INPRO Collaborative Project GAINS “Main Issues of the Project ”

1. INPRO Collaborative Project GAINS“Main Issues of the Project” V. Usanov, P. Villalibre, H. Hayashi, G. Fesenko (IAEA), Presented by V. Usanov AER/CZE1meeting, 25-28 March 2008,Liblice, Czech

2. GAINS as a Follow up of the Joint Study • INPRO Joint Assessment Study on INS based on CNFC with FR: Canada,China,France, India, Japan, Rep. of Korea, Russia,Ukraine • To develop large-scale NP with enhanced sustainability features nationally (~100 GW by 2050) & globally (~2000 GW), the key potential role of FR was identified • To provide the role, JS identified: • Intensive RD&D for countries with a large-scale NP programs: - at national level; - internationally (bilaterally, GEN-IV, INPRO, etc.) • If RD&D successful, it could open global perspective through organization of multilateral approaches to provide full fuel cycle services to interested countries with thermal reactors • IAEA/INPRO seems to be a right framework for analysis of the transition scenarios from present towards future global system

3. Plutonium Balance – B2 Scenario (JS) 200 0 1900 2000 2020 2040 1900 2100 -1000 Pu-fiss= (product – Consumption) - t Pu-fiss= (product – Consumption) in -t x104 World China The consideration of plutonium balance at national and global level indicates a problem that could be addressed in the future.

4. GAINS: Global architecture * of INS based on TR & FR with the inclusion of CNFC Major challenge: To develop long time transition strategy from present NP to Perspective INS aiming to facilitate increasing use of nuclear energy nationally and globally while minimizing financial and political risks Approach: To proceed from philosophy of providing local interests in economics, environment, security to global interest of sustainable development * ‘Architecture’: reactor/FC installations comprising a dynamic system where each component interacts with or is related to at least one other one and they all serve common objectives

5. MS - PARTICIPANTS of GAINS As of May 2007 15 Members: Argentina, Belarus, Canada, China, Czech Republic, France, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russia, Slovakia, Spain, Ukraine, USA, EC andItaly as an observer (+ announcements from Bulgaria and Pakistan)

6. INPRO TASK 3“Nuclear Energy in the Context of Sustainable Development” • Purpose • Support MSs’ capacity building in scenario/vision analysis • Provide base cases on global vision of long-term • development of INS • Deliverable • Common technology platform • b) References scenarios and boundary conditions VALIDATED AND VERIFIED ANALYSIS TOOLS & CODES Technical specification for computer tools Collaborative projects Cooperation with other international Organs Energy mix studies (NP scenarios, costs) CZ1, IND4 Use of Th (EC1, IND4) Global architecture of INS based on TR & FR with the inclusion of CNFC (GAINS) FC innovations (RUS2)

7. The Schedule of the Study The Study will be carried out in three stages: • Selection of scenarios for nuclear power deployment and identifying of the nuclear systems & fuel cycle options • Simulation and study of the developed scenarios and options. • Analysis and conclusions.

8. Selection of NP deployment scenarios High scenarios for worldwide NE demand will be selected in cooperation with IAEA/PESS to demonstrate INS potential Scenarios for INS deployment will be split into two storylines: • The first will describe a converged world • The second storyline will reflect a heterogeneous world based on self-reliance and preservation of local identities

9. Background – Rationale • The global NP is almost entirely TRs (LWRs, HWRs). In coming decades - ALWR and AHWR, and maybe HTR. TRs in OFC are and will be an economically attractive option, but: • NSF accumulation • Resource availability in long term perspectives • Political concerns on enrichment • INS CFC-FR - potential to provide sustainable features to NP, but: • Feasibility in medium term perspective (15-25 years) • Economic efficiency concerns (R&D, few countries with large NP scale) • Political concerns on reprocessing • A need for analysis of global and regional scenarios towards INS with attractive sustainability features : • to clarify effect of synergy between FR and TR • national preferences in different type of reactor and fuel cycles; • potential of multilateral collaboration

10. Identification of a representative set of current and innovative nuclear systems • Large-sized LWR, HWR types of nowadays and ALWR, AHWR, HTR under development • Nearby large-sized FR as well as more innovative fast reactor systems • SMRs including modular type reactors Identification of advanced NS and milestones of their introduction could be an area of a regular communication between INPRO and NEA

11. Milestones of INS introduction

12. Identification of FC options & roadmap of their availability in the convergent world • Once-through uranium option with improved technical and economic characteristics of fuels; • Mono and multi (?) - recycling plutonium options based on mixed oxide fuel in thermal reactors; • Multi-recycling plutonium and MA options for fast reactors with mixed oxide, nitride, carbide, and metal fuels; • Options base on mixed U/Th and Pu/Th fuels; • Different options for minor actinides management, including those based on use of ADS Subject to the findings of relevant projects and studies (OECD/NEA, GIF, and others) The IAEA activities on Advanced Fuel Cycles

13. Example of INS with LWR, FR and CANDU driven by concerns over SNF and repository heat loading waste

14. Example of INSwith FBR and ALWRdriven by economic, resource, waste andPRconcerns , Th

15. Fabrication HWRAHWR fuel HWR HWR SF Extraction&conversion nat.U HWR SF AHWR Fabrication LWR UOXALWR UOX LWR UOX SF LWR UOX LWR Reprocessingplant Enrichment plant Extraction&conversion nat U LWR UOX SF ALWR UOX LWR MOX Reprocessingplant Fabrication LWR MOX LWR MOX SF LWR_MOX MA, FP SeparetedPu FR&bl Reprocessingplant Fabrication FR&blanket Fuels Dep U FR & blSF FR FR_Th&bl Reprocessingplant Fabrication FRTh&blFuels FR_Th & blSF FR_Th Extraction Th Rep U 233 Fabrication HWR_ThHTRFuels HWR_Th&HTR Reprocessingplant HWR_Th SF HWR_Th HTR_Th HTR_Th SF

16. Selection of NP deployment options for the heterogeneous world • Definition of the regions for the heterogeneous world should be based not on geographical principle but on the typical conditions (profiles) in different groups of countries • Example of profiles: • high status of NE development (reactors &FC) but no much room for further deployment in national borders; • low/moderate status of NE development but high demand for further NP deployment including development of own NFC; • no NP or low/moderate commercial use of NP with orientation towards assured NFC services We expect significant differences in the total growth of NP and its sustainability features in case of theconverged world modeland theheterogeneous world model

17. Opportunities to Better Global NS Architecture and to Reaching NE Technological Potential

18. Simulation of the scenarios and options • Comprehensive analysis with the use of national computer codes and IAEA’s codes DESAE, MESSAGE, NFCSS (former VISTA) • Output data: • radionuclide inventory; • material flows with focus on nuclear materials & radwaste; • activity, heat release, radiotoxicity, and other parameters for identifying repository requirements; • investments, full FC cost, energy cost; • characteristics related to proliferation resistance

19. WHAT WE EXPECT ON TOOLS INS energy production, system investments, total INS cost, energy generation cost Economics Environ-ment U/Th consumption,U&TRU isotopes inventory, radionuclide emissions Mass and activityof SF, isotopes inventory, incl. FP & MA, heat release, radiotoxicity Waste Prolifer. resistance Fissile materials inventory and balance, SWU, heat release Infra-structure Capac. of fabr.& rep. plants, NPPs, storages, repositories, optimal INS introduction Data in green can be provided by existing IAEA tools; data in rose can be provided by MS or by improved IAEA tools

20. Analysis of scenarios and options Main issues to be examined: • effect of synergy between TR and FR as well as between regions with different profiles; • impact of technical/technological innovations of the INS components on the INS structure; • a time-dependant strategy for fuel resource and radioactive waste management; • optimal terms and timing for serial deployment of FR and introduction of Multinational FC under different demands, market climate, characteristics of the reactors & FC; • incentives, conditions and ways of transition from basically heterogeneous model of NP to a more convergent model

21. Possibilities for GAINS/CZE1 Cooperation • Participants of CZE1could make a valuable contribution to the GAINS profile related to the countries with orientation towards commercial use of NP with assured NFC services • A few ways of the CP implementation • The IAEA Technical Cooperation Project (TCP) • The IAEA funding, but • Rather complicated formal procedure including need for the Governmental approval • INPRO Joint Collaboration Initiative (JI): • The JI project can be started immediately after agreement at the level of national nuclear agencies and approval at the INPRO Steering Committee, but • The project has to be funded by the participating member states