4.1 Ashley Jacobs UNTF2011

The ADTRTM Power Station
Presentation to UNTF2011
12 April 2011
Victoria Ashley, Project Manager

Roger Ashworth, Technical Manager
Copyright 2011, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. All rights reserved.

Agenda
Introduction to Jacobs
The ADTRTM Technology
The ADTRTM Business Case
Conclusions
30/08/2017 Slide 2 Copyright 2011, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. All rights reserved.
An introduction to Jacobs
Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. is one of the worlds largest and most diverse
providers of professional technical services
2010 revenues of nearly $10 billion
Support to industrial, commercial, and government clients across multiple
markets
We provide a range of engineering, construction, operation, and maintenance
services for advanced research facilities, including fusion and fission energy,
nanoscale materials, high-powered lasers and x-rays in the US, Europe, UK
SNS is an accelerator-based neutron

source in Oak Ridge National Lab. This
one-of-a-kind facility provides the most
intense pulsed neutron beams in the
world for scientific research and
industrial development.
Agenda
Conclusions
Why nuclear?
World population is growing by approx 1.6% annually
Energy usage is increasing by approx 2% annually
Decreasing supply of fossil fuels
Issues of climate change
Alternative energy sources needed
Nuclear safety and waste issues need to be addressed
Based on WNA Nuclear Century Outlook Data June 2010

Why thorium?
To continuously generate annual power output of 1GW requires:
3,500,000 tonnes of coal 200 tonnes of Uranium 1 tonne of Thorium

Significant impact upon the Low CO2 impact Low CO2 impact
Environment
but challenges with Can consume Plutonium
especially CO2 emissions reprocessing and radioactive waste
and very long-term Reduced quantity and much
storage of hazardous shorter duration for storage
wastes of hazardous wastes
In principle, total annual global energy needs could be

provided by 5000 tonnes of thorium (Ref. ThorEA report)
Estimated World Thorium Resources
Country Tonnes % of world
1. Australia 452 000 18
2. USA 400 000 15
3. Turkey 344 000 13
4. India 319 000 12
5. Brazil 302 000 12
6. Venezuela 300 000 12
7. Norway 132 000 5
8. Egypt 100 000 4
9. Russia 75 000 3
Source: OECD/NEA Uranium 2007:
10. Greenland 54 000 2 Resources, Production and Demand
(Red Book) 2008
11. Canada 44 000 2
12. South Africa 18 000 1
Other countries 33 000 1
World total 2 573 000 100
Project Background
Norway No. 7 in estimated world thorium reserves, Aker Solutions
investigated potential for utilising thorium
Collaboration with Professor Carlo Rubbia to commercially develop his
original Energy Amplifier concept, EA patent ownership
Feasibility Study from Jan 2008, ms internal investment
Project Objectives
1. Establish technical feasibility of the
design
2. Apply established technology
3. Develop and protect IP rights
4. Align with Gen IV strategy
5. Develop the business case for
thorium power
6. Establish a consortium with suitable
partners
Development from Energy Amplifier to ADTR
EA ADTRTM
Energy K-effective 0.98
Amplifier
12-48MW accelerator power output
Reactivity uncontrolled (No control
rods) - larger sub-critical margin
Coolant circulation by natural
convection
ADTRTM
K-effective 0.995
3MW accelerator power output
Reactivity controlled by enriched
boron10 control rods
Coolant circulated by axial flow
Source CERN 95/44 pumps
Heat exchangers separate from
main vessel
Slide 9
ADTRTM COMPLEX Passive Air Cooling
System Stack
Accelerator Beam
Transport
Refuelling machine
Steam collection tank
1500MW(Th)/600MW(e) Heat Exchangers

& Coolant Pumps
59te MOX fuel, 10 year refuelling
Vessel dimensions 9.5m diameter, 20m high
Molten lead coolant and spallation target Nuclear Core
Decay heat removed by natural convection on shutdown
System operates at atmospheric pressure
Coolant
Lead Sodium
Negative temp & void coefficient of reactivity Positive void coefficient of reactivity
MP 327C BP 1748C MP 98C BP 883C
Intermediate cooling loop not required Intermediate cooling loop required
Chemically un-reactive no fire risk Chemically reactive
Operate at atmospheric pressure Pressure vessel
High pumping power as high specific gravity Low pumping power as low specific
High thermal heat sink gravity
Also acts as spallation target Not suitable for spallation target
Corrosive with steel Less corrosive with steel
No hydrogen generation No hydrogen generation
Conversion of Fertile Thorium to Fissile Uranium
Thorium fuel requires fissionable
starter material +
Plutonium Th232 n1 Th233
Minor Actinides
(22.3 min)
Plutonium selected for ADTRTM
mixed oxide fuel
84.5%Th
Pa233
15.5%Pu (27 d)
Fertile Th232 breeds fissile U233 Fission

Fragment n1
Could burn waste actinides from

conventional reactors
+ n1
U233 n1 n1
No need for fuel enrichment Fission

Fragment
Fuel Cycle Tendency to Equilibrium (11 cycles)
Self-sustained fuel
cycle possible
Over a 10 year fuel
cycle
Plutonium is burnt
U233 is produced
Delivers balanced
criticality
as much fissile
material produced
as is destroyed
All Pu All U
U233 Pa233
Reactor Control First fuel cycle (10 year operation)
Reactivity vs Fuel Burn Up
0.035
Raw Reactivity
0.03
Plot
0.025
0.02
Reactivity
0.015
Control
0.01 Rods Control
Rods
0.005
Fuel Burn Up GW day/ton
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Accelerator
-0.005
Controlled Reactivity keff = 0.995
-0.01
Raw reactivity swing compensated by control rods

Power output adjusted by accelerator
Load following possible useful for small grid systems
Developed method of measuring Keffective - filed as patent
Benchmarking against Generation IV Goals
Thorium is 3-5 times more abundant than Uranium
Thorium is by-product from rare earth mining
Minor actinides from a thorium reactor less than from a PWR
Can be configured as a minor actinide burner reducing long term waste
Sustainability burden
ADTRTM consumes ~50% of its Plutonium starter over 10 year cycle
One ADTRTM can consume Pu from approx 1.5 PWRs
Gaseous emissions equivalent to conventional advanced systems
Low carbon emissions
Thorium fuel is cheaper than Uranium fuel

Lead shielding reduces neutron embrittlement & extends reactor
vessel lifespan
Economics
10 year refuelling time increases system availability to >95%
Operation at atmospheric pressure means cost savings on
containment vessel
Reduced fuel handling requirement leading to reduced operational
expenditure
Replaceable reactor components reduces the risk to capital
Benchmarking against Generation IV Goals
10 year sealed core reduces opportunities for fuel interception

Proliferation The ADTRTM is a net consumer of Plutonium
Resistance Hard gamma U232 daughter products prevent manual handling
No requirement for enrichment technology
Design is for inherent safety, i.e.

Sub-critical operation increases margins to prompt criticality
Virtually instantaneous reduction in power achieved by
accelerator shut-off
Safety & Primary system operates at atmospheric pressure
Reliability Maximum credible accident results in self-limitation of reaction
Reactor below ground enhancing physical protection
Coolant chemically unreactive and provides large heat sink
Agenda
Conclusions
Programme aligns with GenIV timescales
Aim to build first commercial 600MW(e) reactor by 2030
Capital cost per KW equivalent to current reactors
Further reduced costs due to:
Long refuelling time therefore lower operational costs
Use of thorium fuel requires no enrichment
Technical &
No significant
commercially viable
Concept &
Regulators
Development Issues
Endorsement
of Site and Design
2 years
Feasibility Licenses issued
5 years
Study Completion Date
Concept 5 years
design &
development System
definition, Plant
3 years
design & Safety
Case Pre-licensing & 7 years
site selection
Detailed design Construction &
& fabrication Completion
2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Market Analysis - Types of countries
1. Large countries with nuclear Ideally the first ADTRTM
demonstration plant should be in a
power, but with significant country with established nuclear
energy demand growth infrastructure
2. Countries with no existing Its inherent safety and non-

nuclear infrastructure and proliferation strengths could make
the ADTRTM attractive to countries
recent aspirations to gain requiring energy with minimum
benefits of nuclear power infrastructure and maximum safety
3. Smaller countries less Benefits of load following and

600MW size, the ADTRTM fits market
demand on grid system
gap between small modular systems
<300MWe and conventional reactors
>1000MWe
Agenda
Introduction to Aker Solutions
The ADTRTM Project and Business Case
Conclusions
ADTR Concept Study Slide 20

Conclusions
Aker Solutions truly believes in the potential of the ADTRTM technology
because:
1. Technically feasible
Challenged assumptions for confidence in design
Transmutation with load following power generation
2. Applying established technology
Reduced commercial risk
3. Developing IP
EA patent
Keffective patent
Other unique design aspects identified
4. Align with GenIV strategy
Meets GenIV goals and timescales
5. Develop the business case for thorium power
Financial potential - Capital cost per KW equivalent to current reactors
Market potential - Niche for size and power producing waste burner
6. Establish consortium with suitable partners
Now engaging with potential partners to further develop this exciting technology
The ADTRTM Team
Victoria Ashley Roger Ashworth

Project Manager Technical Manager
E-mail: victoria.ashley@jacobs.com E-mail: roger.ashworth@jacobs.com

Tel: 01642 334072 Tel: 01642 334061
Mobile: 07925 113388 Mobile: 07833 295500
www.jacobs.com
Copyright
Copyright of all published material including photographs, drawings and images in this document remains vested
in Jacobs and third party contributors as appropriate. Accordingly, neither the whole nor any part of this document
shall be reproduced in any form nor used in any manner without express prior permission and applicable
acknowledgements. No trademark, copyright or other notice shall be altered or removed from any reproduction.
Disclaimer
This Presentation includes and is based, inter alia, on forward-looking information and statements that are subject
to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ. These statements and this Presentation are
based on current expectations, estimates and projections about global economic conditions, the economic
conditions of the regions and industries that are major markets for Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (including
subsidiaries and affiliates) lines of business. These expectations, estimates and projections are generally
identifiable by statements containing words such as expects, believes, estimates or similar expressions.
Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expectations include, among
others, economic and market conditions in the geographic areas and industries that are or will be major markets
for Jacobs businesses, oil prices, market acceptance of new products and services, changes in governmental
regulations, interest rates, fluctuations in currency exchange rates and such other factors as may be discussed
from time to time in the Presentation. Although Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. believes that its expectations and
the Presentation are based upon reasonable assumptions, it can give no assurance that those expectations will be
achieved or that the actual results will be as set out in the Presentation. Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. is making
no representation or warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of the
Presentation, and neither Jacobs Engineering Inc. nor any of its directors, officers or employees will have any
liability to you or any other persons resulting from your use.
Jacobs consists of many legally independent entities, constituting their own separate identities. Jacobs is used as
the common brand or trade mark for most of these entities. In this presentation we may sometimes use Jacobs,
we or us when we refer to Jacobs companies in general or where no useful purpose is served by identifying
any particular Jacobs company.

4.1 Ashley Jacobs UNTF2011

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

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

4.1 Ashley Jacobs UNTF2011

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

The ADTRTM Power Station

Victoria Ashley, Project Manager

Copyright 2011, Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. All rights reserved.

SNS is an accelerator-based neutron

Based on WNA Nuclear Century Outlook Data June 2010

3,500,000 tonnes of coal 200 tonnes of Uranium 1 tonne of Thorium

In principle, total annual global energy needs could be

1500MW(Th)/600MW(e) Heat Exchangers

Fertile Th232 breeds fissile U233 Fission

Could burn waste actinides from

No need for fuel enrichment Fission

Raw reactivity swing compensated by control rods

Thorium fuel is cheaper than Uranium fuel

10 year sealed core reduces opportunities for fuel interception

Design is for inherent safety, i.e.

2008 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

2. Countries with no existing Its inherent safety and non-

3. Smaller countries less Benefits of load following and

ADTR Concept Study Slide 20

Victoria Ashley Roger Ashworth

E-mail: victoria.ashley@jacobs.com E-mail: roger.ashworth@jacobs.com

Вам также может понравиться