Center for Climate and Energy Decision Making Michael J Ford mjford at andrew dot cmu dot edu Ahmed Abdulla ayabdulla at ucsd dot edu May 23 2016 52316 Engineering amp Public Policy School of Global Policy amp Strategy ID: 583433
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Nuclear fission innovation in the US" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Nuclear fission innovation in the US
Center for Climate and Energy Decision MakingMichael J. Fordmjford [at] andrew [dot] cmu [dot] eduAhmed Abdullaayabdulla [at] ucsd [dot] eduMay 23, 2016
5/23/16
Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy
1Slide2
Current electricity mix
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy2
Excluding biomass and waste, which account for 2% of electricity generationSlide3
EIA projection (wishful thinking!)
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy3
Excluding biomass and waste, which account for 2% of electricity generationSlide4
A more likely scenario (
closures)5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy4
Excluding biomass and waste, which account for 2% of electricity generationSlide5
This scenario:
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy5Uses EIA projections regarding:
demand change
gas and renewables generation expansion
Adopts following closure assumptions:
declared
shutdown plans
operating license
expirations up to 2040
no
second license renewals (SLRs
) –
for good reason
Includes plants
currently under construction
Assumes 12 threatened
plants stay
online
Light water reactors face too many challenges
Advanced reactors were meant to be deployed nowSlide6
Obstacles to advanced
fission research5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy6
Technical:
Multiple technologies
under investigation
Large
technical capability gaps associated with each
Institutional:
Inadequate regulatory framework
Inequitable incentive structure
Infrastructure:
Dwindling industrial base
Dwindling human capital
Political:
Poor public perception
Reticence in the executive and legislative branches
Very little market pullSlide7
DOE has an advanced fission agenda
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy7DOE is charged with promoting advanced fission reactors:literature assumes it has spent close to $40B since 1978
Has an advanced fission research agendaSlide8
Research purpose and methods
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy8
Phase I:Retrospective analysis of U.S. advanced fission R&D
Data-driven analysis of DOE and Federal
Budget
documents, down to individual
programs
Phase
II:
Semi
-
s
tructured interviews
Complement data-driven approach, fill data gaps,
and
craft a revivified research agenda
We are exploring how well the DOE
’s
a
dvanced fission R&D spend aligns with its research goals.
Where does the money go? How effective has it been? Slide9
Phase I: Analysis of DOE R&D spend
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy9Data sources:DOE annual
Budget Justification d
ocs Approved
annual
Federal
Budgets
DOE
Required Supplemental Stewardship Information (RSSI) for
R&D funding
Lab Directed
R&D (
LDRD)
funding docs
(2000—2017)
(1980—
2015)
(1998—2015)
(2004—
2015)
Seeking older budget justification, RSSI, and LDRD data from the office of DOE’s Chief Financial OfficerSlide10
Preliminary results
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy10
Let’s look at DOE’s
Required
Supplemental Stewardship
Information (RSSI)
for FY 2014
DOE
Budget
R&D
Budget
Nuclear
Energy
27B
1
0B
0.3B
Advanced
Nuclear
Nuclear
Activities
4B
0.1BSlide11
Phase II: Semi-structured interviews
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy11We are interested in advanced fission onlyOur focus is exclusively on the U.S.Questions fall into the following sections:
State of advanced fission innovation?
Objectives of advanced fission research?
Problems with DOE’s stewardship?
Critical capability gaps that need to be filled?
Policies that need changing?
Contribution nuclear will
make to decarbonziation
under different scenarios?Slide12
We are aiming for > 40 experts
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy126 interviews so farMore than 15 confirmed interviews in the next 3 weeksAnother 50+ names
DOE Office of Nuclear Energy
Nuclear Regulatory CommissionCongressional staff
All three laboratories that work on advanced fission
Academia
Industry
Non-government organizationsSlide13
Impressions: 3 industry; 3 academics
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy13State of advanced fission innovation: “stagnant”DOE NE has no focus, no performance criteria for existing projects, and is captive to its labs:
Comparisons to Office of Science unflattering
Staff have no technical competenceLabs have pet projects
Utilities and public perception drive research approps.
“To fund your project, tout only its safety”
If the goal is to develop a new generation of fission reactors, DOE NE is bringing a kayak to a naval battle:
Funding: too small to matter, too unfocused to countSlide14
Summary
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy14Goal of nuclear energy R&D is safety, not paradigm shiftFrom 2011 to 2015:
DOE Nuclear R&D responsible for military nuclear infrastructure, nonproliferation
and nuclear energy
Nuclear energy R&D is small; focused on LWRs
Nuclear
e
nergy
R&
D dedicated
to
facilities, admin & pet
projects
(e.g. fuels with no
reactors)
Few nuclear
e
nergy
R&
D dollars have been going to
advanced reactor concepts
$24B
8%
20%
0.4%
50%
Not including
legacy waste mgmt
. ($25B)Slide15
Our impressions
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy15Utilities, industry groups (e.g. NEI) and public have no appetite for advanced fissionThey drive congressional + executive funding priorities
Absence of market pull is actively undermining technological pushAdvanced fission research lacks an agenda and has become a jobs program that is unlikely to yield results that will matter in
the timeframe necessary to help decarbonize the energy sector.
~ End ~Slide16
The 12 threatened plants
5/23/16Engineering & Public Policy / School of Global Policy & Strategy16Clinton-1, ILNine
Mile Point,
1&2 NYOyster Creek, NJ
Ginna, NY
Palisades, MI
Pilgrim
-
1, MA
Fort Calhoun, NE
Millstone
2&
3, CT
Indian
Point 2&
3,
NY.