 20850-4024 Contact:
George Severine Telephone: 301-354-1706 8. Complete Mailing Address of Headquarters
or General Business Ofice Publisher: Access Intelligence, LLC, 4 Choke Cherry Road,
2nd Floor, Rockville, MD 20850-4024 9. Full Names and Complete Mailing Addresses of
Publisher, Editor, and Maging Editor: Publisher: Brian Nessen, 4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd
Floor, Rockville, MD 20850-4024 Editor: Robert Peltier, 4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd Floor,
Rockville, MD 20850-4024 Managing Editor: Gail Reitenbach, 4 Choke Cherry Road, 2nd
Floor, Rockville, MD 20850-4024 10. Owner if the publication is owned by a corporation,
give the name and address of the corporation immediately followed by the names and ad-
dresses of all stockholders owning or holding 1 percent or more of the total amount of stock:
Veronis Suhler Stevenson, 55 East 52nd Street, 33rd Floor, New York, NY 10055 11. Known
Bondholders, Mortgagees, and Other Security Holders Owning or Holding 1 Percent or More
of Total Amount of Bonds, Mortgages, or other Securities: None 12. Non-proit organiza-
tion: not applicable. 13. Publication: POWER magazine 14. Issue Date for Circulation Data:
September 2012.
Average No. of No. Copies of
15. Extent and Nature of Circulation: Copies Each Issue Single issue
During Preceding Nearest to
12 Months Filing Date
a. Total Number of Copies (Net press run) 54,604 53,496
b. Legitimate Paid and/or Requested Distribution
(1) Outside County Paid/Requested Mail Subscriptions 45,013 43,585
(2) Inside County Paid/Requested Mail Subscriptions 0 0
(3) Sales Through Dealers and Carriers, Street Vendors, 6,644 6,944
and Other Paid or Requested Distribution Outside USPS
(4) Requested Copies Distributed by Other Mail Classes 0 0
c. Total Paid and/or Requested Circulation 51,657 50,529
d. Nonrequested Distribution (By Mail and Outside the Mail)
(1) Outside County Nonrequested Copies 1,162 1,207
(2) Inside-County Nonrequested Copies 0 0
(3) Nonrequested Copies Distributed Through the USPS
by Other Classes of Mail 0 0
(4) Nonrequested Copies Distributed Outside the Mail
(Include Pickup Stands, Trade Shows, Showrooms,
and Other Sources) 842 757
e. Total Norequested Distribution 2,004 1,964
f. Total Distribution (Sum of 15c and 15e) 53,661 52,493
g. Copies not Distributed (Ofice, Returns, Spoilage, Unused) 943 1,003
h. Total (Sum of 15f and g) 54,604 53,496
i. Percent Paid and/or Requested Circulation 96.27% 96.25%
16. Publication of Statement of Ownership for a Requester Publication is required and will
be printed in the November 2012 issue of this publication
17. Signature of Owner: Don Pazour Date: 10/4/12 PS Form 3526-R, August 2012
November 2012
|
AIR QUALITY
Hazy Timetable for EPAs Proposed
Tighter PM2.5 Standards
On June 15, in response to a court order, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agen-
cy (EPA) proposed new lower limits on particulate matter (PM) emissions that
are scheduled for release in mid-December. Even with implementation de-
lays, now is a good time to start paying closer attention to the requirements
of the proposed standard.
P
articulate matter (PM) is a complex
mixture of extremely small particles and
liquid droplets. PM comprises a number
of components, including acids (such as ni-
trates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals,
and soil or dust particles. The size of particles
is directly linked to their potential for caus-
ing health problems. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) is concerned about
particles that are 10 micrometers in diameter
or smaller (PM10) because those are the ones
that generally pass through the throat and nose
and enter the lungs. Once inhaled, these par-
ticles can affect the heart and lungs and cause
serious health effects (Figure 1).
Particles may be emitted directly or formed
in the atmosphere by transformations of gas-
eous emissions such as sulfur oxides (SO
x
),
nitrogen oxides (NO
x
), and volatile organic
compounds (VOCs). Examples of secondary
particle formation include the following:
The conversion of sulfur dioxide (SO
2
) to
sulfuric acid droplets that further react with
gaseous ammonia to form various sulfate
particles such as ammonium sulfate.
Reactions involving gaseous VOC yield-
ing organic compounds with low ambient
temperature (saturation) vapor pressures
that condense on existing particles to form
secondary organic aerosol particles.
The EPA groups particle pollution into
two categories:
Inhalable coarse particles, such as those
found in industries handling dusty materi-
als like coal, are larger than 2.5 micrometers
and smaller than 10 micrometers in diam-
eter. These particles are classified as PM10.
Fine particles (PM2.5), such as those found
in smoke and haze, are 2.5 micrometers in
diameter and smaller. These particles can
be directly emitted from sources such as
forest fires, or they can form when gases
emitted from power plants react in the air.
Due to environmental concerns, coal-fired
power plants are required to operate a par-
ticulate collection system to control the re-
lease of particulate emissions. These systems
include inertial collectors (cyclone collec-
tors), fabric filter collectors (baghouses), wet
scrubbers, and electrostatic precipitators.
POWER has published a variety of articles
about PM standards and PM control technolo-
gies. The most recent examples (available in
the archives at www.powermag.com) include
Particulate Matter Air Quality Standards
Continue to Evolve (June 2011) and EPRI
Bridges Industry R&D Gaps (January 2012).
Regulating Particulates in the Past
The first rules regulating PM were promul-
gated in 1971 under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
Since that time, the EPA has continually up-
dated the PM standards (Table 1) to better
1. Particulate policy. Particulates of dif-
ferent diameters have different effects on the
human body and often originate from different
sources. PM10 and PM2.5 particles are eas-
ily inhaled and penetrate airways and lungs.
Source: California Environmental Protection
Agency Air Resources Board
Human hair
(60 mm diameter)
PM10
(10 mm)
PM2.5
(2.5 mm)
Hair cross section (60 mm)
2. The air is getting cleaner. This graph illustrates the reduction in the amount of the
six common pollutants (SO
2
, NO
x
, PM, CO, ozone, and lead) in relation to other key economic
indicators over the past two decades. Source: EPA
220%
200%
180%
160%
140%
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
-20%
-40%
-60%
-80%
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11
Gross domestic product
Vehicle miles traveled
Population
Energy Consumption
CO
2
emissions
Aggregate emissions
(Six common pollutants)
Year
|
November 2012 58
AIR QUALITY
protect human health and the environment.
The CAAs centerpiece has been the national
ambient air quality standards (NAAQs),
which were established for six pollutants:
sulfur dioxide, NO
x
, PM, carbon monoxide,
ozone, and lead (Figure 2).
PMs chemical and physical properties
vary greatly with time, region, meteorology,
and source category, thus complicating the as-
sessment of health and welfare effects. Since
the EPA completed the last PM standards
review in 2006, the agency has examined
hundreds of new studies. The new evidence
includes more than 300 new epidemiological
studies, many of which report adverse health
effects even in areas that meet the current
PM2.5 standards. The EPA also has consid-
ered analyses by agency experts.
Court Order Drives EPAs New
Proposed PM Standards
Under the CAA, the EPA is required to con-
sider revising its PM standards every five
years, and it last did so in 2006. Yet, as the
agency approached the five-year deadline in
October 2011, it announced that it wanted to
delay issuing revised PM rules until the sum-
mer of 2013 because it needed more time to
sift through the latest scientific research.
Eleven states, including New York and Cal-
ifornia, plus the American Lung Association
and the National Parks Conservation Associa-
tion, challenged the delay in court, arguing that
it violated the CAA. On June 2, 2012, Judge
Robert L. Wilkins ruled in the case (American
Lung Association v. U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, U.S. District Court, District
of Columbia) and ordered the EPA to sign a
proposed rule by June 7, a deadline that was
later extended under an agreement between
the agency and the plaintiffs.
On June 14, the EPA proposed to strength-
en the NAAQS for PM2.5. The agency also
proposed to retain the existing standards for
PM10. The agency said that its proposed
changes to the PM2.5 standards are consis-
tent with advice from its independent science
advisors, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory
Committee (CASAC).
Specifically, the agency proposed to take
the following actions:
Strengthen the annual PM2.5 health stan-
dard by setting the standard at a level
within the range of 12 micrograms per
cubic meter (g/m
3
) to 13 g/m
3
. The cur-
rent annual standard, 15 g/m
3
, has been
in place since 1997.
Retain the existing 24hour fine particle
standard, at 35 g/m
3
. The EPA set the
24hour standard in 2006.
Set a separate PM2.5 standard to improve
visibility, primarily in urban areas. The
EPA is proposing two options for this
24hour standard: at 30 deciviews or 28
deciviews. (A deciview is a yardstick for
measuring visibility.)
Retain existing secondary standards for
PM2.5 and PM10 identical to primary
standards to provide protection against
other effects, such as ecological impacts,
effects on materials, and climate impacts.
The EPA also proposed to retain the ex-
isting 24hour standard for PM10. This stan-
dard, with a level of 150 g/m
3
, has been in
place since 1987.
The EPA also made the following
proposals:
Grandfathering preconstruction permit-
ting applications that have made substan-
tial progress through the review process
at the time the final standards are issued.
The agency is taking this action to ensure
a smooth transition to the new standards.
Making updates and improvements to the
nations PM2.5 monitoring network that
include relocating a small number of mon-
itors to measure fine particles near heavily
traveled roads. The EPAs proposal does
not require additional monitors.
Updating the Air Quality Index for
particle pollution.
The EPA anticipates making attainment/
nonattainment designations by December 2014,
with those designations likely becoming effec-
tive in early 2015. A nonattainment area is a lo-
cation considered to have air quality worse than
the NAAQS as defined in the CAA Amend-
ments of 1970. Nonattainment areas must have
and implement a plan to meet the standard. An
area may be a nonattainment area for one pollut-
ant and an attainment area for others.
States would have until 2020 (five years af-
ter designations are effective) to meet the pro-
posed health standards. Most states are familiar
with this process and can build on current work
Final rule
Primary/
secondary Indicator
Averaging
time Level Form
36 FR 8186
Apr. 30, 1971
Primary TSP 24-hour 260 g/m
3
Not to be exceeded more than once
per year
Annual 75 g/m
3
Annual average
Secondary TSP 24-hour 150 g/m
3
per year
52 FR 24634
July 1, 1987
Primary and
secondary
PM10 24-hour 150 g/m
3
per year on average over a 3-year
period
Annual 50 g/m
3
Annual arithmetic mean, averaged
over 3 years
62 FR 38652
July 18, 1997
Primary and
secondary
PM2.5 24-hour 65 g/m
3
98th percentile, averaged over 3
years
Annual 15.0 g/m
3
over 3 years
3
Initially promulgated 99th percen-
tile, averaged over 3 years; when
1997 standards for PM10 were
vacated, the form of 1987 standards
remained in place (not to be ex-
ceeded more than once per year on
average over a 3-year period)
Annual 50 g/m
3
over 3 years
62 FR 38652
July 18, 1997
Primary and
secondary
PM2.5 24-hour 35 g/m
3
98th percentile, averaged over 3
years
Annual 15.0 g/m
3
over 3 years
3
per year on average over a 3-year
period
Table 1. Early evolution of PM standards. The first rules regulating particulate
matter were enacted in 1971 under the Clean Air Act. Since that time, the EPA has continu-
ally updated PM rules under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). By law, the
agency cannot consider costs in setting or revising NAAQS. Source: EPA
Notes: FR = Federal Register, PM = particulate matter, TSP = total suspended particulates.
November 2012
|
AIR QUALITY
to meet the news standards. A state may request
a possible extension to 2025, depending on the
severity of an areas PM2.5 problems and the
availability of pollution controls.
The CAA does not specify a date for states
to meet secondary PM2.5 standards; the EPA
and states determine that date through the state
implementation planning process. The same
controls that will be installed to meet the pri-
mary, healthbased standards will also help ar-
eas meet the secondary standards. In 2020, the
EPA expects virtually all counties will meet
the secondary standards without state/local re-
ductions. By law, the agency cannot consider
costs in setting or revising NAAQS.
The EPA intends to issue a regulatory impact
analysis that will estimate the potential benefits
and costs of meeting a revised annual health
standard in the year 2020. The proposed stan-
dards are expected to yield significant health
benefits, valued at $2.3 billion to $5.9 billion
annually for a proposed standard of 12 g/m
3

and $88 million to $220 million annually for
a proposed standard of 13 g/m
3
, according to
the EPA. The EPA will issue final standards by
Dec. 14, 2012, after holding hearings to seek
public comment. The proposed standards re-
flect the continuing trend of tightening the PM
NAAQS over time (Table 2).
How New PM Rules Affect the
Power Industry
In August, POWER interviewed Block An-
drews, PE, director of Strategic Environmen-
tal Solutions, and Robynn Andracsek, PE,
associate environmental engineer, Environ-
mental Studies and Permitting Division, with
the engineering firm Burns & McDonnell
about the new PM standards.
Previous government studies have shown
that the biggest environmental bang for your
buck is from reduction of fine particulate
matter, Andrews said. But, have we gotten
to the point of diminishing returns? I dont
know; I will defer this answer to the toxicolo-
gists and economists.
Andrews said that the EPA has a pro-
cess for evaluating the ambient air qual-
ity standards that includes a working group
(CASAC) with toxicologists that evaluates
health-based studies and uses the results to
set the NAAQS.
PM2.5 can be in a filterable (solid) form,
or a sulfate or nitrate condensable form,
Andrews said. For the filterable portion, air
dispersion modeling can be a problem if the
PM2.5 standard is lowered, especially with
coal-fired plants fugitive emission sources
such as ash handling and road and coal pile
dust. He said, Background PM2.5 levels to-
day are around 80% of the proposed standard.
This does not allow many additional impacts
from an existing or new facility.
Andrews explained that sulfate formation
is a chemical transformation of SO
2
emis-
sions. Natural gas combustion is relatively
free of SO
2
emission, but a coal plant stacks
SO
2
emissions will form sulfates. Nitrate for-
mation is a chemical transformation of NO
x

emissions. Both coal and natural gas com-
bustion would be expected to form nitrates.
Primary standards provide public health
protection, including protecting the health
of sensitive populations such as asthmat-
ics, children, and the elderly, Andrews said.
Secondary standards provide public welfare
protection, including protection against de-
creased visibility and damage to animals,
crops, vegetation, and buildings.
In addition, the EPA is proposing a new
visibility standard for the secondary NAAQS.
Some of the same atmospheric chemistry that
converts SO
2
and NO
x
to form sulfates and ni-
trates can also impact visibility, Andrews said.
A good amount of work to determine re-
gional haze impacts on Class I areas has been
performed. I have not seen any determinations
of visibility outside of the Class I, so it is un-
clear (no pun intended) what, if any impacts
this may have on the coal and natural gas
power plants beyond the primary standard,
Andrews said. My concern is that the visibili-
ty modeling results have not always correlated
well with the real world results. This could
require industry/industries to spend money
without a real visibility reduction return.
Andracsek explained that the model re-
quired for demonstrating compliance with
the PM2.5 NAAQS is AERMOD, which is
the EPAs most commonly used air disper-
sion modeling program. It has been around
for several years. The problem comes in
getting the model to demonstrate PM2.5
NAAQS compliance. The sum of modeled
impacts from the source, plus impacts from
their neighbors within at least 50 kilometers,
plus the background concentration is what
must be compared to the now lower PM2.5
annual NAAQS, she said.
There are two main issues related to prov-
ing PM2.5 NAAQS compliance, according to
Andracsek.
First, PM2.5 is made up of primary PM2.5
and secondary PM2.5. Primary PM2.5 is
what is normally thought of as very fine dust.
Secondary PM2.5 is formed from NO
x
, SO
x
,
VOCs, and ammonia that react chemically in
the air to form fine particulates. The EPA does
not yet have a method to calculate or model
secondary PM2.5, other than using SO
x
and
NO
x
as surrogates. This leaves a hole in com-
plying with any PM2.5 NAAQS, she said.
Second, the background levels for PM2.5
in many parts of the country are 8 mg/m
3
to 11
mg/m
3
. When the NAAQS is lowered from 15
mg/m
3
to 12 mg/m
3
or 13 mg/m
3
, the background
does not change, Andracsek said. This leaves
an even smaller amount of available room for
source emissions. Combined with the fact that
the models are quite conservative, modeling
compliance with the PM2.5 NAAQS at 15 mg/
m
3
is problematic; modeling compliance at 12
mg/m
3
to 13 mg/m
3
is stifling.
The cost to run PM2.5 modeling at a fa-
cility varies greatly, depending on the spe-
cific circumstances, according to Andracsek.
Modeling stacks is much easier and faster
than modeling fugitive emissions. A lot of
primary PM2.5 is from fugitive emissions. A
dispersion modeling project would run from
$15,000 to $50,000 and take from one to six
Year Regulatory action
1971 TSP NAAQS promulgated
1987 PM NAAQS revision; PM10 standards introduced
1997
PM NAAQS revision; PM2.5 standards introduced; PM10 Surrogacy Policy established where-
by permit applicants are allowed to use compliance with PM10 NSR requirements (including
PM10 NAAQS) as a surrogate approach for meeting PM2.5 NSR requirements
2006 PM2.5 24-hour NAAQS revised/lowered; PM10 annual NAAQS revoked
2008
PM2.5 NSR rules finalized; significant emission rates established for primary PM2.5 emis-
sions (10 tpy); and the PM2.5 precursors, SO
2
and NO
x
(40 tpy each)
2010 Final PSD increments, SILs, and SMC for PM2.5 promulgated
2011
PM10 Surrogacy Policy ended; PSD compliance demonstrations required for PM2.5 emis-
sions, including accounting of direct PM2.5 emissions and secondarily formed PM2.5 from
precursors; states must establish limits taking into consideration the condensable fraction
of PM2.5 emissions
2012 (proposed)
Stricter annual PM2.5 NAAQS; secondary standard to address urban visibility concerns; revi-
sion of numerous monitoring requirements
Notes: NAAQS = National Ambient Air Quality Standards, NO
x
= nitrogen oxides, NSR = New
Source Review, PM = particulate matter, PSD = Prevention of Significant Deterioration, SIL =
significant impact level, SIP = state implementation plan, SMC = significant monitoring concen-
tration, SO
2
= sulfur dioxide, tpy = tons per year, TSP = total suspended particulates.
Table 2. Regulatory milestones for PM NAAQS and related compliance
assessment requirements. Source: EPA
|
November 2012 60
AIR QUALITY
months, she said. This is a very rough esti-
mate. Compliance costs will vary depending
on what controls may be required to comply
with the PM2.5 NAAQS.
The rule states that, for now, meeting
the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS is sufficient to
demonstrate that the secondary visibility
standard is attained, Andracsek said. So if
the EPA issues its guidance along with the
revised final rule, there should be no further
analysis above the normal PM2.5 analysis
and, therefore, no additional cost above that
needed to run the model described above.
There is a lot of uncertainty, however, as to
whether or not the surrogacy policy would be
allowed to stand in court, especially in light
of the fact that visibility is already considered
for Class I analysis and the Best Available
Retrofit Technology regulations.
Andracsek explained that if the EPA re-
leases the new standard before the guidance
is finalized, applicants might then have to
follow the Federal Land Managers Air Qual-
ity Related Values Work Groups 2010 analy-
sis for long-range visibility (such as regional
haze) impacts, which would add $50,000 and
three months, or more, to the projects cost.
She added, It may not be possible to even
meet the regulation given the uncertainty
about the methodology. A big part of the
PM2.5 problem is the uncertainty and lack
of understanding about how these very fine
particulates behave in the atmosphere.
The Impact of CSAPRs
Nullification
On August 21, 2012, the U.S. Court of Ap-
peals for the D.C. Circuit vacated the Cross-
State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). Andrews
discussed the impact of the CSAPRs nul-
lification on coal-fired and gas-fired power
plants that have to install new air pollution
control equipment in order to comply with
the proposed PM2.5 NAAQS.
There have been two rules that were driv-
ing PM2.5 controls: CSAPR and the PM2.5
NAAQS. Since CSAPR has been vacated,
it is unlikely that EPA will have a replace-
ment rule in the near future. In fact, it took
EPA three years to replace the original CAIR
[Clean Air Interstate Rule], he said.
After a new CSAPR or similar rule is final-
ized, the states will be given an opportunity
to develop a State Implementation Plan (SIP),
which will have to be approved by the EPA
and give a reasonable timeframe for compli-
ance, according to Andrews. It could easily
be five years or more before any CSAPR com-
pliance would be expected, he said.
The NAAQS regulatory process can be
the timeframe driver as well, Andrews ex-
plained. A typical process would require
states to monitor PM2.5 (which has been
happening for several years), submit to the
EPA a list of non-attainment areas, develop
SIPs for compliance, obtain EPA approval of
the SIPs, and then require controls in or near
non-attainment areas.
The EPA may set a timeframe for this pro-
cess, but history tells us that the timeframe is
not always reliable for a variety of reasons. It
could easily be five years or more before any
PM2.5 NAAQS compliance would be expect-
ed, Andrews said. The bottom line is that a
controls timeframe is uncertain. History tells
us that NAAQS-driven control requirements
are rarely required immediately.
Will Plants Require New Equipment
to Meet Stricter PM Standards?
Andrews explained that for fugitive dust
emissions, meeting the new standard could
require more enclosed coal piles and fur-
ther fugitive dust reduction techniques, such
as road paving, surfactants, and baghouses,
where feasible. For SO
2
and NO
x
emissions,
further reductions could be required such as
scrubbers and selective catalytic reduction
(SCR) technology, he said.
POWER asked Andrews if he thinks the air
POWER magazi ne POWERnews COAL POWER GAS POWER
MANAGI NG POWER POWER Handbook powermag. com
POWER connect Careers i n POWER ELECTRI C POWER
To subscribe, visit www.powermag.com/subscribe or call 847-763-9509.
If you need information on the global power
generation industry, look to first.
www.powermag.com
IN PRINT, IN PERSON, AND ONLINE
November 2012
|
AIR QUALITY
pollution control equipment currently used
by most U.S. coal-fired and gas-fired power
plants will be sufficient to enable them to
comply with the proposed secondary PM2.5
NAAQS. He answered, I dont think we
know at this point what scale of reductions
will be required to meet the proposed visibil-
ity standards. However, if the 24-hour PM2.5
surrogate policy continues to be in place,
then it would have a limited impact.
Andrews had no estimates about the costs
of installing air pollution control technol-
ogy that would enable fossil-fired plants to
comply with the proposed PM standards. He
explained that he would first have to know
if the power plants in question are going
to retrofit a unit, retire, build new genera-
tion, or rely on the market for power. Once
we know this answer, then we would have
to know the stringency and form of the
regulation(s), he said.
When discussing the probable impact that air
pollution control upgrades will have on affected
power plants bottom lines, Andrews referred
to the good old days when there were fewer
moving parts in the environmental arena. He
explained that today there is great uncertainty
about the required controls and cost impacts re-
lated not only to air regulations, but also water
and coal combustion residuals regulations.
Is retrofitting a coal unit cost competitive
compared to buying market power or other
forms of energy such as natural gas com-
bustion? An answer to this question is quite
utility-specific, according to Andrews. It will
depend on many factors, including delivered
fuel costs, environmental costs, the power
market pricing in specific geographical areas
and the individual utilitys future projections
of key cost and risk issues
Historically, energy companies have
done a great job of balancing regulations,
ratepayer costs, andfor investor-owned
utilitiesa reasonable rate of return for the
shareholders, Andrews said. Their job is
even harder today, but I am confident that
they will continue to perform well.
EEI Responds to Proposed PM
Standards
The Edison Electric Institute (EEI), an asso-
ciation of shareholder-owned electric compa-
nies, filed its comments about the proposed
PM standards with the EPA on August 31,
and referred to the regulatory treadmill of
NAAQS standards. The group said that if
the proposed PM rules are finalized, the EPA
will be adding to the already existing list of
separately enforceable PM NAAQS. Accor-
ing to the EEI, finalization of the proposed
PM rules would mean that the EPA and the
states will be concurrently implementing:
The 1997 PM2.5 annual standard.
The 2006 PM2.5 24-hour standard.
A new 2012 PM2.5 annual standard.
A potentially revised 2012 PM2.5 24-hour
standard.
The 1987 PM10 24-hour standard.
A new 2012 secondary PM2.5 visibility
standard.
The 2006 secondary PM2.5 standards as
newly targeted on other welfare effects
apart from visibility.
Under the EPAs currently planned sched-
ule for NAAQS reviews, a new ozone stan-
dard could be promulgated in 2014 that
would layer on top of existing standards and
potentially add another secondary standard
to the two 2012 PM2.5 secondary standards,
according to the EEI. In addition, during this
time period, the newly revised NO
2
and SO
2

NAAQS will be implemented, requiring ad-
ditional designations and SIP submittals.
The EEI said that the EPA needs to do a
far better job of coordinating these regula-
tions and minimizing their overall burden
for the agency itself, states, and regulated
entities. The current situation causes an
immense waste of resources and, given the
lengthy process of designating new nonattain-
ment areas and revising SIPs, fosters years of
uncertainty for states, local governments, and
industry that are affected by revised NAAQS,
it said. The industry group commented that
the EPA should, instead, seek to rationalize
its NAAQS process to better conform to ex-
isting executive orders.
Looking Ahead
Currently, the proposed PM standards imple-
mentation timeline is unpredictable because
of the complicated implementation process.
The most likely scenario would require the
individual states to monitor PM2.5, submit a
list of non-attainment areas to the EPA, de-
velop SIPs for compliance, obtain EPA ap-
proval of the proposed SIPs, and then require
controls in or near non-attainment areas.
Even though the implementation process
could take as long as five years, regulated fa-
cilities need to start planning for how to deal
successfully with compliance and permitting
issues. The increased complexity of PM2.5
NAAQS compliance will no doubt boost fa-
cility costs and staff work hours. Therefore,
it is important to begin assessing projected
PM2.5 emissions and possible permitting
problems to prepare for and, hopefully, avoid
permitting hurdles and delays.
Angela Neville, JD, is senior editor of
POWER.
new catalog available:
www.superbolt.com
www.nord-lock.com
The Nord-Lock Group has provided
over 30 years of safe, reliable bolting
to the Power industry. With a wide
range of solutions, including wedge-
locking technology and Superbolt
tensioners, our engineers are ready to
solve your critical bolting challenges!
Your trusted partner
for bolted joints
|
November 2012 62
PLANT DESIGN
The Evolution of Steam
Attemperation
The fundamental design principles and process for modern steam desuper-
heating, or the attemperation of superheated steam in the power gen-
eration industry, have been evolving since the early 1930s. Meeting the
requirement for steam quantity, quality, and temperature consistency is
the foundation of traditional attemperator component design, particularly
for fast-response combined cycle plants.
By Martin-Jan Strebe and Arvo Eilau, Tyco Valves & Controls
I
ncreases in steam and combustion turbine
operating temperatures and capacity that
are inherent in the quest to increase steam
cycle efficiency are advancing metallurgy
technology. At the same time, diverse opera-
tional requirementsincluding cycling and
low-load and load-following operations
have added complexity to the design of to-
days combined cycle (CC) plants. Increased
final superheated steam volumes and temper-
atures coupled with these diverse operational
modes are, in turn, challenging many other
vital plant components and systems, particu-
larly the steam attemperator system.
Attemperator Design Overview
An excellent attemperation system for a mod-
ern CC plant requires a balance of design ef-
ficiency, component flexibility, and system
reliability. Rapidly varying load conditions
place strenuous duty cycles on steam attem-
peration components and downstream appa-
ratus. On average, the attemperator system
will experience 700 to 1,000 thermal cycles
per year of normal operation. The thermal
cycles can double in a cycling unit.
Most modern heat-recovery steam genera-
tion (HRSG) superheated steam attemperator
component designs can be characterized as
either circumferential, probe, or a combi-
nation of both technologies. As with many
complex engineering components, designs
evolve from functional requirements derived
from expected plant operations. Each of these
design categories has a unique set of require-
ments that must be met to achieve expected
levels of plant performance and efficiency.
One of the more common superheater attem-
perator designs used in the HRSG CC market
today is a circumferential spray design (Figure
1). The primary function of this design is to
inject water perpendicular to the steam flow
through multiple fixed or floating spray nozzles
via a penetration in the main steam pipe wall and
the attemperators inner spray liner or protective
shield located inside the pipe. The nozzles pro-
duce mechanical atomization of the water drop-
lets into the superheated steam flow. This design
will often utilize external circumferential piping
to the main steam pipe for water supply to the
individual spray nozzles in conjunction with a
remote spraywater control station.
An alternative design for steam tempera-
ture control integrates a probe unit within the
pipe. This design is divided into two major
categories: integrated units (IU) and separat-
ed units (SU). Integrated probes incorporate
the spraywater control valve function within
the component (Figure 2). SUs offer a probe-
style spray for water atomization with a re-
mote spraywater control valve and external
water supply piping (Figure 3). The probe
application, whether of IU or SU design, em-
ploys single or multiple spray probes into the
superheated steam flow, spraying water drop-
lets parallel with the steam flow.
1. Circumferential in-line attemperator. In this design, water is injected perpen-
dicular to the pipe steam flow through spray nozzles to desuperheat steam. Source: Tyco Valves
& Controls
In-line
attemperator
Steam flow
DCS
TIC
2. Probe-style IU desuperheater. In this design, an integrated flow control valve is
inserted into a pipe through which water is injected into the flowing steam. A downstream
probe measures the downstream temperature and is used to control the water flow. Source:
Tyco Valves & Controls
Steam flow
DCS
TIC
November 2012
|
PLANT DESIGN
Whether an attemperation system is cir-
cumferential or probe style in design, it must
be supported by robust integrated control
components and control functionality. The
placement, design, and function of tempera-
ture probes are critical. A spraywater control
valve or valves must enable bubble tight
shutoff, and manual valves required for com-
ponent and system isolation should be rou-
tinely inspected.
Most current HRSG steam attemperator
systems are designed for minimal to zero
water flow at maximum steam flow. CC
plants that are dispatched through automated
load-following management systems or au-
tomatic generation controls will see constant
superheated steam attemperation as load is
increased or decreased to meet fluctuating
megawatt demand. This mode of operational
dispatch will stress existing design limita-
tions of the attemperation system.
Common system and component failure
issues associated with extreme cycling con-
ditions are:
Spraywater control valve packing leaks or
packing blowout.
Wetting or droplet impingement of down-
stream thermal probes.
Nozzle spring failure.
Nozzle cracking or erosion.
Linear weld attachment (pin) cracking or
complete line failure.
Main steam pipe cracking.
Foreign object damage to the steam
turbine.
Engineering and Design
Considerations
Attemperator system components are de-
signed and engineered to an expected life
span, based on detailed 3-D finite analysis
computer models, operational case histories,
material composition, and expected thermal
cycles associated with each component.
Some shortened component life in the steam
attemperator system can be attributed to sup-
porting operational systems, such as feedwa-
ter or condensate supply conditions, water
chemistry, distributed control system (DCS)
settings, or response times. These support
systems are usually designed for no or mini-
mum spray conditions at design or baseload
conditions for maximum efficiency.
The attemperator system installed at a
plant designed for baseload may exhibit much
different operation when cycled. A functional
field test often proves prior factory test set-
tings to be inaccurate. The following is a
minimum list of supporting systems and pa-
rameters associated with the attemperator that
should be reviewed and/or inspected to mini-
mize the chance of downstream damage:
Feedwater or condensate supply pressure,
flow rate, and temperature at the spraywa-
ter control valve during various load con-
ditions, or at the attemperator probe if an
integrated design is present.
Thermal probes, operational temperature,
and location specifications should be veri-
fied and/or tested.
DCS logic settings should be consistent
with plant operation. The dead band of
the control signal should be within the re-
quired tolerance.
Water chemistry should be known through-
out the steam and condensate systems un-
der various load conditions.
This equipment, if not originally designed
for cyclical operation, can be redesigned or
modified to better suit current operational
conditions. Often, a presumed shortage of
feedwater or condensate spray capacity can
be attributed to a logic setting in the DCS for
valve position, or for response at a predeter-
mined load condition.
Additionally, if the plant infrastructure has
been in service for a period of years and has
experienced a series of routine control valve
preventative and corrective maintenance ac-
tions, operators may observe a minor, incor-
rect spraywater control valve stem position
setting. Thermal probes are often placed in-
correctly during unit construction, resulting
in probe wetting or water droplet impinge-
ment, which will result in inaccurate steam
temperature measurement.
Locating the Attemperator
In addition to mechanical design and field
operations, accurately predicting water drop-
let atomization is very important. However,
measuring droplet atomization in the field is
difficult. If atomization of spraywater into
the steam system is negatively affecting the
ability of the temperature probe to measure
downstream steam temperature correctly,
then severe overspray and underspray condi-
tions can produce increased thermal cycles
and component damage.
Thermal probe location is a first step in
verifying or eliminating probes as a possible
contributor to poor steam attemperator sys-
tem performance. Here are two general rules
for measuring and verifying the proper loca-
tion of upstream and downstream attempera-
tor thermal probes (in a straight pipe):
The upstream thermal probe should be a
minimum of five pipe diameters from the
attemperator location.
The downstream thermal probe should be
a minimum of 20 pipe diameters from the
attemperator location.
These rules of thumb should be used as
a quick check of an existing installation in
straight pipe and are useful in determining
if a gross error was made in thermal probe
placement. Droplet atomization calculations
can be used to determine the exact require-
ments and dimensions for the piping arrange-
ment and thermocouple locations.
Advances in Steam
Temperature Control
Precise steam temperature control has been a
challenge for steam plant operators since coal
was first shoveled into a furnace. Todays su-
perheat temperatures and daily plant cycling
place extraordinary stresses on critical com-
ponents. Effective steam temperature control
is needed to protect expensive downstream
equipment, such as the steam turbine.
In a typical CC plant, precise steam tem-
perature control often conflicts with compact
steam piping design. That makes it difficult
to select an attemperator that can operate in
the shortest possible straight length of pipe
yet with an effective evaporation rate. This is
particularly difficult when short pipe length
is coupled with a high turndown ratio and
the desire for a flat temperature distribution
across the steam pipe.
3. Probe-style SU desuperheater. This design is similar to that shown in Figure 2, but
the water flow to the desuperheater is controlled via a separate flow control valve. Source: Tyco
Valves & Controls
Steam flow
DCS
TIC
|
November 2012 64
PLANT DESIGN
Primary atomization of the feedwater
used to attemperate the steam is produced by
the nozzle design and geometry within the
desuperheater and the pressure differential
between the cooling water and the steam.
Together with the University of Eindhoven
in The Netherlands, Tyco Valves & Con-
trols commissioned a joint research project
to develop theoretical modeling of primary
atomization using computational fluid dy-
namics (CFD) analysis and laboratory laser
diffraction to analyze water droplet size upon
discharge from the desuperheater.
The study examined two nozzle designs,
spring-loaded and swirl nozzles. Initial re-
sults have identified that when operating at
25 bar (263 psi) with a 0.05 mm lift and K
v
=
0.047 (K
v
is a function of the nozzle design,
and it relates the flow through a nozzle as a
function of the fluid properties and the pres-
sure drop across the nozzle), spring-loaded
nozzles produce droplet sizes of 87 m (the
diameter of a human hair averages 30 m).
The same calculation for swirl nozzles at 25
bar, K
v
= 0.043 resulted in droplet sizes of
27 ma factor of two to four times smaller
than spring-loaded nozzles, depending on the
operational pressure range. Basic engineer-
ing guidelines indicate that the smaller drop-
let sizes will evaporate faster and provide
better desuperheater controllability.
Using this data, Tyco analyzed the sec-
ondary atomization characteristics evident
when the speed differential and drag forces
between the cooling water and pipeline me-
dia cause the droplets to split into smaller
sizes. By measuring the speed differential
of the two nozzle designs, Tyco is able to
define which nozzle achieves higher speeds
and therefore faster secondary atomization.
Optimum atomization will result in frictional
forces breaking the droplet size, which re-
sults in complete mixing and true tempera-
ture control and measurement.
The results of the Tyco desuperheater re-
search study demonstrate that swirl nozzle
designs offer enhanced performance and max-
imum use of water pressure drop for atomiza-
tion in the shortest possible length. Optimized
spray injection angles of swirl nozzles allow
equal temperature distribution within the pipe
and provide the highest turndown ratio using
mass flow control, rather than pressure control.
Having no springs or moving parts within the
nozzle, and no pressure drop and cavitation in
the control valve, maximizes the operational
life cycle of the swirl nozzle design compared
to spring-loaded nozzles.
Improving Desuperheater Design
The next generation of combustion turbines,
HRSGs, and steam turbines will be able to
operate at final steam temperatures that are
projected to reach 1,150F. As steam tempera-
tures rise, the need for tight steam control
also increases, and multiple design solu-
tions are required, depending on the specific
modes of operation expected from the plant.
At these higher steam temperatures it is im-
perative that potential weak points in a steam
temperature control system are identified be-
fore it is installed in the field. That means re-
lying on modern engineering techniques, 3-D
design simulations, and the use of CFD and
finite element analysis (FEA) tools.
For example, using CFD and FEA allows
effective spacing of the nozzle openings to
prevent areas of high stress. These tools can
then be used to confirm whether the spray
water nozzles are designed at the optimum
angle for the shortest evaporation time and
the reduction of cold spots on the inner steam
line, which could lead to pipe cracking. Un-
derstanding the stress of higher cycling on
the attemperator system and desuperheater
nozzle units helps engineers to avoid future
mechanical stress-related failures and maxi-
mize system life.
CFD modeling techniques also enable
close examination of the droplet distribution
within the pipeline from both probe-style and
circumferential desuperheaters. This identi-
fies which design offers more equal droplet
distribution between the hot steam flow and
cooling water and therefore faster and more
effective evaporation. Using CFD analysis
provides greater understanding of attempera-
tor system design and how altering desuper-
heater geometry and spray nozzle angle can
improve droplet evaporation and minimize
impingement on the pipe wall.
FEA offers particular advantages dur-
ing the design and engineering phase of the
project by analyzing the heating and cooling
cycles of critical desuperheater components.
Attemperator components in the hot zone
are at increased risk of thermal fatigue and
shock. Using an FEA program, Tyco can
identify where a crack may appear in, for ex-
ample, the desuperheater nozzle and predict
the potential failure point over the service life
of the product.
Taking its steam temperature control testing
further, Tyco has carried out thermal fatigue
cycle analysis on its desuperheater nozzle in-
jection units in two material typesF91 and
Inconnel 718at steam temperatures up to
1,150F, water temperature of 307F, and up to
10,000 thermal cycles. These analysis tools
have allowed Tyco to improve the design ge-
ometry and metallurgy of its severe service
desuperheaters, which then allow engineers
to produce a design that will minimize stress
points and optimize the design and engineer-
ing characteristics of the attemperator system
(Figure 5).
4. Small droplets desired. This is a
laboratory image of droplet size analysis. The
size of the water droplets flowing into the
steam determines the rate of water atomi-
zation and steam temperature. Source: Tyco
Valves & Controls
5. TempLowHT flow path. TempLowHT incorporates a spraywater control valve lo-
cated outside the heat-affected zone, reducing the risk of thermal shock to critical components.
A single probe provides water droplet atomization through a series of nozzles located parallel to
the steam flow. Source: Tyco Valves & Controls
Steam flow
conditions
Control
shaft
Piston
Uninsulated
atmospheric
conditions
TempLowHT TempLow
Piston
November 2012
|
PLANT DESIGN
The Future of Steam
Attemperation Technology
Drawing on the results of the water droplet
study, CFD modeling, and FEA, Tyco has
developed a new circumferential steam at-
temperation system for the power generation
industry. CircTemp has been designed and
engineered to improve desuperheater perfor-
mance in severe-service boiler system appli-
cations. In developing the product, Tyco used
the advanced modeling techniques to establish
the performance characteristics and opera-
tional parameters. CircTemps design uses the
high-temperature, high-cycling experience
Tyco has gathered through its Narvik-Yarway
TempLowHT probe desuperheater and applies
it to the new product development.
Tyco started with a nozzle design that pro-
vided good primary atomization, ensuring
that droplets would only become smaller dur-
ing secondary atomization with the shortest
possible evaporation time. This approach has
reduced water droplet sizes from 100 to 20
, delivering shorter evaporation times. The
key is the higher turndown ratio achieved by
the CircTemp desuperheater, compared with
typical spring-loaded nozzle circumferen-
tial designs. Using mass flow, rather than a
pressure-reducing control valve, maintains a
constant pressure differential within the at-
temperator system. This increases the velocity
of the water discharged from the nozzle injec-
tion unit, producing smaller water droplets. In
spring-loaded nozzle designs, the control valve
is the limiting factor because the pressure after
the valve determines the discharge velocity.
The CircTemp design enables individual
nozzles to be shut off as the steam load fluc-
tuates. This means that a considerably higher
turndown ratio can be achieved by sequenc-
ing nozzle open and closing. As the load
increases, smaller nozzles and then larger
nozzles can be opened one at a time, as the
flow requires. When less flow is needed, the
nozzles can be closed in the reverse sequence:
first the largest and then the smaller nozzles.
Tycos study into optimum spraywater an-
gles also determined that cooling water entering
the pipe perpendicular to the steam flow could
impinge on the pipe wall. Optimized spray an-
gles and nozzle configuration creates different
cooling water spray patterns and ensures equal
distribution. This research into desuperheater
spraywater characteristics has influenced the
CircTemp design to prevent potential damage
to downstream pipe and liners by eliminating
cold spots on the inner pipe wall and maintain-
ing constant steam temperature.
Striving for higher CC plant efficiency
means higher steam temperatures and, prob-
ably, high cycling duty over the lifetime of
a plant. Components in direct contact with
the higher-temperature steam must have the
best materials, be based on state-of-the-art
research, and integrate field operating experi-
ence into their design and manufacture. One
of those components, the critical yet problem-
atic desuperheater valve, is ready today for the
next generation of combined cycle plants.
Martin-Jan Strebe (mstrebe@
tyco-valves.com) is director for global
product management control valves and
Arvo Eilau is marketing manager, Tyco
Valves & Controls. As of October 1, 2012,
Tyco Valves & Controls will be officially
known as Pentair Valves & Controls.
For more information, call Wrights Media
at 877.652.5295 or visit our website at
www.wrightsmedia.com
Leverage branded content from POWER magazine to create a more
powerful and sophisticated statement about your product, service,
or company in your next marketing campaign.
Contact Wrights Media to nd out how we can customize your
acknowledgements and recognitions to enhance your companys
marketing strategies.
Content Licensing for
Every Marketing Strategy
Marketing solutions t for:
Outdoor
Direct Mail
Print Advertising
Tradeshow/POP Displays
Social Media
Radio & Television

Logo Licensing | Reprints | Eprints | Plaques
In spring-loaded
nozzle designs, the
control valve is the
limiting factor.
|
November 2012 66
NEW PRODUCTS
TO POWER YOUR BUSINESS
Vertical Nuclear Waste
Cask Transporter
Intelliport Corp.s newly introduced self-loading OmniLoader
can safely and efciently move nuclear spent fuel using
proven uid suspension technology. Licensed to Wheelift
Systems, the vertical cask transporter is a self-loading
pneumatic-tired carrier that engages the cask at the
bottom, to then lift and carry, allowing for more efcient
movement within and between independent spent fuel
storage installations (ISFSI) without needing to comply
with single-failure proong. Operating on independent
uid suspension axles with air-lled jumbo jet tires, the
OmniLoader also features Wheelifts signature SynchroSteer
for all-direction travel over challenging and diverse
surfaces. The self-loading transporter is operated remotely,
thereby signicantly reducing dosage exposure risks to
operators and crew. Absence of an overhead lifting beam
allows the transporter to engage and lift the loaded cask
only enough to clear the oor before driving out of the fuel
building and directly to the ISFSI pad. (www.wheelift.com)
Dust-Repelling Coating for
Solar Thermal Mirrors
Germany-based solar mirror maker Flabeg has
developed an anti-soiling coating for solar
mirrors used in solar thermal power plant
applications, duraGLARE, which can repel dust
and sand from the surface of mirrors. Dirt on
mirrors can be reduced up to 50% compared
with panels that are not coated, the company
claims. As well as an increase in reection,
the enhanced performance of the collectors
means that the effective solar area can also
be made smaller, and this would cut the need
for additional collectors and their
components. The coating has been tested for
several months in various climate zones
worldwide. (www.abeg.com)
Spent Fuel Multi-Monitor System
The new 1E-qualied CL86 Plus Spent Fuel Pool Multi-
Monitor System from Fluid Components International (FCI) integrates three
critical measurements: continuous level, point level, and temperature into
a multi-variable solution designed specically for spent fuel pool (SFP)
applications in nuclear power plants. Maintaining water levels within
spent fuel pools is of vital importance to ensure that spent fuel is kept
cool and insulated, preventing the release of radiation. The new CL86 Plus
Monitoring System features integrated continuous water level, multiple
point level wet/dry indication and alarms, and water temperature sensors.
These precision sensors operate independently of one another, offering the
reliability and dependable accuracy required in demanding nuclear power
plant installations.
The CL86 Plus provides discrete and independent outputs of each
measurement for interface with the plant control room and alarm
systems. The CL86 Plus is ideal for both new and retrot SFP installations.
It consists of a unied probe assembly that is immersed in the SFP
and manufactured to the exact length specied for the depth of the
application. The sensor design is an extension of FCIs proven thermal
dispersion technology for the nuclear industry. Sensor wires and electronics
interface junction box are housed in a rugged metal enclosure that is
water-tight and resistant to falling debris. (www.uidcomponents.com)

November 2012
|
NEW PRODUCTS
Inclusion in New Products does not imply endorsement by POWER magazine.
Improved Thermal Images
Measurement technology specialist Testo
announced the new Testo 875i thermal imager,
a professional quality and versatile thermal
imager with very high thermal sensitivity,
outstanding image quality, and simplied
ease of use. With the devices high thermal
sensitivity of less than 50 mK, and the
outstanding image quality of 160 x 120 pixels
(which can be increased to 320 x 240 pixels
with SuperResolution technology), even the
smallest details and the slightest temperature
differences can be identied. The new imager
allows the easy and safe detection of areas of
interest in many thermography applications.
The thermal images are visualized in real time
on a 3.5-inch display. Critical temperatures
and hot-cold spots can be displayed directly
on the display as well. Verbal notes can be
captured by the thermographer via a headset
and archived as part of the image le for later
recall. (www.testo.com)
Portable Milling Machine for Linear and
Gantry Milling
The Climax LM5200 and
LM6200 portable milling
machines are designed
with a split rail system
to easily perform both
linear and gantry milling
with a minimum of
changeovers. A rigid,
modular bed design
allows shorter bed
sections to be combined
to t the length of
the work area, without
losing rigidity, and
to extend the bed by
two or three times
its original length.
With just a few simple
changeouts, bed lengths
can be extended to 192 inches and RAM length to 116 inches. The
machines enable precision milling, drilling, and boring to be done
more efciently to meet tight tolerances.
Features include reduced-friction rail technology for continuous,
nonstick slip travel throughout the entire length of the piece being
machined; milling head that can be rotated 360 degrees; heavy-duty
spindle design; and choice of power units for aggressive milling in any
position. Applications include pump and motor mounts, compressor
and heat equipment foundations, exchanger faces, sole plates, as
well as other metal pieces with at and rounded surfaces. (www.
climaxportable.com)
Combination Cutting Torch
ESAB introduced a new, improved line of combination cutting torches
as part of the new Purox Elite Series of gas apparatus products. The
Purox Elite Series Combination Torch includes the WH-4200 welding
handle and the CA-4200 cutting attachment. The torch welds material
up to 1 inch thick and cuts up to 8 inches in thickness. The torch
delivers superior safety with its tubeless extruded handle that
minimizes the potential of gases mixing in the handle. This tubeless
handle design, along with the torchs head injector, contains any
ashback that could occur at the furthest point from the user. It also
features color-coded pressure adjustment knobs for quick and easy
identication of gases. The torch is properly weighted for comfort and
reduced operator fatigue. (www.esab.com)
|
November 2012
68
Opportunities in Operations and Maintenance,
Project Engineering and Project Management,
Business and Project Development,
First-line Supervision to Executive Level Positions.
Employer pays fee. Send resumes to:
POWER PROFESSIONALS
P.O. Box 87875
Vancouver, WA 98687-7875
email: dwood@powerindustrycareers.com
(360) 260-0979 l (360) 253-5292
www.powerindustrycareers.com
Need help? Need a job?
LINEAL
RECRUITING
SERVICES
Contact Lisa Lineal in confidence
www.Lineal.com LisaLineal@Lineal.com
Toll free 877-386-1091
Electric Power Systems & Service Specialists
Se habla Espaol
Exothermic Engineering hires early retirees with
power plant industry expertise. Enjoy flexibility
working from home and top rate pay on challenging
projects in your area of technical expertise.
Visit www.ExoEng.com
Exothermic Engineering LLC
24 / 7 EMERGENCY SERVICE
BOILERS
20,000 - 400,000 #/Hr.
DIESEL & TURBINE GENERATORS
50 - 25,000 KW
GEARS & TURBINES
25 - 4000 HP
WE STOCK LARGE INVENTORIES OF:
Air Pre-Heaters Economizers Deaerators
Pumps Motors Fuel Oil Heating & Pump Sets
Valves Tubes Controls Compressors
Pulverizers Rental Boilers & Generators
847-541-5600 FAX: 847-541-1279
WEB SITE: www.wabashpower.com
FOR SALE/RENT
POWER
EQUIPMENT CO.
444 Carpenter Avenue, Wheeling, IL 60090
wabash
READER SERVICE NUMBER 201
George H. Bodman
Pres. / Technical Advisor
Ofce 1-800-286-6069
Ofce (281) 359-4006
PO Box 5758 E-mail: blrclgdr@aol.com
Kingwood, TX 77325-5758 Fax (281) 359-4225
GEORGE H. BODMAN, INC.
Chemical cleaning advisory services for
boilers and balance of plant systems
BoilerCleaningDoctor.com
READER SERVICE NUMBER 204 READER SERVICE NUMBER 205
POWER PLANT BUYERS MART
Regardless of the surface, MoleMaster
has a media blasting solution for:
From Abrasive Blasting using a wide variety
of media to low-abrasive Dry Ice Blasting,
MoleMaster does it all safely and eficiently!
www.molemaster.com
Toll Free: 800.322.6653 Fax: 740.374.5908
info@molemaster.com
Media Blasting Services
Cleaning surfaces
Sanitizing surfaces
Preparing surfaces for painting
Routine cleaning or to remove smoke
and other surface stains
CONDENSER BRUSHES
PLUGS SCRAPERS
IN STOCK SHIP TODAY
MADE IN THE USA
JOHN R. ROBINSON INC. Since 1907
Condenser and Heat Exchanger Tools & Services
Ph. 718-786-6088 Fax: 718-786-6090
Email: jrrinc@earthlink.net
www.johnrrobinsoninc.com
P
O
W
E
R

P
L
A
N
T

B
U
Y
E
R
S

M
A
R
T
READER SERVICE NUMBER 207 READER SERVICE NUMBER 208
November 2012
|
POWER www.powermag.com
69
PRODUCT Showcase
Model A100
Plug Resistant
Orifice for critical
drain lines
CU Services LLC
725 Parkview Cir,
Elk Grove Vlg, Il 60007
Phone 847-439-2303
rcronfel@cuservices.net
www.cuservices.net
When a plugged
drain line would
mean disaster...
Safety Shutter
Keeps NFPA 70E risk category =
OFF Button
Provides push button
circuit disconnection
F
R
E
E
S
A
M
P
L
E
S
A
V A
I L
A
B
L
E
Disconnect switch rated plugs
& receptacles are ideal for cord
drop applications technicians
can easily deenergize equipment
without having to wear cumbersome
PPE and without having to climb a
ladder to disconnect power.
800.433.7642
meltric.com
Turbine Controls
Woodward, GE, MHC
Parts and Service
TurboGen (610) 631-3480
info@turbogen.net
NEED CABLE? FROM STOCK
Copper Power to 69KV; Bare ACSR & AAC Conductor
Underground UD-P & URD, Substation Control Shielded
and Non-shielded, Interlock Armor to 35KV, Thermocouple
BASIC WIRE & CABLE
Fax (773) 539-3500 Ph. (800) 227-4292
E-Mail: basicwire@basicwire.com
WEB SITE: www.basicwire.com
CONDENSER OR GENERATOR AIR COOLER TUBE PLUGS
THE CONKLIN SHERMAN COMPANY, INC.
Easy to install, saves time and money.
ADJUSTABLE PLUGS- all rubber with brass insert. Expand it,
install it, reverse action for tight t.
PUSH PULL PLUGS-are all rubber, simply push it in.
Sizes 0.530 O.D. to 2.035 O.D.
Tel: (203) 881-0190 Fax:(203)881-0178
E-mail: Conklin59@aol.com www.conklin-sherman.com
OVER ONE MILLION PLUGS SOLD
This guidebook exclusively features clean coal articles including
full charts, photographs, graphs and step-by-step instructions
previously featured in POWER magazine.

Topics Include:
TechnologyoptionsforcapturingCO2
Exploringthemanycarboncaptureoptions
ClimatechangeconcernsdriveprojectstocurbCO2
AlstomschilledammoniaCO2-captureprocessadvances
toward commercialization
Optionsforreducingacoal-iredplants
carbon footprint: Part I
Optionsforreducingacoal-iredplants
carbon footprint, Part II
Chemicalloopingandcoal
AFreshLookatCoal-DerivedLiquidFuels
CapturingCO2:GasCompressionvs.
Liquefaction
CommerciallyAvailableCO2Capture
Technology
Oxy-Combustion:APromisingTechnology
forCoal-FiredPlants
UndergroundCoalGasiication:
AnotherCleanCoalOption
AvailableinaPDFformat.60pages.
POWER magazines
Clean Coal Guidebook
C
l
e
a
n
C
o
a
l
G
u
i
d
e
b
o
o
k
Order your copy online at
www.powermag.com/powerpress
or call 888-707-5808.
21079
November 2012
|
ADvERTISERS INDEx
Enter reader service numbers on the FREE Product Information Source card in this issue.
AREvA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37. . . . . . . . . .18
www.areva.com
Atlas Copco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26. . . . . . . . . .14
www.atlascopco.us
Bentley Systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41. . . . . . . . . .20
www.bentley.com
Bilfinger Piping Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25. . . . . . . . . .13
www.piping.bilfinger.com
Chatham Steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19. . . . . . . . . .10
www.chathamsteel.com
Chromalloy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. . . . . . . . . . .5
www.chromalloy.com
Conbraco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55. . . . . . . . . .23
www.apollovalves.com
Doosan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover 3. . . . . . . . . .26
www.doosanheavy.com
Dresser-Rand. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52. . . . . . . . . .22
http://www.dresser-rand.com
Fluke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . .6
www.fluke.com
Fluor Corp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21. . . . . . . . . .11
www.fluor.com
HACH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17. . . . . . . . . . .9
www.hach.com
Magnetrol. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . .2
www.magnetrol.com
MAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover 2. . . . . . . . . . .1
www.man-engines.com
Matrix Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35. . . . . . . . . .17
www.matrixservice.com
Orion Instruments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39. . . . . . . . . .19
www.orioninstruments.com
Pentair valves & Controls. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. . . . . . . . . . .3
www.natronx.com
ProEnergy Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Cover 4. . . . . . . . . .25
www.proenergyservices.com/experience
Structural Integrity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. . . . . . . . . . .8
www.structint.com
Superbolt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61. . . . . . . . . .24
www.superbolt.com
Swagelok. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13. . . . . . . . . . .7
www.swagelok.com
Westinghouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . . .4
www.westinghousenuclear.com
Page
Reader
Service
Number Page
Reader
Service
Number
CLASSIFIED ADvERTISING
Pages 68-69. To place a classified ad, contact
Technol ogi es f or coal - f i r ed power pl ant s ar e evol vi ng rapi dl y, and
COAL POWER has evol ved t oo. I n i t s l at est onl i ne f or mat you get
ever yt hi ng you val ued i n pr i nt and so much mor e:
Access t o COAL POWER wher ever you can use a br owser.
Techni cal ar t i cl es, coal power news, bl ogs, opi ni on, and i nf or mat i on.
Easy r et r i eval of ar chi ved COAL POWER f eat ur es.
I nst ant access t o our adver t i ser s f or mor e i nf or mat i on about t hei r pr oduct s.
The abi l i t y t o comment on st or i es and shar e your knowl edge wi t h t he
coal - bur ni ng power pl ant communi t y.
J ob boar d.
Subscr i be t oday f or e- mai l al er t s when each new i ssue i s post ed.
e- mai l : subscr i be@coal power mag. com
Then vi si t t he onl i ne home of COAL POWERwww. coal power mag. com
From the edi tors of POWER: The onl i ne magazi ne devoted to
the coal -fi red power generati on i ndustry
POWER
CP ad_7x4.875.indd 1 5/13/10 2:00:00 PM
18_PWR_110112_Class&AdIndex.indd 71 10/13/12 6:24:07 PM
|
November 2012 72
COMMENTARY
Preparing for the EPAs
Cooling Water Rule
By Harold M. Blinderman, JD
W
ith the U. S. Environmental Protection Agencys (EPAs)
issuance of a final rule regulating cooling water intake
structures at existing facilities potentially less than a
year away, facilities should be paying close attention to the pro-
posed rules provisions, data requests, and study requirements as
they evaluate their compliance options and begin to formulate
their compliance strategy.
Overview of Proposed Rule
The proposed rules primary purpose is to regulate existing facili-
ties utilizing once-through cooling water systems. The rule, as
proposed, applies to all existing power plants and manufactur-
ing facilities that have the design capability to withdraw more
than 2 million gallons per day (mgd) from U.S. waters and use
at least 25% of such water exclusively for cooling water pur-
poses. The EPA states that 355 facilities across the U.S. employ
once-through cooling. Of the 104 operating U.S. nuclear units,
60% use once-through cooling systems, according to the Nuclear
Energy Institute.
Under the proposed rule, permitting authorities will use their
best professional judgment in selecting the best technology
available (BTA) to reduce entrainment, the incidental drawing
of fish and other aquatic organisms into a power plants cool-
ing water system. Consequently, while the EPAs draft rule does
not identify closed-cycle cooling or any other technology as the
national standard for minimizing entrainment, the ultimate deci-
sion on how best to reduce entrainment at a particular facility
will be made, in most instances, by state environmental protec-
tion agencies after reviewing all the information before them.
Focusing on Entrainment Reduction
It is incumbent upon facility managers to begin developing their
overall approach from the very first submittal required by the
proposed rule. Provisions in the proposed rule allow for consid-
eration of a number of technical, biological, and economic fac-
tors that may help a facility develop its site-specific approach
to entrainment.
The proposed rule recognizes that energy reliability, increased
air emissions, land availability, and remaining useful plant life
are four key factors, among others, that the permitting authority
must consider in making any decisions regarding BTA for reduc-
ing entrainment. Furthermore, the proposed rule provides that
the permitting authority may reject an otherwise BTA (or not
require any BTA controls) if the control costs are not justified by
the benefits. Thus, any compliance strategy must fully consider
these issues.
In addition, if a nuclear facility can show that compliance
with the proposed rule conflicts with a U.S. Nuclear Regula-
tory Commission safety requirement, the proposed rule pro-
vides that either the EPA or state permitting authority must
make a site-specific BTA determination for minimizing adverse
environmental impact without conflicting with the facilitys
safety requirements.
All plants subject to the proposed rule must be mindful of
the numerous application studies that will be triggered once
the rule is issued, which, at present, is likely to occur in the
summer of 2013. The permitting authority will use these sub-
mittals to assess the entrainment impacts of a facilitys cooling
water intake structure and to reach a determination regarding
the appropriate technological and operational controls to be
implemented at the facility.
Importantly, the amount of information requested is tied to
a facilitys intake flow. The greater the design and actual intake
flow, the more studies are required. Facilities should be aware
that, within six months of the final rules effective date, plants
with a design intake flow of 50 mgd or more must initially submit
a wide range of information, including studies to describe the
source water body, cooling water intake structures, and cool-
ing water system; characterization of the biological community
in the vicinity of the cooling water intake structure; a plan for
controlling impingement mortality; a description of biological
survival studies addressing technology efficacy and other studies
on impingement and entrainment at the facility; and a discus-
sion of the operational status of the facility.
Following these submittals, facilities that fall within this cat-
egory and also withdraw more than 125 mgd, and existing facili-
ties with new units, have more work to do. The proposed rule
calls for the development of information leading to the submit-
tal of an entrainment characterization study within four years
and comprehensive studies assessing technical feasibility, costs,
and benefits of installing various technological and operational
controls within five years of the final rules effective date. These
reports will be critical to any agency BTA assessment, and it is
within the discretion of the permitting agency to move up these
reports timetables.
Throughout this process, facility owners and operators should
be very aware of federal and state regulatory preferences in de-
veloping an overall compliance strategy reflecting the individual
facilitys specific circumstances. For instance, California and New
York have policies in place favoring closed-cycle cooling tech-
nology or achieving reductions in intake flow or entrainment
mortality to levels commensurate with closed-cycle cooling.
Facilities Need to Advocate Site-Speciic Plans
The information submitted by a facility as required by the pro-
posed rule will form the basis for the permitting agencys deter-
mination about what constitutes BTA for entrainment. As any
BTA determination will be based upon the permit writers best
professional judgment, facilities have the opportunity to make
their case based on site-specific economic, technical, and bio-
logical findings as developed throughout the entire process.
Harold M. Blinderman, JD (hmblinderman@daypitney.com) is
a partner at the Day Pitney law firm in Hartford, Conn.
Equipment
& Parts
Field
Services
EPC
Services
Turbine
Services
Operations
& Maintenance
Technical
Services
Aero Depot
Solutions
Fabrication
Services
Professional
Services
Controls
Solutions
Renewable
Energy Services
Packaging
Solutions
High Voltage
Solutions
Process
Services
UNITED STATES
l
PANAMA
l
VENEZUELA
ARGENTINA
l
BRAZIL
l
PAKISTAN
l
ANGOLA
Experience That Really Stacks Up.
If youre building, operating, overhauling, refurbishing
or stafng a power plant, lets talk. Weve put together
an impressive team of power industry veterans who work
together to provide safe and reliable solutions for every
phase of a projects life cycle.
Please contact us to talk about how our services can
help you achieve maximum return on investment.
tel 660.829.5100
|
www.proenergyservices.com/experience

November 2012

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

November 2012

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

N

Bilinger Piping technologies is globally active as a qualiied contractor in piping construction

BILFINGER PIPING TECHNOLOGIES GMBH

A change has just

David Wagman is executive editor of

Radio & Television

Вам также может понравиться