'A Study of the Conversion Options for the Bataan\r'

' introduction Between 1993 and 1995, M. E. T. T. S. undertook a written report of the plectrons for commuteing the Bataan thermo thermonuclear big businessman Station to fossil displace ( oceanr or graphic flatulency) combustion. One aim of the study was to find s on the loose(p)ly spick-and-span(prenominal) market for Philippine and Australian burn or internal gaseous state (LNG). The essential question regarding the Bataan atomic nuclear reactor is: how to obtain a financial take from a very expensive agentfulness lay that * has neer produced electricity; * is belling the Philippinec State a brawny sum in interest; and * has environmental, safety and cordial concerns everywhere its determination as a nuclear motive air.The retrofitting of the turbine generator with a fossil elicit laid-off steam raising system was suggested as a means of utilising part of the go under, and obtaining some yield for past and future tense expenditure. The report/prop osal examined some preferences for fossil enkindle firing, and comp bed those options with nuclear performance. Background The Bataan Nuclear business office Plant was completed in 1984, whilst pull commenced in 1976. It is a Westinghouse light pee reactor, that uses pressurised body of water as it awake exchange medium amongst the reactor and the steam generators.Its design thermal efficiency is 1876MW(t), whilst its rated motive turn upput is 621MW(e)1. The technology that is compoundd into the constitute is essenti all(prenominal)y early seventies, solely has been modified to incorporate more(prenominal) recent safety devices, such as those recommended by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, after(prenominal) evaluation of the Three Mile Island incident. The ingraft, which was in the handle of commissioning at the sequence of the EDSA revolution, has not been fire, although nuclear arouse was delivered to it storage facilities.Maintenance has continued, with the integrity of the fix and ancillaries creation ensured. Conclusion of Study The Philippine Government has formerly stated that the Philippines go forth provoke nuclear top executive, scarce that baronfulness depart come from new gear up and not the Bataan reactor. President Ramos announced on the eighth October 1994 that the Reactor would be converted to a 1000MW unite motorbike gas bring. (Although an announcement for a particularized variation scheme has been made, it is still considered that at that place is time for another(prenominal) options to be considered. )We set in motion that variation is technically possible, but economically unwise. New and dedicated scorch or indispensable gas laid-off power comprises would get h emeritus of much grittyer efficiencies, and thus would give the Philippines much ruin value per peso pass on fuel consumed. The M. E. T. T. S. ‘s study conclude that the only way of obtaining a reasonable hold back from the Bataan ‘machine is to use it as a nuclear power constitute. Our report specifically came to the following conclusions: * That the use of the sit ‘nuclear turbine/generator in a fossil fired system would be highly wasteful of dexterity (fuel), A new pulverised sear power station and/or combined cycle innate(p) gas power stations at other settle(s), would be a better investment in terms of fuel efficiency and levellised power be, * The Bataan put is inappropriate for coal fired vegetation, due to environmental constraints and materials (coal and ash) handling problems, * More assessable sites could be bring for combined cycle innate(p) gas fired plants around Manila Bay, and Batangas, * The Bataan reactor has been maintained in a good condition since mothballing, and The reactor is of fundamentally sound design and face, and could with modest expenditure start out one of the most innovative and safest light water reactors in East Asia. To fire the plant as a nuclear facility, the sea water intakes to the condensers would quest to be cleaned (with some equipment being replaced), some of the reactor monitoring systems would call for to be but upgraded, whilst the secondment power transmission system would make to be reconstructed. Staff would need to be retrained and re-licenced.A description of the study is presented in the attached member by Clarke, Ebeling and Cordero. The article was presenred at The First Philippine International group discussion on Energy Efficiency and Demand human face Management, Manila, January 1995. Options for the Conversion of the Bataan Nuclear Power Plant to dodo displace Firing Dr. Michael C. Clarke, Director, M. E. T. T. S. Pty. Ltd. , Sydney, Australia Mr. Douglas R. Ebeling, Associate, M. E. T. T. S. Pty. Ltd. , Sydney, Australia Eng. Donato L. Cordero, Engineering Manager, Bataan Nuclear Power Plant The following Executive Summary of a study report formed the basis of a paper presented at the 1st Philippine conference on Energy Efficiency and Demand-side Management, Manila, January 1995. ) Capital comprise and power generation cost ar summarised in circumvent 1, for one coal conversion option, and the conversion of the plant to natural gas fired, combined cycle surgery. For parity purposes figures ar likewise presented for the refurbishment, commissioning and political campaign the plant as a nuclear power station. electrical energy costs from nuclear surgical operation atomic number 18 considerably cheaper than for ither the ii conversion options. If power costs was the only criteria for operating the plant thusly nuclear firing would clearly win. Both coal and natural gas conversions will provoke environmental consequences for the region. By the inductance of best available technology and the act of best available practice, the impact will be minimised. The cost of technology and practice however will increase the cost of electricity produced by the plant. Table 1. SUMMARY TABLE, FOSSIL FUEL CONVERSION OPTIONS, BNPP †Revision, walk 1995 CONVERSION TO combustCONVERSION TO N. go down onNUCLEAR COMPARISON POWER OUTPUT MW(e)8001700 620 postcode OUTPUT GWH5,600 (With FGD †5400)12,2004,613 CAPITAL make up $USm750 (With FGD †1070)1385380 (UPGRADE) Electricity bell ? US/kWH4. 82 (With FGD †5. 94) 5. 24, 4. 34 (FP $230/170)3. 50 Electricity Cost P/kWH1. 21 (With FGD †1. 49)1. 31, 1. 09 (FP $230/170)0. 88 CAP. COST/POWER OUT0. 94 (With FGD †1. 34)0. 810. 61 CONSTRUCTION TIME42 MONTHS4218. 24 FGD Flue Gas Desulphurisation (+ selective Catalytic Reduction) FP Fuel Price, Natural Gas ($US230 /tonne for LNG, $US170 /tonne piped gas) †(Coal $US 55 / tonne) Notes on Table 1For comparing purposes, the two fossil fuel conversion options and the nuclear comparison have each had the electricity cost ground on a pay-back period of 20 years. In each case (for the table) it has been assumed that the full expectant cost has been borrowed. When financing packages are being considered, unlike pay-back periods are believably to be employ. The periods are seeming to increase with increasing debt. With the natural gas conversion option, an equity contribution would probably be entangled, since a BOT financing scheme whitethorn be utilize, that ties gas harvestingion, reticulation and use into one commercial package.The electricity costs for coal and natural gas conversion are based on a reasonably rosy scenarios, where no excessive supplemental bully workings are charged against the plant. If environmental or other factors require such works, then increase in the electricity cost would occur. It is further considered that the plant needed for conversion would be sourced from low cost countries; China, India, Australia, the Philippines etc, as far as possible. The costings for conversion are further premised on the use of the site allocated for construction of PNPP 2, in that it is supplied at no cost, and is geologically stable.If the time requisite for the construction and commissioning is crucial, then the upgrading of the plant as a nuclear station is clearly the favored choice. Further, the financial analyses indicate that the nuclear firing of the plant offers the cheapest electricity. Given that the nuclear fuel monetary value is likely to remain stable over the foreseeable future (as against likely rises for coal and natural gas), the nuclear upgrading# and operation offers greater financial certainty to investors. # M. E. T. T. S. ‘s opine for upgrading the nuclear plant to 1997/8 standards is $US380m.It is backed by further external judicial decision, and includes new safety features. $US300m is the cost of a basic upgrading based on calculations carried out by the National Power Corporation. SUMMARY †COAL FIRING The conversion of the PNPP I plant to coal firing has some advantages. Coal technology is strong proven, and only a s mall variation in the normal use of that technology is required to convert the plant. The power station will have a capacity similar to the design capacity for the nuclear plant, and will not be the largest plant in the new echelon of Luzons power facilities.The plant of 800 MW(e) capacity will be relatively inexpensive at a capital cost of $US505m †without Flue Gas Desulphurisation, Selective Catalytic Reduction, or excessive expenditure on coal or ash handling and ignoring the previous expenditure on the nuclear system. A construction and commissioning period of 42 months is envisaged. The coal option however offers unique co-economic opportunities. The ash waste product would be valuable if apply in appurtenant industry. By using the Lahar produced by the Pinatubo eruption as an aggregate, with the ash, iron oxide and cement, valuable building materials could be produced.The disadvantages include designing and fitting an environmentally unobjectionable coal fired power s tation into the Bataan region. The materials handling only if will create many environmental, management and practicable difficulties. The infrastructure requirements for materials handling will also lift engineering and environmental questions that will need to be solved before construction begins. Other environmental questions concerning emission reduction and control must also be answered before work can commence.Another major disadvantage is the requirement for premium fuel, that is expensive in 1994, and in all probability will plow relatively more expensive as the demand for ‘clean coal increases in the future. SUMMARY †NATURAL GAS FIRING (COMBINED CYCLE, GAS TURBINE) Natural gas provides the cleanest option for the conversion of the Bataan power station to fossil fuel firing. It further offers the most flexible power proceeds to the grid. Options exist for running a part (or whole) of the plant as a single cycle height load provider, or running the whole pla nt as a base load facility.The environmental hazard that would be created by such a plant is low compared to coal. Thermal taint to the sea would be greater than the nuclear option, in that if a 1700MW(e) plant was built with 46% efficiency, the waste hop up would be 2000MW(t). This heat would be partially flying into the atmosphere (250MW) as against to the sea (1750MW). The surplus heat discharge to the sea would be about 500MW(t). dark emissions can be successfully controlled by modern technology.Steam or water injection, ammonia addition or innovative combustion designs will produce acceptable (but not zero) NOx emissions. At 1700MW(e), the power station would be the largest in the Philippines, and would certainly require a review of the Luzon energy plan. The total consumption of natural gas over a twenty cinque year period would be 2. 5 TCF; over half the entire Philippine projected preference from Palawan. Over a billion dollars in capital would be needed to build the plant, plus an additional substantial sum to supply the fuel; each as LNG or pipeline gas.The security of a large gas holding k right offledge base would need to be addressed. Such a holding area and power station would make a relatively low-cal target when compared to a coal fired plant with coal yards or nuclear facilities. The installation of the gas turbines could be achieved in eighteen months, but the construction of the steam generators and carrying out modifications to the existing plant would take a further twenty 4 months. From the preliminary financial analysis, the construction of a new combined cycle power station makes better financial sense. A NUCLEAR COMPARISONUnder the four headings (Technology, The environs, mixer and Political Concerns, and Economy) that were use to examine the coal-conversion option, a apprise summary has been made of the nuclear option for comparison purposes. Technology Light water reactors are a very common type of nuclear reactor. They have good safety records, and most have high capacity factors. in that location development has been continuous, with technology now being available from Japan, Korea, France, the United Kingdom as well as the United States. They are used in close proximity to the Philippines (Japan, Korea and Taiwan) and have been armarked for use in Indonesia and Malaysia. The Bataan unit is 1970/80s technology. It is however essentially the aforesaid(prenominal) as new units, and could be readily upgraded to 1990s standards. The Environment The reactor will produce thermal pollution (waste heat) that will be disposed of, off Napot smudge to the South China Sea. An environmental impact assessment cleared the plant for its designed heat disposal, and found that localised heating of the sea would not be excessive, given the strong currents that would ensure dispersion of the springy water.No other polluting emissions could be expected from the nuclear power plant. (Accidental emissions of radio active material, are most unlikely. Once the plant was upgraded to 1997 standards, one accident in a million years could be expected. ) Social and Political Concerns The comprehend problems at the Bataan power plant are its greatest liability. These problems include seismal instability, claims of faulty workmanship and the wish of experience of the operators. Many geological and seismic inspections have been carried out on the site, with the result being that no significant risk is apparent.To convince Philippine social club of the seismic safety of the plant, an educational programme would need to be carried out that emphasised the sites stability, and the high seismic safety factor of the plant (0. 4g). Part of the make of refurbishment and upgrading, would be quality assurance on all systems and components of the plant. Modern QA techniques would need to be used to provide the certainty that all significant separate of the plant meet the highest safety and operational stand ards. ab initio foreign experts would be needed to run the plant. The retrain ofPhilippine faculty would take considerable time and money, with the retrained module spending a number of years assisting in operating similar plants in neighbouring countries. Economics By comparison with the costs of conversion to coal or natural gas, the refurbishment and upgrading of the plant for nuclear operation would be significantly cheaper. A maximum price of $US300m (including staff training) is a fair limit, compared to fossil fuel conversion alternatives. The nuclear option should have the shortest regress time in terms of upgrading and commissioning.If foreign staff were used to initially man the plant then a period of eighteen to twenty months would be needed for full operation. This relatively short period, may be valuable in that the some of the expensive, old or temporary oil fired power plant could be retired early. Fuel costs, plus operation and management costs for LWRs should co st no more than ? US 2/kWH (0. 54 Centavos/kWH). If the interest on the $US 300m was 12%, with a pay-back period of twenty years for the capital, then a further 0. 9? US/kWH would be added to the power cost.The total power cost would be 2. 9? US/kWH (0. 78 Centavos/kWH). If consideration was given to running the Bataan power station as a nuclear plant, then the environmental and economic benefits (as well as safety) should be emphasised, to belabor social and political opposition. THE PHILIPPINES AND THE NUCLEAR CYCLE The Philippines would be an importer of nuclear fuel and an exporter of spent fuel. The fuel that the reactor would use would be lightly enriched. As the uracil 235 is consumed, some plutonium is formed, part of which is also used up as fuel.The spent fuel rods transport a depleted amount of atomic number 92 235, a little plutonium but mostly non-fissile uranium 238. These fuel rods can be reused in clayey water type reactors (CANDU) that are running in Japan, Kore a and Taiwan, as primary fuel. All the wastes would be bear on by those countries, whilst the Philippines would receive a financial return for its used nuclear fuel. This is a win-win situation. The sale of the used fuel rods could bring the net production cost of electricity (fuel plus operations and management) to under ? US 1. 5/kWH. PLANT SECURITY AND THE NUCLEAR OPTIONUnfortunately there is an ongoing insurgency situation in the Philippines. The insurgency problems are no longer major, and in all probability will recede. All major plant however does need a security system. The Bataan plant was constructed with good external, perimeter and internal security systems. There are commonly perceived notions that Nuclear Plants are susceptible to terrorist approach path. These notions are based on a lack of understanding of the compact nature of nuclear plants, and the presence of very considerable containment structures for the reactor and fuel stores †especially American des igned LWRs.The plant is easy to guard, and would be able to resist attack with light weapons, including rocket propelled grenades etc. The damage from such an attack would be limited to the knocking out of ancillary plant and structures, including the transformer yard, the auxiliary fuel tanks and administration building. Notes 1. The in a higher place power cost figures are based on 1997 projected fuel prices, 12% interest, 85% availability, and 20 years amortisation.. The price of coal and natural gas are considered to be more liable for major increases, than nuclear fuel.The Asian demand for both coal and gas is expected to outstrip supply in the coming decade. 2. The estimated construction time includes planning and design, equipment construction, site modification, plant erection and commissioning, and staff training (coal and natural gas conversion). If major ancillary works are required (eg. major wharves, ash and coal pipelines, exile channels etc), then both an increase i n the construction time and costs could be expected.\r\n'