The World's First Westinghouse AP1000 nuclear reactor, under construction and behind schedule...

[NNadir]

...catches up by meeting other timelines ahead of schedule and placing the project as a whole, back on schedule.

The project to build the world's first AP1000, China's Sanmen 1, reached a construction milestone when the third steel ring of the plant's containment vessel was hoisted into place. Work on the Westinghouse reactor is now back on schedule, despite falling six months behind at the end of last year.

The steel ring, which makes up part of the containment vessel, was lowered into place on 12 September. Composed of 36 steel plates 44.5 mm thick, it is 11.7 metres in height and weighs in excess of 500 tonnes. Installation of the third ring means that the steel safety shell now rises 35.7 metres above ground level, according to the Sanmen Nuclear Power Co.

Sanmen 1 is one of two AP1000 pressurised water reactors being constructed at the site in Zhejiang province and is the lead unit of four AP1000 units currently being built in China. Construction is also under way on two AP1000s at Haiyang in Shandong province. Aris Candris, President and CEO of Westinghouse, told the recent World Nuclear Association Annual Symposium in London that all four AP1000 reactors are on course to commence operation between November 2013 and March 2015.

http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Construction_on_schedule_for_first_Sanmen_unit-2109107.html">Construction on schedule for first Sanmen unit

Actually, I'm kind of surprised that the reactor is on schedule. The destruction of nuclear manufacturing in the world has meant that for most reactors there one should expect FOAKE (first of a kind engineering) problems that frequently cause delays.

The Westinghouse AP1000 is a Gen III+ pressurized water reactor with passive safety features. It is an American design.

Four AP1000's are now under construction in China, but China is not committed to using the American contractors as the result of a technology transfer agreement.

Westinghouse is negotiating with China to build ten more units. The Chinese plan to have 80GWe of nuclear electricity capacity - nuclear capacity having the highest capacity utilization (reliability) in the world - by 2020, 200 GWe capacity by 2030, and 400 GWe capacity by 2050, roughly approximating the entire US electrical generating capacity using all forms of energy.

Have a nice evening.

[AlecBGreen]

1. I lived in China for several years

the country is growing at a pace you would have to see to believe. I was in the 2nd poorest province but the capital city was exploding with new growth. In just two years they built a "satellite city" larger than my hometown of 25,000.

[Christopher Calder]

2. Mini reactors are a better idea

If we are going to build uranium based reactors, they should be built small on an assembly line. That way there will be no cost overruns or unexpected delays.

EXAMPLE

Hyperion Power Module - A Revolutionary Uranium Based Mini-Reactor

Hyperion Power Generation Inc. hopes to manufacture the Hyperion Power Module (HPM), which is a liquid metal cooled “fast” reactor. Each HPM-based electric plant generates 25MW of electricity and can be configured for steam only, co-generation, or electricity only. Inherent negative feedback keeps the reactor stable and operating at a constant temperature. HPMs use uranium nitride fuel and a lead bismuth eutectic coolant. At just 1.5 meters wide and 2 meters tall, the reactor can be transported to site by ship, rail or road. The battery like HMP produces power for 8 to 10 years and is then shipped back to the factory for refurbishing and reloading. The company claims an estimated cost of 10 cents per kilowatt hour or less, and suggests the HPM could also power civilian cargo ships, which would save enormous amounts of diesel fuel and reduce global CO2 emissions. This very simple design is meltdown proof and the uranium it contains is not weapons grade.

SEE: http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/product.html

Also ...........

NuScale modular reactor

SEE: http://www.nuscalepower.com/ot-Scalable-Nuclear-Power-Technology.php

Thermal capacity – 160 MWt

Electrical capacity – 45 MWe

Capacity factor – > 90 percent

Dimensions – 60’ x 14’ cylindrical containment vessel module containing reactor and steam generator

Weight – ~ 300 tons as shipped from fabrication

Transportation – Barge, truck or train

Manufacturing – Can be forged and fabricated at any mid-size facility

Cost – Numerous advantages due to simplicity, modular design, volume manufacturing and shorter construction times

Fuel – Standard LWR fuel in 17 x 17 configuration, each assembly 6 feet in length; 24-month refueling cycle with fuel enriched less than 4.95 percent

Benefits of the NuScale technology

Light-water reactor design is based upon existing knowledge base and known technology for both the industry and the NRC.
Small, modular nuclear power plant that can increase size and capacity incrementally over time by adding modules at a multi-module plant.

Owners can co-locate multiple units at one site – up to 12 units at single location.

Simple design - passive cooling enhances safety.

All manufacturing can be done in the U.S. at multiple locations.

Shorter time from COL to COD.

Online refueling provides for constant reliability and uptime.

Initial Operations – NuScale forecasts the first plant can be online producing electricity from 2018.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ
)
What is the basis for the NuScale design?

NuScale plant designs are based on decades of operating experience with light water reactor technology. Water acts as the primary coolant within the reactor system. Water that is turned into steam within the steam generators also turns the turbine generator that makes electricity. NuScale fuel is similar to the fuel used in current operating nuclear plants except that NuScale fuel assemblies are six feet long instead of 12 feet. Each assembly contains 17 rows each holding 17 fuel rods.

What are some of the differences in the NuScale design?

First, the reactor vessel is integrated into the containment vessel and the steam generators are integrated into the reactor vessel. Instead of the large, reinforced concrete dome-shaped containment buildings seen at existing plants, the NuScale containment is a steel cylinder that is 65 feet long and 14 feet in diameter. The steel reactor vessel fits inside the containment vessel. There are two "helical coil" steam generators within the reactor vessel.

Second, instead of motor-operated pumps, the NuScale reactor system uses natural circulation - a convection process – to circulate water through the reactor. The NuScale design eliminates concerns about a Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) in other designs that could result from a break in the large pipes that connect the reactor to steam generators. In addition, there are no pumps on the reactor system that require an emergency electrical power supply for cooling if power is lost to the site.
What is meant by passive cooling and natural circulation?

Natural circulation is a process that does not require active mechanical equipment, such as a pump, to move water through the reactor and keep it cooled.

In the NuScale system, water is heated as it passes over the nuclear fuel. As it is heated the water becomes lighter and rises within the reactor vessel cylinder. As the water reaches the top of the cylinder, it is drawn down over the steam generator tubes where it passes its heat to a second enclosed system to produce the steam that makes electricity. When it transfers heat, the water cools, becoming more dense or heavy. Gravity pulls the heavy water down the outside of the cylinder where it is then drawn back inside the cylinder by the heat of the fuel. The overall result is a natural circular flow of water during both normal operations and when the system is shut down.
Will NuScale plants require less water for cooling?

NuScale plants will need about the same amount of water per megawatt of capacity as other thermal power plants.

How much will it cost to build a NuScale power plant?

The NuScale design has a number of economic advantages. It is modular and the components can be manufactured and fabricated at a number of facilities that already exist in the U.S. Many of the major components also use existing off-the-shelf designs. Modular components can be made off site, then shipped and installed on site, lowering costs and construction times. Modular design also enables manufacturing in volume to keep costs low.

NuScale plants also are scalable allowing multiple 45 MWe modules to operate within a single facility. Once the basic plant infrastructure is in place, new power production modules can be added and put into operation while existing modules continue to operate. The benefits resulting from volume manufacturing, shorter lead and construction times and the ability to add capacity as needed, are major advantages of the NuScale design.

How long will it take to build a NuScale plant and when will the first one go into operation?

Because of the modular and scalable design, NuScale anticipates a construction timeframe of 36 months from the first concrete to fuel load for the first reactor module. Additional modules can then be added as needed. NuScale projects that the first plant can go into operation as early as 2018.

What is the projection for NuScale operating efficiency in terms of capacity factor – the percent of time over the course of a year that a plant operates at full power?

NuScale plants are expected to operate at capacity factors in excess of 90 percent. Modules are shut down sequentially for refueling and NRC required inspections and tests about once every two years.

How often will each module need refueling?

Under the current design, a NuScale module will need refueling every 24 months.
------------------------------------------------------------------
These mini-reactors based on uranium will lead the way to the ultimate energy source, reactors based on much more abundant thorium.

For information on the ultra safe and clean Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor, see: http://thorium.50webs.com/

[NNadir]

3. I disagree. Mini-reactors are not better.

I am familiar with the NuScale design.

It's OK, but it is not superior to large scale systems in my view. I'm not big into redundant systems, or particularly systems that have point source potentialities.

The Chinese nuclear fleet under construction is very attractive to me, because of its broad flexibility. They are planning 500 reactors, almost all of which will be large, and 24 of which are now under construction. They know what they are doing.

Basically we have 50 years of experience with light water reactors and they are a mature technology. We had small reactors in the 1950's, but they proved to be problematic since maintainance on a smaller system had less economic justification than maintainence on a large system.

Shippingport and Indian Point 1 operated only a few decades, whereas many larger reactors will now run 60 years despite whining and crying from uneducated anti-nukes.

The "small is better" meme has become an element of faith, but the most common distributed energy system in the world is the car which has been, at the end of the day, a disaster environmentally.

Small nuclear reactors will never be as troublesome as say, wind farms, or inferior to small dangerous natural gas plants, but I disagree with the claim that they are better than large reactors. I generally like reactors that are between 700MWe and 1200 MWe.

The EPR's may be pushing it, but I think they will be fine, and prove much more useful in the long term than the NuScale stuff.

One of my good friends in the nuclear world, Rod Adams is a small reactor guy, but I just don't agree with this claim.