ML19321B027
| ML19321B027 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear, Callaway, Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1980 |
| From: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Burmeister R AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007250070 | |
| Download: ML19321B027 (22) | |
Text
- I Vdb
/
Do UNITED STATES 85 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4W 5
,"s3
,E wAss moToN,0.c.20sss SpT
\\, v.... /
S,26-
~e
.., O
~t m;
g i
Tuts DOCUMENT.CONTAlHS POOR quAUTY PM a
Mr. Randy Burmeister 2045 South Linden Avenue Springfield, Missouri 65804
Dear Mr. Burmeister:
This is in reply to your letter of May' 4,1980 to President Carter about nuclear energy.
Enclosed is a statement of December 7,1979, by the President on the Kemeny Com-mission Report'on Three Mile Island. The statement includes the following:
"Every domestic energy source, including nuclear power, is' critical if
+9 we are to be free as a country from our present over-dependence on unstable and uncertain sources of high priced foreign oil... We must take every possible step to increase the safety of nuclear power production."
Also enclosed is the chapter on " Coal and Nuclear: The Transitional Energy Sotrees" from the Second National Energy Plan transmitted by the President to the Congress on May 7, 1979. This contains the following statement on the last page:
"The Nation's mid-tem energy situation depends on successfully main-taining and expanding the use of coal and nuclear power. These two sources are commercially available today and can be enlarged if the markets grow and their critical environmental and social problems are overcome."
The only nuclear power plant in Missouri is the Callaway plant under construction near Fulton; the first of the two units is scheduled to go into operation in 1982.
There is an operating nuclear power plant in Arkansas near Russellville.
For the Arkansas plant, the project manager for the Nuclear Regulatory Comission is Guy Vissing, who called you on June 20 and talked with you about your concerns with nuclear power. We trust that, as a result of the call, you have more assur-ance that the health and safety of the public is being protected in the operation of nuclear power plants.
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has found that actions recommended by its own staff and by the Kemeny Comission in the areas of human factors, operational safety, emergency planning, nuclear power plant design and siting, health effects, and public infomation are necessary and feasible.
Interim measures have been taken, and an Action Plan has been developed to include other safety improvements, detailed criteria for their implementation, and various implementation deadlines.
yo7 %Do70 r
Mr. Randy Burmeister ya.;, 7 ; 3 Every effort is being made to protect the public health and safety at all nuclear power plants that are. currently in operation or that may start operating in the future. Any plants that are found to be unsafe will not be allowed to operate.
Sincerely, s
Harold R. Denton, Director
-Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosures:
As stated
l DECEM3ER 7, 2 9 79 FOR IR*tEDI ATE RELEASE l
OFFICE OF THE h91TE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY THE WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT *BY THE PPISIDENT ON THE FEIENY COMMISSION REPORT ON THREE MILE ISLAND Room 450, Old Executive Office Building (AT 2:45 P.M. EST)
The purpose of this brief statrent this THE PRESIDENT:
af ternoon is to outline to you and to the public, both in this country and in other nations of the world, my own assessment of the Kemeny Report recommendations on the Three Mile Island accident and I would like to add, of course, in the presentation some thoughts and actions of my own.
I have reviewed the report of the Commission, which I established to investigate the acci, ent at the Three Mile Island nuclear d
The Commission, headed by Dr. -John Kemeny, found very power plant.
~
serious shortcomings in the way that both the Government and the utility industry regulate and manage nuclear power.
The steps that I am taking today will help to assure that nuclear power plants are operated safely.
Safety, as it always has and will remain, is my top priority.
As I have said before, in been By this this c.ountry nuclear power is an energy source of last resort.
on the direct use I meant that as we reach our goals on conservation, of coal, on development of solar power and synthetic fuels, and
- ' - - -- -.= -,=,,, H n n nf American oil and natural gas, as we reach those
I will send to the Congress a reorganization plan to clarify assignment
- First, several steps.
i of the NRC, to strengthen the role of die Cha rman i
son with the power of authority and responsibility and provide th s pertive of ficer, with autho to act on a daily basis as a chief execu implement better put needed safety recuirements in place and toThe" Chairm l and to r g e ncy,.
procedures.act on behalf of the Commission during any eme h
Second, I intend to appoint a new Chairperson of t es In the meantime, I have Nuclear Regulatory Commission, d
i spirit of the Kemeny Commission recommen at on.to serve as the Chairman asked Commissioner Ahearne, now on the NRG, implementation of the Mr. Ahearne will stress safety and the prompt E
needed reforms.
di In addition, I willi. establish an independent a v soryf the Unite$
i V
committee to help keep.me and the publ c o in achieving and in making
]t of the progress of the NRC and the industry ill be safer.
clear the recommendations that nuclear power w h
Federal Third, I am transferring responsibility to t eto head up all off-site Emergency Management Agency, the FEMA, h gh review of emergency emergency activities, and to complete a t orou ting nuclear reactors plans in all the states of our country with opera by June, 19 80.
Commission and Fourth, I have directed the Nuclear Regulatoryl rate our program to the other agencies of the Government to acce e ite.
a resident Federal inspector at every reactor s Government agencies to Fif th, I am asking all relevant f the Kemeny implement virtually all of the 'other recommendations oA detailed I believe there were 44 in all.
briefing will be given being issued to the public and a more extended Commission.
I
+%_
~.
O better informed decision-making among regular operating hours and, of course, during emergencies.
I challenge our utility companies to bend every effort to improve the safety of nuclear power.
Finally, I would like to discuss how we manage this transition period during which the Kemeny re' commendations are being implemented.
There are a number of new nuclear plants now awaiting.
Under law, the Nuclear operating licenses or cons truction permits.
Regulatory Commission is an independent agency.
Licensing decisions rest with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and as the Kemeny Commission noted, it has the authority to proceed with licensing these plants'on a case by case basis 4 which may b& used as circumstances surrounding a plant or its application dictate.
Tbe NRC has indicated, however, that it will pause in issuing any new licenses and construction permits in order to devote its full attention to putting its own house in order and tightening up safety requirements.
I endorse this approach which the NRC has adopted, but I urge the NRC to complete its work as quickly as possible and in no event later than six months from today.
Once we have instituted the necessary reforms to assure safety, 'we must resume the licensing process promptly so that the new plants we need to reduce our dependence on foreign oil can be built and operated.
The steps I am announcing today will help to insure the safety of nuclear plants.
Nuclear power does have a future in the United States.
It is an option that we must keep open.
I will join with the utilities
- and their suppliers, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the executive and also the state i
departments and agencies of the Federal Government, and local governments to a,ssure that the future is a safe'one.
1
- - - - IInume Document No.14121 *
(Mth Congrza, Int Hemlon SECOND NATIONAL ENEltGY l'LAN MESSAGE ruou TITE PRESIDENT OF TlIE UNITED STATES TRA N SMI'ITING TIIE SECOND NATIONAI. ENEltGY PI,AN, PtlitRUANT TO SECTION N)1 OF Tile DEPAltTMENT OF ENEltGY OltOANIZATION ACT E.X C E R P ',
h! AY 7,1979.-hIPH9a(e And SCCOtGpanJ ng OSDer$ referred le the I
Committee of Ilie Whole llouw ora time Ntate of the linton and ordered to Ise printed U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 45-004 0 WAHIIINGTON : 1979
To the t'ongren of the United States:
I ani pleased to transmit to the Congress the second National Energy I'lan,as required by Section 801 of the Departinent of Er.crgy Organization Act (l'uhlic Law 95-91).
The First National Energy 1*lan, which I sent to the Congress two years ago, was the first comprehensive cRort to deal with the broad scopo of this Nation's energy probleins. The resulting National Energy Act, passed last autunm, acted on a number of my proposals, and will have an imin>rtant and lasting role in preparing for the Nation's energy futuie.
Ilut nmeh reinains to be done. Aml we inust now deal jointly with a nuinher of issues which have matured since April 1977.
As I said in my April 5th energy message, our Natio,n's energy pn.hlems are real. They are serious. And they are gettmg wone.
Every American will have to help solve those pn>bh ms. Ilut it is up to us-t he Congress aind the Executive liranch-to provide the leadership.
We must now buihl on the foundation of the National Energy Act. In my April 5th energy address, I laid out a program for action in five an as.
First,in accordanco with the Energy l'olicy and Conservation Act of 1975, I have announced a piogram to phase out controls on do-mestic crude oil prices by September 30,1981. Oil shouhl be priced at its true n placement value if we are to stop subsidizing imports, ii. crease U.S. oil pnnluction, reduce demand, ami encourage the development and use of new energy sources.
Second, the increased revenues from decontrol must m>t unduly or unjustly enrich o'l pnnlucers at tlic exg>cuse of consmners. For this reason, I have proposed a tax on the windfall profits due to decontrol.
I'n>cceds from that tax wouhl be used to establish an Energy Security Trust Fund, whi:h woubt be availahic, in part, to assist those low-income Americans who can least adont higher energy prices.
Thinl, we must provide additional emphasis on conservation and on the develo[n:n nt of new domestic energy sources aml technologies. The Energy Security Trust Fund will also provide funds for energy saving mass transit and for tax incentives and accelerated research and de s-onstration of new energy technologies.
inD
IV Fourth, we must find ways to expeditiously develop and use our energy resources, while protecting and enhancing the quality of the environinent. The length and coniplexity of m.ny Federal, State, and local perinitting; in ocedures, however, has created needless complexity
,r cud incerased tiene arid cost, without improving the protectiou to the
'e public or the envitonment. We must armove the needless red tape
]" ~" {
-i {
[
I s-which is tying up many needed energy Inujects. I have signed an Executive Oriter to expedito Federal decisionmaking for certain energy projects, which are deemed to be in the national mterest.
(,)
Fifth, we must. provide international lemlership to deal witti the crisis lefore us toilay. The members of the International Energy Agency have joined in a coinmon cominitment to redi.cc energy con-suinption in response to current, shoitages. The tiniteil States has provided leadership in gaining tins conunitment. I will assure the IJnited States aloes its part to inect that.conunitment.
The energy progriun 1 annaunced on April 5th puts the country in a strong position to achieve these goals.'l he Plan I am forwarding tmiay shows how these progsams relate to our overall energy problem, enil to the other policies r.nd programs which we must carry forward.
This National Energy Plan explicitly recognizes the uncet taintits-geologie, technological, economie, political, and enviromnental-w hich confront us. It. presents a strategy for dealing forthrightly with the inneestainties, with the threats and piumises of our energy future.
The nualysis in the Plan shows the need to anove aggressively to incet the grave energy challenges to our Nation's vitality. My A priI51h proposals confiont those challenges sguarely. Together with the Na-tional Energy Plan, we are provuling a firm foundation for dealing wit h t hese challenges today and for deca <les to come.
/
7 Y /7/
42^'
.4,
/
Jinur CARTFR.
Tne WuiTx Ilouse, May 7,1979.
CHAPTER V WJ
! si CDAL AND 140 CLEAR: THE TR AP8SITiottAL
/
ENLMCY SOUkCES I
Coal and nuclear power now supply 22 percent of the Hatton's energy increasing share as c on ve nt ional oil and gas and sma e t psovide resources are depleted. Over three-fourthe of Joe.estic coal consump-an
- s. Mc e used t o ge ne r a t e tion and virtually all of the nuclear energy electric power, with est and gas doisinst a ng tronoportatioc, space Although the Admiciot tat ion se heating, and most industrial uses.
h e nc our a gi ng the direct use of coal in andustry, electric generation F
will continue to be the chief use of both co*1 (and nuclear energyl arr.wth in consumption of coal l$,l for at least the nest 40 years.
The t heir enva ronment al and public llg in large erasure :..:
d with new and nuclear depende acceptability, and their competit sveness with one another an 1
i j
technologies yet to come.
f ace two basic challenges:
Soth of these estasy sources b
o ine need to resolve institutional and env i r onme nt al problema
]
that limit the use of esisting direct coal-tired and light water reactor plant technology; and a
of develope.ent of more resource-efficient o the timing and pace aJvanced cuel-fired power cycles, alter-technologies, such as l[~
native nuclear fuel cycles, and advanced nuclear reactore.
!lM survival rather than economics.
challenge is one of technology The first coal burning and light w at e r re act or power plante can fd Unlese envi ronment al and public accept abilit y, they will not be able direct electric power generation.
If achieve of new to casty their projected share that omsch faster.
then the other will have to grow j
either one falters, further aggnavating its own difficultaea.
And w it hou t competition f rom the other, the added pressure placed on the semaining source will l
L drive sta costa higher.
developacat -depends on the outcome I
I The second c h al k -n ge--t echnolog yin electricity runnumption and develop-of the first and on t he gr ow t h eent of other new energy sources.
The role for technologies such as liquid metal fast l
Magnet ohydrodynamics (MlWI, cost f uel celle, and t he biceder reac t or will depend on how capensive they are coopered to p
.- M alternetives.
h'
/t la the yeare since the embargo, perceptions of the role for these I
technologies have changed radically.
Electricity coneusption, which than half a hoe doubleJ every decade (i percent per year) f or more jb;N J
ar y
s,..
i X t.. -
I f
l r
1
... n l
t
f 1
13G 137 6
/
i l
century, is now espected to rise more slowly. The growth rate should IlJO3 Jag f
rpprosth about halt the biotoric everage by the end of the century.
8 b
g g
This slower gruwth in demand, though welcome for many reasons, has eeriously disrupted utility construction planning, particularly for g
O b nuclear plants.
On the othes hanJ. the slower demand growth will O
g I
l l
g resources, avonds greater c
postpuhe the potential depletion of uranium envirommen al problems from more coal use, allows more time to develop Q.
.O
} u{
new t e c h nolugi e s, and removes any urgent need to commercialise the
{
E E
s 5
3 e
bereder reactur.
M
.k C
s' O-m A.
Coal O
O s
r k
Q U
f During the tiret half of this century, coat was the predominant fuel V
s an the United States.
In the late 1940s, however, its dominance began G
to erode as consume r e shifted to cleaner, mere convenient, and tre-quently cheaper energy forms -- primarily uit and gee.
Figura V-1 y
a fraction of total energy C
t shows how the ur,e of coat changed both as 11J I
use end in physical terms.
f,#
C For many years, coal was a dominant fuel in all demand sectors, p
declined in the 1950s, and e ve n when it revived again in the late F
- Q a nc liaJang t ranspor t at ion, in which it eupplied the railroads. As coal O
m 19t>0s and 19 70s, it c ame to depend on one ma jor market-utilities. In 1978, 78 percent of the coal used in the U.S. was burned by the
,- O fg C
electric utilities.
o u
O
(
f, Essa today, however, U.S. coal reserves are still hundreds of times CD 'C O
e e-greater then annual production levels. While domestic oil and natural 3
g as use se limited by supply, coal consumption is limited primarily O)2 by constrainto on demanJ.
Even when the fuel cost economics favor
[ 11.
N cost, firms have been willing to pay sisable premiums for cleaner' C0 Q
.f-m more convenient tuels.
d' s
M&ny people gemember the time when cloude of smok e hung ove r U.S.
C cities.
People also remember proJuction disruptions, such as coat
.9 strikes, whach threatened the entire economy.
Coal mining haa d
histurically been a dangerous calling, and the health and estety of "g
g m
2 sinere an ungent social concern. Even if past problema do not recur, the attituJee that were created by these probleme may persist.
m In the past 15 years, coat's environmental problems have been curbed g
{
f' o
by Federal and State actione dealing with air and water pollution.
O Q
undtrground eine health and safety, and, most recently, ourface mining s
J and reclamation.
However, utilities and industry often tound it v
easier to meet new air emission rules by switching to cil, gee, and 80
)
g O
y tower sulfur coats, than by installing pollution control equipe,ent.
U ln l
l h
h h
y ag o
JeaA Jad suoi uo!h!W
- d.
4 i
r V-3 E
.,nM N
1
o 138 139 8
1 Hining safety seguistions helped reduce f atalities and diaelpling injur' The program for coal emphasises direct coal combustion, since about 1
ies in both underground and surface mines, but worker productivity 90 percent of the coal consumed in this country in the neat 20 yeare neccesarily fell, and labor coste rose (especially in underground will be tastned direct ly.
Coal geeification, liquefaction, and other F
mining).
Portly because of increased safety coste end other economic advanced technologies will probaily not account for a large share of reasons, there has been a shift from underground to surf ce mining.
coat use before 2000.
As the new Surface Mining and Reclamation Act is implemented over J
the neat few yeare, however, the costs of surf ace mine production maF Coal Conversion pegulatione I
also begin to rise. Meanwhile, concern with another problem of lossil
~
~
fuel use, especially coal use, has been growing -- the accumulation of The Energy supply and Environment al Coordination Act of 1974 ( E SI.CA l
{
carbon dioside in the atmosphere from coal combustion, which mi gh t provided the authority to require coat use in boilere capable of N
raise temperatures and af fect the earth's climate.
burning coal.
The National Energy Act catended sad improved on the ESECA authority through the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act.
j STRAf t.CY FOR COAL which authorizes a variety of regulations tor requiring existing and new boilers to use fuele other than oil or gas.
In particular.
The U.S. has nearly 4 trillion tone of coal in place, and has econom-utility and large industrial boiler usere may be psohibited from ically recoverable reserves that approach 200 to 300 billion tone.
burning oil or goe in new unite unless they show that they cannot use But annual production of coat has risen to only 660 m:11 ion tone per coal or another alternative fuel.
Regulatione under the statute year.
The Administration seeks to increase product ion and encourage will be promulgated shortly and will indic at e how much more costly esemption to use oil or gas so granted.
]
g eater reliance on coal. To carry out this atrategy, the U.S. will:
coat use must be before an h.
Espand domest ic cost market e by vigorously implementing regu-The Department of Energy intenda to use its statutory authority o
letions that prohibit the use of oil and gas in utility and vigorously, and thereby reduce oil imports by an estimated 300,000 to fi large indust rial boilers, under the Powerplant and Industrial 450,000 barrels per day by 1985. The Department is also working with tuel Use Act of 1916.
other agencies to eseure that other Federal regulat ions, policies, and programe do not needlessly hamper utilities and industry from con-Encourage the development of better emission control technologies verting to coal.
o D,
en that both existing and new utility and indust rial f acilit ies can burn coal directly and still comply with current and ant ici-One provision of the Fuel Use Act deserves spec ial ment ion.
Before h
cipated environmental standarde, certain esemptions con be granted, it sea s t be shown that use of coal-oil mistures is not feasible.
These elarry-like mistures contain
$J Demonstrate the capability to produce synthetic liquida and gas pulverized coal and oil. They can be burned se liquida in an oil-fired o
4'j from coal by the mid 1950s so that significent capacity can he furnace -- e i t he r in esisting oil burning facilities when is not built in the 1990s--if incremains world oil prices make th'"
feasible to convert esclusively to coal, or in new facilitsee when c ompet it ive.
eactusive use of coal is foreclosed for environmental reasone.
o Develop technologies that will allow a more elticient and The technical feasibility of suc h mistumes hee been demonstrated y
environment ally accept able vea of coal in the 1990s and beyond.
only for short periode. Mor e inf or ma t ion is needed on long-term per-I formance, the range of applicatione, and especially on the ability to leprove the competitive economics of coal by correcting oil and transport and store the elurries.
If the mist ures could tie produced d
o
$i gas price distortione; develop cheaper ways to mine cool in an at a central plant and shipped to a variety of users, they could be environmentally acceptible manner; and discourage increases in used more widely then if they had to be produced on site.
Current is coal prices that do not reflect real increases in the cost of testing Progrene should answer many of these questione.
producing and delivering coal.
V-5 V.4 a
4 I 'a I
r 1
1 4
s t
r-k.
j
e 140 gu
- Njsg, l.wironmental Problems of Coal Combustion c nd ta na th t
- C'*I.
Compliance with environmental standards poses the greatest pot ent ial a tr d
an co art gen an the air into constreist on increased direct see of cnal. Unless these st andarda can
- v. ting the Euntains more nieruse than other fuele, beast fuel problem.
.gg,,,
a
, . ogen caid,,,,;,
bpec ial combust ion inhniquu le met at competitive costo many firme that might use cual will turn can red u to other fuele instead. The Department of Energy bee accelerated its
- giee,
,,a u
a r new technolo.
Controle, w[Ilb in nit rosen oside emie,""#8 efforts to develop new technologies for improved emissions control.
tjuna
"" *** 'F f reduc-from stati Th2 De p a r t me nt is working with the kavironmental Protection A ge nc y
'Y * **ces are neeJed, for P*rticulate e ;
(tPA) and other agencies to develop appropriate control ats etegies a can be eff,,gj,,,
,edu ed with current technolo-complying with environmental regulations. The future of cual conver-sies such a trostatic precipitatore, aion depenJa in Inge measure on the succesa of these ef f ort s.
g ase not u gg E
ea anJ 8 ib at
- 8t'*"**
These om lg Although coal utilisation is ef f ected by many environmental standarde, part c lates act " carriers for t race el,%
eir pollusion is the major problem.
Some of the water pollution and of which may b Y Dducarbone,..ny
" c ar cinogenic, a g, cotid wastes problema affecting coal use erine trum the techniquea
b a g hou se s a
a.
auch as
""ded t o reduce scopirab used to reduce air emissions from coal combustions.
Such cont role 8
- i88 tone.
ave not yet been used wsdely b The air pollution control standards that individual utility and Water polluti and solid waste problems ha" M
- Coal depend largely on the age and many y,,,,,
"8'"'
- tandarde a,t g use for ir>Just rial coal-borning plant e enset meet locttion et the facility. M os t plante that esisted in 1975 must meet tion Control 4 al ater pogg,,
- I IIII anJ the ae the emission standarda in the Clean Air Act's State Imp leme nt at ion kera,ery Act (RC et 1916 may cante urce Conectv. tion and technologiu used to contgog sulfur dioside ta **i "*
m
- I proble** for the Pleae (SIPe).
New facilities sust meet New Source Perf ormance Stan-dirJe (NSPS) which are currently being revised. Those new facilitica for which const ruction was started bef ore September, 1978 must meet This brief
- h uw e that the problem. og the esisting MSPS standarde. Facilities f or which construction began urious and fu abl
- 8 "" 8 I P 81 combustion '
bustion are Itter will have to meet the forthcoming NSPS standarJe and the still are being introJuced
" P technologie, g
a e thue probleme unJafined new requimente for visibility maintenance.
By 1965, less will fac;ggtete th
- C'e88ful they
- '#" "" of coat thre 35 percent of coal busned in the U.S. will be affecteJ by the of elect'ICity until **Pfuved and ineahaustibi 5
pramary source revised NSPS. but by 1990 more than one third will be subject to the available.
Ag,,*
f"'t'
'"J Improved ef aser standarde.
In addition to these minimum standesda. special sies. discussed late this Chapter. can inherenti
[
persitting procedures are required by the Clean Air act that will lead the emie.j#ns proble aerect combust ion t echni
~
j 8 mme of areas and in aseaa not attaining to taghter controle in pristine Sulfur 0mide Controje--
Suffur omide 4
hestth standards.
combustion (en be controlled in three g,,,,,g" I,
"* I'on direct coal variety of air pollu-(
Air Pulturant tieks -- Coal coseustion emite a
t ent s that may damage the environment and public health -- including sulfur dioniJe, nit roge n osides, particulates, hyJrocarbone. and o
.g
,,* [gn t e n d. (before combuaci n). through use of go, h
carbon monoside.
Compliance with esisting sulfur dioside emissaan agg 81 or cleaning of higher sul
' E etendarJa as the most costly. Closely related and possibly even mose difficult to aegulate and control are the sulfates formed from sulfur o at th
'C hend (after combustion) th uh the removal of I
dioside and particulate matter. Sulf etes may have significant effects ugg,,
es f rum the flue gas; and on human health and ecology. They can be t ransported several hundred milea in the atmosphere and then " washed out" in the form of "aciJ o durin
- 8 *ed_ combustion i
reins." which adversely effect both plant e, animal life, and humane.
idia proce,,,,
gg r instance, gg,.
combustione. throusi chdhig Together, sulfur onides and sulfates are likely to const itut e the
,,g g ptuse of sulfu, e part of the combustion prouan single most important near-term constraint on direct coal use.
i V-6 5
1
\\
r h y
' }e 142 143 J
F.b r; o FluiJiaed bed combustion (FBC) is another way to meet air pollution t
- "liu coal or 6.eaning of higher aultur cual are two common
(
stanJerde with high sulfur
'te.
The coal burne in a fluidsred bed MSPS and SIPS.
4pecially sur older plants. They
'b'a tstandarJe for new plante regiaired by the Clean Aar of coal and l iesc o t one. Sulfur da. side is captured chemically by the f,M "U"
3 g
timeetune and discarded with the a.h.
Small industrial scale SBC Y
"I **" **
- g gypp use of lower sultur cual, obt e n ned w a t h or unite are available now and the Dep a r t me n t of Energy is enc uraging N
I cleaning is an attractive method to meet current o
demonstrations.
Larger-scale utility systems require more technical h
atJa because it costs less than back-end (post-cumbua-development and init ial commercial demonet s st ions.
In the near term,
[3 nt ole, bot. is funding RD6B t,or pre-combust aun coal c leani ng irdustrial FBC systema ohuuld provide energy at atout the same cost as et bio eillion in FY 1979 and $4 million an M IM.
mvent ional coal combust ion wit h FGD.
Aside f rom their environment al c5 adv ant age s. PSC eyetema could also become more economical anJ efti-d NSPS will require removal at a substantial part of c ent once they have bee n fully demonstrated and are being built e*
4,og eagfur cont ent.
Wathout use of another control in Cumdaercial quant it ies.
Development of fluidase4 beJ combustion P
flue saa deselfurisation), most iront end clean-uP tectinology (suc. ee systema is f unJe d at $41 million an FY 1979 anJ $45 million in tY will not meet the new stan O ne method that will. however. 18 1980.
eotid golvent re t s_ neJ coeg Sk 1). en ash-free, hydroge nst eJ solid i[s plante Because of the critical importance of environmental controls for direct
. abusti a control.
On the other hanJ. some ut the coal use and the uncertain relative costs of all thcee approaches in udocts of such technologies have been f ound to cont aan
.he face of current and projected standards, the Government's strategy enic and tonic substances.
Although there to no the e by products presently. It is clear that worker and is to develop m etal Q t M&g g % m a m WM w 4 Total funding tur these efforte beped trom $17 million in FT 1979 to Pob i I h esset be prote'ted Irom '"'h eggiuente. In recent y m s.
g);,,jggjo,;,yy gygg,
.s ted 3D&D on two processes for o cuaI -
at prod s a, solid and the other a liquid. Funding f or s othetic Liguide and Ca m U
one consev r c i a l demonstration lent has bee n linked to an upa ming st 1q d processes.
FunJang h
The Government ciel demonstration plant would now be prow,Jed from intende to denunstrate the capability to produce synthe-t t
a u iJ c e
t c liquide and gas tros cost by the mid 1980s so that significant the gnergy Security FunJ.
capacaty can be built when oil prices rise enough to make synthetice competitive.
Technologies for making pren.um synthetic liquida and
%q
~
. d contsol systems. particularly glue gae desulfurisation (FGD).
papelane quality gas from coal can be moJified to make lower cost bein uscJ to meet cultur aside emission standards. However, C'
inJust ria l fuele.
Industrial use of synthetic fuele will depend on end reliability have not been demonstrated fully
- the economic conditione in the industry and whether health and envi-go ete e t o me e t even more stringent standards are being roamental problema associated with production and use These Improved FGD technologies. Particularly re ge ne rable of synthetica 1
d'g - -t the volume of wastes collected and thua seduce many el can Lee resolved.
In fact. entisfactory development of all of these
'M technologies depenJe on solving environmental and worker saf ety issuee
?h llution and waste disposal problems which face the throw-an parallel with econceic and technical issues.
.e r
twty" processes.
j The Energy Depar t ment 's synthetic fuel program includes a number of b
D' ble" e stema are espected to be available an the different research, pilot. and demonst ration projects as well as par-h i
1980s.
The eu tur emission control coats for esisting and improved ticipation in international R&D programe.
The following ac t i va t ie s systema will range is e a ut 0t
$.70 per million Btus (compared are underway:
e g $g o pe n ll un Btus).
FGD is a criti-wath coal coste u I
1' I
{,
cal, cant rul techno g that requires high Priority if Cu",udge t o Demonstrations of the manufacture of boiler fuele from coal to EN utential. The Energy Department's t
to e
D te hn logy has been increased inom $1 million in tY 1979 displace residual fuel oile and other products.
Demonstration of a Solvent Refined Coal (SRC)
,[
procese on a commercial scale to $ 5 million in FY 1950.
has high priority, and related processes are being pursueJ in
($
the pilot plant phase.
V-8
't V-9 y
,I *.%
Y[k s.
Q par
.pM i
Y..js,j g? ?,
_k i
W s
4 i O'
n
144 145 a Limited investmente in alternative ways to produce coal substi-tutes for Inghter oil products--such as gasoline, distillate TABLE y.g fuele, and methanol.
NTHEficS
( i r,
o Coenercial-scale use of a conventional gasification process to cuovert noncaking Western coal to pipeline gas.
i advanced gasification process to demonstrats the o Support of an UN
,Y 1
--~_9 _80 ability to use a broader range of coals and to lower coste.
Liqueg.cgg,,
p N5 8tu) Caaifacetio, 206.4 g
o t.ap nded kD6D to scismalat e industrial uses of medium Stu gas, L
a 85.0 low Bau ges and synthesis gas from coal.
Advanced ke8 earth 40 40.7 and Support M
3 9 o Development of methods to redoce synthetic fuel costs by wor k
~
un highly advanced (" third generat ion") processes.
Tot a l 366.0 o Desearch and development to define the environmental and safety efleste associated with the proJoct ion and use of coal-dertved The p"8J could at " ** O *esilable I
liquide sad gaees. These efforts wall also develop appropriate go synthetic I*'
- elected coal-Projects which need Federa ae.j control technologies and the operat ional environment al dat e on
- barriere,
- 'het
- #C83 *tatutes which to base future standards and regulations.
tee authority to t h' Depa r g *e"E of Ene, a
8e "" 8 c loan tuaren-requiremente th These actavities span a wide range of processes and fuel products. But AJainistration ufig -
88 tb assus*Ce of
'h*
" ""* of Prop **e em>dificati
.Suarantees.
Th certain e le me nt s are comanon to many of the processes and specific st reamline pro"aures f or anan jag loan p enaating alaturca go applications.
Virtually all of them involve gaaification, either to g
- jngreyed coal u,, g Jgg..
convert saw coal into gas for further processang or to convert a ctency residual char into hydrogen for subsequent use.
Fos this reason, it should not be necessary to build separate pilot or demonstration N ny,a'* aced coal technologs,, f or the plants for every possible combination of processes to make liquade or the p,o,g,, g,
'I'5 City hold k
- e"Cies n th c gases.
Judicious selection of k6D pro jec t s, pilot plante, s ad com-electricitF. Th se t
- be coal go
)
8*
8380 reduce po g g, mercial Jenonstrations can develop useful anf ormation on a wide spec-part of the process t
hF than,in back end clean uP systcais.
'8'*I trum of cual synthetic options.
ar e s eve y.g,, j,, g e SF DPtsons:
There
, j' na As Table V-1 shows, the Administration continues to support a robust o Na mis of programa f or synthetic f uels. Due to stringent budget require-La
.J"**i c e, (MHD) 08's adv 8ennation sh temperature coal co, technique, mente the Adainist ration had to be more selective when funding demon-electrk y at high eggjcj on proces, go Senerate atration projects in FY 1980. However, creation of the f.nergy Security J
applicatsuns.
Fund will help support more nrojects to develep major technology e
Advanced fuel I_l* convert synthetic For eaample, the Fund will make it unnecessary to choose c
- *I E0 electri-3 between the SkC-1 (solida) and the SRC-II (liquids); the Federal share
,,ag,g, g o,'d Senuation.ye*another options.
- e oP son for base or inter-for a second SRC plant would come out of the Fund.
V..
h II
'"'I (elle that use
,,g,,,,
V-10 furbased naphtha "8
b sed fuel.
oaksercaal now hg as a g 9uite eatensive develoPac het,,, ca,g, t
p s
V-Il I
I k
n t
8 i
a l
l i
's
9 I46 147 I h a.9l W
Freasurired fluidised bed (PFS) combustion links fluidised bed a
y, y
,f
" E"4
- t fair market,ogue of Fed" *II '#W"ed coal 9
e F
Eb'ue t ion wit h advanced turbines and other heat recovery he Wug will het Petitson wathin systeme to achieve blah efficiencies in the generation uf th Thio 3,.
g"8 Pro 8r se nt g " "*(rF.
electricity. This technology may be sure effective in reducing p,
8 tu ctaon on Federal len,
eminions than atmupheric fluidised bed combustion.
auus e
"* *Le"t with cump re he ne s,.
land me,
"*E'*'"I Principle.
l' cap attain higher operating temperatutes and a
y,g,,,g
"'II
- eek to devego[a f Improved turbines 3 "' ** * * * *8ficient o
higher efficiencies, as well as handle heavier and dirtier 3 ma.' P a%#gy.
8 The R&D Progr
""J" 8'"""d *"d *urface ns"s se funded at $66 13 f uela within environment al limitatione.
- IIion
. The Energy secur t u a vi J
Mut of the advanced electric generating systems that emphasise fuel E**
I
- i"i"A systems that a nnease both efficiency will play a longer term role in the Nation *e energy wue6er I
- nd labor productivity,.,,,g
- mut wat er anJ
- f l
stratsgy. One esception is a technology that combinee coal gasifica-land rec ***"'"" " E"I8tions.
t ion orath a gas turbine and a steam cycle. With advanced high-temper-
-[
'T sture turbines. this " combined cycle" system can raise efficiency.
The De
' "I I"e8 gy will intervene se =~, i.e ur e
< 41 jag,,, 8 c
the lowsr gener at ing cost e.
and reduce emineione in the long term.
Wath
,,u,e,,,",,,7'Ct~ u m..-ion to e,e,,,
I conunti...i turbine.. th.
...te..tsii has signi,,C.nt enviroom,nt.,
the marginal cost of trana 8% coal.
,-+
tJvintages; and it may permit coal-f ueled elect ric generat ion. though o Coal 3,
environmental const raint s.
Will improve the Nation'8 ebihty to use
- 4 C l
at higher coat. even in areas with severe cong,,
- I "r at economicagg7 gNo anae.her, gg Accordingly, one Calif ornia utility system and a consos tium of Midwest g
utilities intenJ to demonstrate auch a coal-fired combined cycle a ned to plants whe,,
be used.
The Adminsstrati
'"PPorte legjegegj"" to e Coe sluny pip,gghee can
' g"" ' " ". y rights og v,'7, t
'III***
j, 8 will fund programs for the advanced converei c.g
$184 million in FY 1979 and $142 million in FY 1980. g Papelines c,
g,p,uve cce etitsun and offer a
'+
The Administration cheaper 1 to move coal g
tschnologies at g, I" ' ' "
" "*"** "t of acts on at g
,y j
tt n The Adnani-D Cost Supply and Production
" I wor k with the Congree d"*
P "" *II5cient l i Cost use will not increase if supplies are too costly.
Move ment prucedure g" 88"Emiae the t ig g"
I **
toward replacement-cost pricing for oil and gas will make coal see
,u,y, assume prompt decisione.
II such mee attractive.
But coal prices are not regulated. and aume oit-import savings may not occur if those prices needlessly increase, the Pseeident has al e u al agencies
' Co83 reguletson--
do not el the te ior tg Ths AJainist ration intende to discourage higher coal prices that "I
d E n" 8 F. and the g 8t h ntal 4
reflect real increases in the coat of producing ant Jelivering coal f rotec t ion Agenc y--t
,,PW t to him within 60 de cost-ellscLive encg,.., go g J" A*"* d*We lopme nt anJ use.
" "'"8 "*>* (G
- supplace, It wtll also support development of more
( ).
methods to mine and transpost coal in an envi r onme nt ally acceptable s9 stoner. Specatic actione include the following:
p:[
V-83 6%
[
'El 2 r
1/ This accounting does not include funding for fluidised bed combus-
%y, tion.
- ,?.
V-12 b.
- 5
,. 9 i <7 2
d IN IEpy e
1
(
Tg*es 148 149 j
S.
leuciver tow n rical demand ent ti w'
newee. r, = g,*
- 8"P8tionalooi.e we,e eve,o,,,,
h he
-gene muse.. r t..
m t.-gi,
.- i e -,_ e r
.e no ongi.e la n-ie-we.,o.
t..e. r a safe h P
es wegg
- e the uth!!ty of egg,gggc,,t rie g* ***I f.* l
- i not csnducted during World War 11 mucteer-generated elect ricity wee P'I**
At that time.
in the civillen economy untti the early 1960s.
,g efter government and todustry had jototly funded and operated several STRATEGY pos ugg,,,,, pg leporstat I
esmonstrettuu plante, electric utttttles began to place ordere for h
reactore. The stret of these begon FI'*8* the Adatelettettoa eeek M
istge numbero et commerctet aucteer oparction la the early 1970s. Ordere f or mens nuclear plante e n e ede d
- e a teh the !!she weg., **
}
(LWR) with th* once-throush gueI 'M* **
- etable supp g thewsh the late 1960s and early 1970s.
"d D
'b*by ensure that ordfra f or coal-fired plante
.vegkg Pwer w111 be a oggegggc,,g
-"- f e
Frus 1971 through 1978. utt11ttes placed ordere f or 105 auclear plante.
'**'gf for the rest og g aa-1 5-oa. It w,n as 4
ay 1978 36 of these ordere had been conce!!ed. In all of 1978. only a-w nee of..c ies,Je,~, ",a,or e.o.1 b.uu,,em,,g un-e ea -.tu,,.
,o I* *E'8tesF. the Adag,g,g,,gg,, $e 6.,.
er.the
, 8 two a-,i. t. we re oae red.
P"'*"IS8 two cowrees:
In pir t, thte sharp decline reflects the downward revisions of elect-
'h ricity stwah f orecaste.
Equally important, however. public concerne o To establish the safet
- I**f Power and resolve oth have increased over a eastee of unresolved queettone about nuclear powzr--epecttically, the management of nucteer wastem, the saf ety of 8 ethnical and inetstugg,,g g nues a w g"P*dIh8 a nd a clear grout reacter opesatione, heatrh and environmental stehe. and pro!!f eration permitting delays artstag f rom the public contro-To deveg*P **w technolog es that permit esponded see og
,,,g,,,
e of smaclear weapuna.
g verstes over these critical teaues coincided with a substantial resources, decline in labor productivity. Some smaclear projects empertenced large and of ten required what some utility esecutives viewed as UI
"*E 8'ect ore--Th* Techntce t a g gmet itut ioneg g,,,,,
cost over runs accesolve management etteattoo.
"N To reestab!!ah the Jfght erster T
Ths recent accide nt at the Three telle Islead plant la Penney 1vante,hae t*eue met be ruolved react-,e,,',$,. ~ ~ r v.. t e
.a, e.e e,,- a viable supply
,,g g,, a; e
relaforced estety and other public concerne.
But es the U.S.
regarde the r.ie of.uci..r,uwer 3
,,;if~ensin.
and lic..e,es.
a-eefo, au,aet; r; = -
d n..n.rg, o,n o..u - n r.e 9tn. isi.
~
-e r...ived-ut n 9 i s-
- u.,
co.. uer.d. a o n - tive e..e.e.e.t.
- w. tour. of w il heest.te.. co,
,iante.
is,r.ved ett,,
a.o r-elve a
.m u.c,_er wiii ch..ge--for the b.tter, if safat, and oth., t..ue.
~ ~ a n ~ i n o a rou,,,
/ -
r-ed-e. a,e.e l
- i38taty b ch er..-ce..f un, re.oiva.
requirements for planales dd 8"I i
P ante.
Other Federal
d *
- I *'d t o Sayrove e,ng 8
nue obtalme 13 percent of its electricity f ree nuclear power.
"
- se that safetin
***'C**
ces fuel a larger numb sht water reacters
'd The U.S.
Any precipitate action to close a large seamber of reactors in operettoe esmt h r wSh fuel cFCle.
This egg could eartously aggravate U.S. all toport dependence. In the long e time avallebte beter f
breeder reactore need to be commercial ea*
am tere, nuclear energy can help ensure a balanced energy supply system.
aj!
la the absence of a nuclear pouer, alternative domestic energy supply I m ter $sfgig g.
- P****
th-three an. l....~,,e,t f ~ ia - has e -.b n'*ehed a,to cources (e specially c oal) would be herder pressed. sad their coste negy;,;awillfavestigatesde-u..usanalco,;,y*
e
,n
,umed higher.
-isi. - le-er,. rte.
- !a the poet, coal, oil, see, urastuna and byJ roposer have w c.* --* *h f-the circuestances that led to the accident and the e,,,,,
,,,g ga each other for sharea of the electricity market.
Bestona' factore
^Ii'**di la datsrained the ein. and the price of electricity hee been etable.
Ib -
the f utur e. huuever. ccat to espected to replace large quantiates of th e t echageog 98** LiO8e th sh' e
la electricity and many industrial uses.
Coal une to
- C
- f *EI'* of malety and back est raises about th ett and gas double or triple by the end at the century and continue to g*81g83 and P efstees go, this pleet and ploeg grow at 3 percent a year thereafter. If nuclear pouer were not avagg.
y @;
erpacted to e]
sble. coal would have to supply most of the mid and long t ese elect-V-15 p <
, * ~,
V-14 I
44 t fo Mf r
2 A b;.I o
e.%q
l v4Q gg 151
. y.
9 a a eh~id b. uenti,ted a,, eeJr 'aF of n)s e A number of potees tal ettes se e a
.alo.tc e.v i r --
e the nature and adequacy of the response to the accident by all
- - u b. c.,en to i s-reeoive ieweis of gove..
wh.the, to use
,,e, "I"**
A e8"dI*
national repoeltory for weet a ehe 34 Th3 Freefdent hoe asked the Nuclear Regulatory Cometeeton (NBC). am tad:ptadent regulato ry body, to accalarate its schedule for puttlag stra eay should seek to have at I.es i
- 8 h-paronent resident NRC inspecture at every reactor alte.
Under repositerges g8 operation within tb
"*I*'
a program started la 1978, the Mac now has permanent tempecture et 20 technical a mt othu consideration
""I" unite. The Freetdest has should be la dif f erest regions of h rer,ctos estee covering 26 indleidual rasctot I
sito toetructed the Department of Emergy to work closely with the NBC regional approeca. th* Seelegic, hydro!
"I'*I to determine what odotttonal safety precautione may be nec e s s a ry.
characteristice of the ettee and -faf c-s uu-io. wiu
'%q -l
- e nivte th.,ri..r, bas,e,o,se,actica.
are generated la a wido Bucler Weste Hansmement-gadioactive wastes defense-related nuclear o Comattuction wcristy of ac t ie t t lee-r es ea r ch,
- medicine, and operation of each rePoeltory should proceeJ 1.
/'
stepa. Initial nygm% g optratione, and la the operativa of commercial nuclear power reactore, u
a he stret
[
Ossr the last decade, the pubite has become lacrees tagly concern.J over repoeltory, ehuutd be pleaned on
- b beele.
This concern has been tied The westes shoulJ be retrievable f "
whattsyr these westes can be saf ely managed.
"IEI*I PerioJ should be allowed of tina.
The ***** r anJ c i rcume t ea wuld be 5
of whether a4 clear puwer generettom e e ned and the technicet aspect s f to the queetton to erpand.
- t and h.,Jitng.uet be,ur,,e,.,,,;,.
~ ~ ~. C o. t. i n-33 y
need to find an effective soluttua to the second major waste managensat gscogatalag the urgest prshism. the April 1977 Nattocal Energy Plaa pledge d to develop e concere le the di eafeting uture urastua mill trailt*Se.
In the management pottcy sad progree.
To acquire i t.e a
j g ettee that the Poes eaceostve health riske, the Departmeng uttonal nuclear weete Federat agencies and 5 sate and local gaterente.
d ueloping e
to P8"tr*** to stabt!!ae tellings at the att* *r 8
- th en to og e tew s of pertinent Freetdent established am Interagency Baview Group (IBG) and sehed it I e a
la addition a t
g design a strategy for deeltog with the weste managenest Problem.
88Eindent criteria.
ng i
Ths primary objective of waste management planning and toplementation h
that "entottog anJ future nuclear waste f rom mitttery and As*F-free-reactor (AFR) stog.g. og
,,,,t c,
seeded as a
'"I I*
civilten activities (including spent fuel) should be isolated from the t empor a ry bridge between stora f
13 to assure 888 r alte and permanent repositories
- Fo alb!
threat to public health and saf ety.
" n aclude i
btorphere and poes no algatticest The igg developed the concept et an "toteria ottategic planning ce of an eatettag og*r*8e f acilitF (eM" k no cet aw*ll. Swt h C8'el8"*1 Morris, Ig3goog,;
bes ts** to use during the interte. eince the required emettonnental en.1
,t
,ette#
'I * *
- w h
esisty stuJtes had not yet been comp let ed a nd f inal dectatens could the u.g'. or constructive of gy,,
e,,
e g I
mot be reached.
s T h<s igg found the most urgent need was for a saf e. pereenent respos-The adataistr, tion takes the poettion that *
- M H orage capacity to Story for high-level military and ciellian wastee (lactudtag openg a nled by 198) f or domestic openg g eg g
N
- f e*me
- dIIS** "**
test).
Such an effort will require detatted studies of repository estatins storate facility is prefe M
- m. the U.s.
um elebes tu assure foreg88 usere that the i Iy entse in a wide variety of geologic environmeone and d ive r e.
- eedia, e able to recety, 188tted amounte of go,e 8" ePent fuel to g using a systems opproach.
Pendtes cosytettom of the dectaten procese und3r the Nettomat Environmental Policy Act, the IRG has r ecomme nde J Proliferation objectives
- Environmental 3apact e g e t es,e ot e j
gy, the f ollowing actions f rom the interin planning W.} !
.T 8/
These estettaa storage f acgggg't; w-hunt b, in.uor,...,a,t s
V-16 r come-ciai
~ e ~ ~c e.e i.s t o.ot (y
re,,ocese,a, e,,-
,- -itted. the.e,ac,1,,,ee,re at being fullF ktillaed by their ladustrial ownere.
bWsI V-17
. 4[
l M i M
~A
+.y i
O m%
k y q 8.af
.Y e
n
a 152 153
,,,.tte nues et-se-gezelgn tu'I
,,,es ch..... for auch It is essent ial t hat ve--
. adJggion, an enWW"
,e, t.... a d th. tiesi.ees.ith uh.ch saf ety and envisonmental protec-queet tone about ot-id he --',,,etedti..,ote. ties ^ ",,,,,e,
~;~;.ed, e,., age is.- bei =
y revleueJ th., toc...
tlosuughly and
- 1. ca. rte.
.ut 6.
statea**L
,se meteseary changee maJe.
The get submitted I*E 'l
,na to con. - a ese nt e,- to to u-t vi a the con. sees to ti a the e,t I
Adalstetrattom has Admantetaattua in, ~ e the eiun..a i uene in.,r-es-o net e ne-ste,e t.
j
,,...,a..o."-
and efflCle#CF.
Itteneing tesLlation to Congrees.The Secretary of Energy ut t1 submit nucleart o e
-e boa. ea t -
e este r Th<a Emersf pe pe s t a**E has I*oded W**E'
.agement, ~. " -
atting anJ
.te shoua on Dble M-I*
tfrantus Resourcre enJ Their tfee TABLE V-2 Concern over ut ether the U.S.
useatum resource base le adequate has leJ to preneuses to acce le rat e the FUNDING F03 UUCLEAR WASTE stNT r ep r oc es e leg.
breeJer program and to a eyetematic appsaleal of doneette utentua resBecause of the large uncerta c unian t to
.g tioltare) sert k nuvieJge, thruegh the Nattunal Useutus Repuurce Evaluation uurces to being conj-ted FT I le designed to lay an adequate f ourada t ion for tuture fuel cycle Progree (NUKE).
It dectetune and domestic and toreign utility IN planning.
ggt r,ramercial 372 To recover the mastnum energy from the doneette 251 Dites **
21 Depa r t ment
$pgat Fuel DioPo**1 of Energy has desaloped prostems sesource base, the Eolf tot A
trum Re.ctor St imiet e private inJustry RED to sacrove itsht unter reactor 0
g g ge uperat ing et t ac tency.
gg2 459 Total o
Construct en eme r gy etticient designed to gas centstfuge eartchment plant produce 85 million ear the Adol #gettatto, The attet 2.2 st iltoo SW are "separat ive uoth ustte" Nuclear 5tt b 8 ""d 1.tcep*I"* L'"i' (SW).
used I*.I*
- g,,
g, geduce t he ""*' t inLI'* in the nuc around 1968.
AdJtstonal I.)
planned to be to operattee m.ar P ent stggeg a nd W " tag PEDC"' *" g g gten the 10 t g
capacity me demand grous.altlton SWU modules can be adJed up to design t
I
- sto, P **E' ope ra t ion destEn ad build a the easschacet The adJed capacity pesatte of
,.,,.- t as e.
to Pg.g,
,, with con.-
to reduce unnecessary and enterpries urautua reeuwaces by s ecovering a greater portiin a way that getration WIII
- conservea ot ting and 1trenning P,_ese without ~ ~,,.
vientum tootupe.
duellC*EI'* *tepe ga he on of the itselle atstra sele W e Develop ad va nc ed lautope separettom g the bill I*CI*
d eaggy alta edM w ison-te'h"*I087*
If technology (AIST).
This The k*7 P' leio succematut ty Javeloped, would pesett econcate
, N olew. *nd " bank in. og a ette beW #,gg ct gos ProJuction of nuclear fuel from depleted urastus ded tot **III Et vel t.tendar.
thereby lucaeasing by I*op4[*gadeps
" tails."
at-es t 20 percent the eartshed uranium oce**
- ,4 a to a e recovesable t rum kninen reserves.
ent l
dised P antthe eP ic*tg,, gn a W' ct,
,e,gt a combinin$
g,
g e e
The big g g,..egersed much og the teePone bt MO Essatae advanced converter re ator co
[
Itcense.
end celled for note Pubitc IS"I" "#
in the dectato"**
4 p,,g,,e, with foreign developero ncepte in utentum convermica elitetency. an attesnative cooperation se usy to latteese T
f stant's tunJle.g for these activities ta summart tote V-).
aed la 186
- I**I**
I
-gf Spect"1 authertration W et
- C9"*I
,8 proposed go,,uay i We nactor storage gec t lit ies*
y.gg 4
5 7
V-18
.4
, [
r..
k.
s h
1,
V-
I m
155 t
TABLg y.)
This AJetalstrattou, however, believes that i
c omme r c i el t a a t t un taptJ steps tward breeder are not needed now.
The timing of the breeder b,,
ING FOR IMPROVED URANIUM UTILII program depenJe on the econcatc need f or the technology anJ on nonpu Ilferation tesues.
It to also Is r k ed to resolution of the reactor d
(Hillion Dollers) u-P estety and waste management problems affecting the whole nuclear p
d.I.21 yn option.
The leeJing breeder condidate (Itquid metal feet breeder). if
{h,,
comen s c ial is ed, wuuld necemmartly lead to opreaJ use of plutontua.
The PrestJent, la the c ont e n t of his non-reproceastag and to utJe-ggtsonal Urantum gescurce 69 g4 P[
j peu11 terat tua policy. J8secteJ defesset et gestuation (NURE) 2%
25 lation of the Citach kiver Breeder Reactur project while alterne-L; euch activittee and cancel-
{
Lisht Water peactor Efficte*CF tive f uel cycles are esaatneJ.
l I4I 409 While preituinary results of the laternational Nuclear Fuel Cycle
)
- 'Ng,
C2e Cent rituge Operettone I, Support (i nc lua tog tvaluation (INFCE) do not enggest the coastsettloD)
,,p,,,,,,,,,
likelihood of stek proof breeJer
,,3
,,,p,,,4
'b being developeJ. The INFCE le considet tag ver nous tes hnical opproaches
(
S%
tJ tapruving the Ade nced leutoP8 8'f*'**
pruitferetton h
l resistence et brerJer anJ converter reactor twel cycles.
It la also studying the 12 Advinced Converter program
.).1
~
their development and commercial vee.
appropriate timing for L
inas Cooled Thera
- ctors)
Y Over the poet decade, economic arguments have g
pace of the breeder program.
been used to justify the V
l dtal Such juottfications hinge on a N[I tectorm-the overa ti demand f or elect ricity, the urantum resourc p
few her
-262 49) reactor ef f setency. and the relettve capital custe of light water e beoe.
Bisenuse f 8'8" E8 N.
operettone gscludlns seacture and breeJere.
If the Jemand for electricity 2 rows rapidly, if Centrifuge Plant M dsanstic urastum resources are Itatted, and if breeeers cost little FM e re than !!ght water reactore. then sopid commercieltaattun wou!J be h
lactuding S*I'* *I Errichment S*E*I'***
atenuatcally attractive.
Such perceptione psevealed in the and easly 1970s when late 1960e y
elect ric it y generatton, particularly nuclear electricity, was gruwing raptJIy.
p v TechnoloE1**
O lq since the 1973-74 oil embargo, sevesal ci rc ums t a nc e s have changeJ.
'h la th*
I"*8
- the U.S.
wigg rely sacross g on reneueble or is.jec t ions of essentially 1**mhausttble sourcas of eness?'
der reactor la electatetty grwth rates have dropped from 7 percent a peas to arvund ) to 4 percent for the long term.
Light water reactor aT enta lon4*t*'" ***r"#,Pston because it bee the ca obllity to Psoduce growth bee elourd because of the probleme acted earlier, indicating jy (
sure fleetle ("burnab9 than it *********
he breeder reactor stat usantum resou rces wil! laat longer.
Flaally, early opstatatic h
wouid not uni,
-e t e gg, gg,,,gg geo generet, guel for 11t t h
eettaates of breeder reactor capital costa ranging trea 0.9 to I.)
light water reactors have been replaced by eettaates of
, ' #[t j l,
I sie e those of v2ter reactors
- i.n to i.n.
1stegent la the bteeds reactor stew out d e
,, ger en option that
- J>J would not disappear w the in**II*DI* *'haaeti
,g
,,g seg tteelle Tr...e changed factore have been reflected la a ggled wham entlF **gwtes plu* teed eyes recent analyste of the pe.e of breeder development.
Typical of this analysts to the case utsatum.
TI'*
I"I*
i li hL
- L*'
if tower coat electricitF from the breeder than I the t
- ***rtred in Figure V -2.
altaation.
Nuclear electricity demand in h
ena resulteg lo Pregrams for ** N
- ste amount of descriteJ by instat ted nuclear capacity la 2000 and in 2020; uraatum
(
- geactore,
- veres a re described la terne of price; and breeder capit al conte pt
... Jeecribed la relat tom to LWR capital costs.
Figure V-2 ahows t hat V.20 eash reasonably attaineble taprovemente la current LWR f uel etlic tenc y p,d l-t,,ea,re would nut 1e neeJed mutal after 2020 in aunt cases.
The f(
es.eptione are when urantum costa are high mutlear demand to high. and
- t, b::2 V.21 t
i M
i..i t
1
.I'
. ? I..
i
- - w il l
w 4
l.%
og breeJer capital costs are low.
Only under the most entreme cases would
- -h the breeder be economically justified in the 2000-2010 pertoJ. Succeas-fut development of advanced lectope separation technologies would ease g
o a t i.e
,re..
e for a.
e.ri, breeder eve. eurtuer.
- i. auch a c..e.
the b.C4 meeJ for an early breeder occure only for 400 GWe on line in 2000, f or breeJer capital costs of I.25 times those a
EGO mish ' ai e<
itsht water reactor, and for k
k In light of this economic emelysia, the f our poselble RD&D program etrategtee will be cone!JereJ below D
. ~
8
' ~
f a late Breefer.
Thle strategy assumes that the resource base to 6
'~
9 edequate for a long period of once-throuah Ilght water reactor h
[
b operations, that the nuclear growth rate will be low, or J
O o
that breeder economice will be unfavorable. Consequently.
$o b
y S
breeder development would be pure..ed at a low level a nd c omme r-
]y Q
clattaatton of the b eeder would be deferred se loog me pos-y e
,g alble.
A decinton on a demonstration plant would t> e deferred tw g
g g--
a S
until the 1990s, as would be reprocessing development.
Light
.g g,
g meat, advansed lectope separation, uranium water reactor improvemente, advanced conver ter reactor develop-e 3g e
W Z 80 and centstfuge factitty deployment and de ve lop me nt would be resource evalaation, Q"e v$
a emp has t red.
$,mg t.
o y ","
$0 8D Hdged Bree yd Yhte attategy assumes that the resource base.
N y 11. p
-p~
g nuclear growth, and breeder ecouomica do not g
ca.mmercializattom of the breeder.
tieweve r, because of unce r-require rapid O
tainty, the strategy would maintain suf ficient tientbtitty and E gC g&
uptione se that program shif ts could be maJe emetty and ettec-h h O y
tively whenever information or evente dictate.
The programe 3OI 3 %=
EE f*'
38 h' **
*C5"'"*
- d '* " C
- d C '"' ' ' ' *ctore, eJva nc.e4 8
C* ag3 53 tootope seperatton, eranium resource evaluation. and centrituse e
e.,
dg factittles would be esqs hae l s eJ. but lese strongly t i.a n in the 8
E Iste breeder.
2.g e
e 3
SS O
3
?!
.5 E st e ede r develcyment would continue at a moderate level with g
g 9
y y?
emphaste ou f.
E E
e ngi nee ring and component development. A dettaton ee
[t
"
- d =aas t ration plant could be t aben in 19si, but also could
+'
O E
r g
r w
M a
be deferrea..et! 19s6-1990.
r!an. for both a 20 year.na a D
3
.9 y
$g 10-year cosmercialisation program could be d eve lop ed.
gepro-O 3
CD p
G
~
f q
x I
ao cessing s eihoology would be de ve lop ed, but commercieltaation
.S f C
dsterred. Thte program attempts to stataire stak at 7,_
E a am,derata l
cost.
a s t
("m *'"
{y
}
b a farly Breeder _. This strategy assumes that the uranium ore base c **
I* I I
- I I 'd
- that the nuclear growth rate ut!! be high, and/or g
S 4
that breeder econceice will be very favorable. It topitre uma 3'!
V-23 an mmo
-~
V-22
e 158 159 I
as early commitment to the breeder, with completion of a com-ceptual destga study by 1981 commi tment to e demonstrattom end Nuclear Poweg factitty by 1982, and inattel commercial deployment 20 yeare The Nettum's aid-tera ener i
thereafter.
BeProcessing development would be gives high tet gns and expandtag the use of
" '"#"**I"IIF "818-
'8r Power.
These two priority through comme rcialis at t ou.
Programa for itsht water sources age co***ECl*1ly evallabl sa be enlarged if the reactor teprovement, advanced conve rte r reactor de ve lopment e ma r k e t e gruw and their critical e** tron-stal and social adva nced tootope separattoa. and urantum resource evaluation ove rcune probteam are would be de-esphaelsed.
Th*e strategy would requise a rels-tively high cost, high rtek program.
The markets for coal and nuclear 18-ly tied to t he growth 8 8 8a demand for electricJt ggp la be used in 3 gg, Espanded Nuclear. Yhte strategy soeuses that nuclear power will todustrial factittles, he Fu 1 d* N hPartment of o
play a produngnant role in our energy future, with testalled Emergy the regulatory tooje go,gg,,g,to the u e og ca.g
,,4
,,,3,,r capacities at least equal to the highest values assumed la the eneggy g,,,,,,,,,
enelysis.
Aggressive progrees would be indicated for light and bs eeders--with cuees t The prima ry constratore on thte water r ea ct or s, advanced convesters, h 9 1 and see artee acute to comme rclet ta a them at the earliest puselble detes*
f rom the regulatory and technical bl 8 C**l *M auclear thte would call for a demonstrettom plant power.
Devel*P*ent of methode to me For the breeder, dectoloa in 1981 and planalog f or both a 20-year and a 30-year res t teto c gee, g,,g* *
- d tatreve J-J-te,on..'"
b E-a-awm be de,10,.e.t oct.a.ie.
..,r-e..ing.
th -.h 16e co - ~1 i-f-the to g tera.. coal s.d conve.
saat tom etage, would be accelerated. The progree would be very It ut!! be dtiterest to make thte
" * * ****t'J" a
r t rane t tles. h ow e ve r, cuotly but would provide the greeteet s oeu r ence et maintaining without incres*ed use of direct coal bur and deploying the nuclear option.
Ef forte to develop long-ters optione must be be e#ced with progrene esaura that direct use of co,3,,,
y to The Adatutstration favors the beJeed stratear.
The breeder program the old ters. runsteteet with pub!!c saf ety and maatse e
- I" steelt luctudes the liquid metal t est breeder (LNFat) se the primary proteggg,,,
emetroamental option, but would eleo support two othere--the light water breeder reactor (LWOR) and the ses cooled fast reactor (GCFg).
Each has V-15 hedge asalmet particutsr strengths and weeknessee and provides e
fatture of one particular approach.
The AJaintetration*e decintoa mot to build the Clinch River Breeder Reactor, a large LMFBR demonstretton plant, needs to be viewed la light of the a na ly e t s that has taken place over the poet decade.
Furthermute, for a variety of technical and econeatc reasons, the longer considered to be adequate in stas er Clinch River Plant to no deelga for a summercist demonetsation.
Those elemente of the Clinch which ces be used Intelligently will be cosyteted. The Siver project systeam design wt!! be completed together witti cestein cosyonents which have value f or test purposes.
la place of the Clinch River plant, the Adat aist rat eos proposes sub-conceptual destan study as the central focus of the ettsutton of a The seeutte of thte study together with recuamendatione 1.MF ait p rogr am.
regardtog the future couros of this program will be presented to the Congrees in March 1981.
V 24 1
y i
=_
i n
4 4
.e 4
1 lb
)$,
h :g s i
e i
i
^^8-
- a
_ w-3.a n., 6.%
?..I 4en.
u 1
..n. eu a.
.,a,
- a. w
~
e.ay ~, 17:0 i
l 4
j The President Jin=y ~arter The White House
. v, m...
caa ning *.:n, s
.I j-Dear Mr. President
?acause of y gr~ ring cencern over the circunstar.ces that j
have risen, snowing tne hign risk. taken when nuclear ener;7 is used as a source of power. I fail to see why you can l
allow nuclear energy to spring up across the United States but, bu:y our land in a death trap of nuclear terror.
i I
?.ecently, I observed reports on the nuclear never pla_p*,
locateElii~RR;ns.as.,., Mis _souri,..a_:.ew_niles frca <here I
+
3 a
live. Quite ocviously tnis has snewn of the canage, aestruction,
^
ani 30rr0w thAt'35:i ~ occur unen human ceings are entrappec cy a nuclear environment.
Eten :noug nu: Lear po's er 13 3 tLLa rt ky, ;hr:ugn e:::ensi';e testing, in Se"eral years it can recene
?. f S* efri01ent an: ine:: ensive Way *o pr0Vice energy..dlease 3en: ne a 3
1 re:17 regarding tnis :.atter.
1' 31.. 7e17 yO' l
2ancypeister 4
i i
a f
4 I
t 4
... _,. _ _..., _..,. _. - -.~, -
-