The 23"dNati6hil kkldo Science Conference (NRSC 2006)

O-OOSFcutyofElctoic Mrch 14-1.6, 2006 IIvlii3

Facutyo Elctroic ngineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

Nuclear Power and the Env'ironment

Prospects and Challenges
Samia Mohamed Rashad
Atomic Energy Authority , Cairo , Egypt
Email Samia_ Rashad hotmail . corn

World wide there, were 441 operating nuclear power plants (NPPs)at the
end of 2002 supplying 16 percent of global electricity generation
cumuilative operating experience now stands at over 10,000 reactor years.
The most significant recent trend has been that of steady increases i
availability factors , without such improvement in availability factors
nuclear power would not have. maintained its 16% share of global
electricity. some 83% of nuclear capacity is concentrated i
induistriali'zed countries .By contrast ,almost 2 billion people i
developing counmtries remain without reliable energy supplies , a major
factor in their aspirations for social and economic development.

Nuclear power can be considered the only source that can provide
electricity on a large scale with comparatively minimal imnpact on the
environment . But any major fuiture expansion in the use of nuLclear power
will depend- heavily on the innovation in reactor and Fuel cycle
technmology . Innovation should ensuLre, that new reactor and fuiel cycle
technologies incorporate inherent safety features , proliferation resistant
characteristics , and reduiced generation of waste, consideration shiould be
given to- physical protection and other characteristics that will reduce the
vuilnerability of nuclear facilities and materials to theft ,sabotage and
terrris acts In1thspprcnieAto wI'llb Ive o eooi
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)

Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt. [IJjJ

III Faculty of Electronic March 14-16, 2006

1- Introduction:
The worlds' population crossed 6 billion mark in the 1999. Most current
estimates suggest that around 2 billion people will be added over the next
30 years with another billion in the following 20 years Virtually all this
increase will be in the developing countries with the bulk of this in urban
areas. The core challenge for development is to ensure availability of
productive work opportunities and a better quality of life for all these
people [I].

Two aspects are very important :quality of life should be above a

minimnum threshold and there should be equitable opportunities for all .At
present however , inequality is widening. .The average income in the
richest 20 countries is now 37 times that in the poorest 20 and this ratio
has doubled in the past 40 years . Inequalities can give rise to conflicts
and there fore ,it is necessary to address development concerns of all
nations.

Inequality seen in income level is also seen in per capita energy

consumption . Statistics published by the IAEA[2] indicate that per capita
energy constumption in North America in 2001 was 343 GJ and it is
expected to grow to 346-387 GJ by 2020. Per capita energy constunption
in Africa is expected to change from 27 GJ in 2001 to 26 -32 GJ in
2020,In the Middle East and Southl Asia From 25 GJ in 2001 to 30-38 GJ
in 2020. These forecasts donot indicate any perceptible improvement in
the inequality. Energy is the engine from the growth. It multiplies human
labour and increases productivity in agriculture, industry as well as
service .with1 sustainability issues staring at us , the above situation can be
corrected only if the energy supply becomes abundant and withlin the
reach of all. Only power of the atom can in principle realise this.
 / March 14-16,2006
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

GDP is assessed to the Ftudamental driver of energy demand ,[ Fig.1]

illustrates world GDP over timne.

The future of nuclear power will depend on a number of factors

including ensuring the continued safety of operation at nuclear faculties,
the development and demonstraation of clear national and international
strategies for the disposal of high level radioactive waste, the ability to
compete economically with other energy sources , and successful
communication of the benefits of nuclear power to civil society. But any
major future expansion in the use of nuclear power will depend heavily
on an additional factor the innovation in reactor and fuel cycle technology
-innovation that successfully maximizes the benefits of nuclear power
while minimizing the associated concerns. innovation should ensure that
the new reactor and fuel cycle technologies incorporate inherent safety
features, proliferation resistant characteristics and reduced generation of
waste . Consideration should be given to physical protection and otlher
characteristics that will reduce the vulnerability of nuclear facilities and
materials theft, sabotage and terrorist acts.

Innovation efforts must be more than purely technical The evaluation of

new design aspects by the nuclear industry should be accompanied
throughout the nuclear comrmunity by a re-evaluation of technology
policy issues these issues play a significant role in economic costs,
investor confidence and public acceptance of nuclear technology. A high
level of confidence must be achlieved in the reliability of construction
schedules, licensing review procedures, regulatory oversight, liability
issues and other factors that affect the cost and eficiency of nuclear
facility design, construction, srart up, operation and maintenance [3,4,5].
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)

Faculty of Electronic
March 14-16,2006 |jInv 3
Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

2- Nuclear Power Role

Worldwide there were 441 operating nuclear power plants (NPPs) at the
end of 2002 supplying 16 percent of global electricity generation. In
2002, 20% of the USA's electricity was nuclear, 27% of Spain's, 31% of
Germany's, 34% of Japan's, 39% of the Republic of Korea's, 44% of
Sweden s, and 77% of France's. Cumulative operating experience now
stands at over 10,000 reactor-years. Six new NPPs were connected to the
grid in 2000, three in 2001, and six in 2002. Long-term projections for
nuclear power, particularly in the event of international agreement to
significantly limit greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, are more bullish
than near-term trends. While economics is a key factor, public concerns
about safety, waste, sustainability, and proliferation will need to be
addressed. The most significant recent trend has been that of steady
increases in availability factors. The cumulative impact of such increases
since 1990 is equivalent to having built 33 new NPPs, each of 1000 MW
(e). Without such improvements in availability factors, nuclear power
would not have maintained its 16% share of global electricity.

Cturrently, growth is centered in Asia. Of 33 reactors currently umder

construction worldwide, 20 are located either in China, Taiwan, China,
the Republic of Korea, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea,
Japan, or India. Seventeen of tlhe last 26 reactors to be connected to the
grid are in the Far East and South Asia. And the greatest growth in
nuclear electricity production in 2001 occurred in Japan. Within Asia,
Capacity and production are greatest in Japan (54 NPPs) and the Repulblic
of Korea (18 NPPs ). Seven NPPs are in operation in China ; four more
are tinder construction. Taiwan, Chlina has six NPPs withl two mnore under
construlction. India has 14 small NPPs (up to 220 MW (e)) operating, and
 The 23Y National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2096)
Facult of Electronic March 14-16, 2006 Invj35
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

eight under construction ).Highest growth of nuclear of nuclear power is

expected to occur in the Asian region[fig.2].

In the USA, there is currently no construction. The Key development has

been market liberalization, the average availability factor rose from
72%in 1990 to 90% in 2001, and nuclear generation costs dropped to
record lows. The Us Nuclear Regulatory commission (NRC) has granted
licence extensions, to 60 years, to fourteen US reactors, and sixteen more
applications are under review.

Western Europe has 146 reactors. Overall capacity is likely to remain

near existing levels, even with long-term nuclear phase-outs planned in
Belgium, Germany and Sweden, Eastern Europe and the economies in
transition have 68 operating NPPs. Ten more are under construction. In
the Russian Federation, there has been an increase of nuclear electricity
production of 30% since 1998, thus ending the stagnation following the
Chernobyl accident. Most of this increased production has resulted from
increased plant availability .In Latin America there are six operating
NPPs and one under construction. Two NPPs are operating in South
Africa.In an increasingly competitive and international global energy
market, a number of key factors will affect not only the energy choice,
but also the extent and manner in which different energy sources are
used. These include optimal use of available resources, reduction of
overall costs, minimizing environmental impacts, convincing
demostration of safety, and mneeting national and global policy needs. For
nuclear energy. anld other options, thlese five factors will determine thle
futulre of energy mnix and strategies, at the national and global levels [6].
 The 23r National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16,2006
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt. fInv3 6

3- Non - electric nuclear heat applications

Nuclear energy plays an important role in electricity generation. It has
proven to be safe , reliable , economical and has only a minimal impact
on the environment. Most of the world's energy consumption, however,
is in the form of hieat . The market potential for nuclear heat was
recognized early Some of the first reactors were used for heat supply,
e.g. Calder Hall (United Kingdom ) , Obninsk( Russian Federation ),
and Agesta ( Sweden) . Now , over 60 reactors are supplying heat for
district heating , industrial processes and seawater desalination But the
nuclear option could be better deployed if it would provide a larger share
of the heat market In particular , seawater desalination using nuclear
heat is of increasing interest to many countres

Since the early days of nuclear power development , the direct use of
heat generated in reactors has been widely practised and expanding . In
addition to the forerunners , UK and Sweden. many other countries have
found it convenient to apply nuclear heat for district heating or for
industrial. processes , or for both , in addition to electricity generation
[7,81 . They include Btulgaria . Canada , China the Czech Republic
Genrnany, Hungary, India , Japan , Kazaklhstan , the Russian Federation,
Slovakia, Sweden, Switzerland and Ukraine. Thotugh less than I % of the
heat generated in nuclear reactors worldwide is at present used for district
and process heating its operating experience exceeds about 600 reactor -
years and there are signs of increasing interest in these applications
About 33% of the world's total energy consumption is currently used for
electricity generation . Thlis share is steadily increasing and is expected to
reachl 40%/ by the year 20 15 .Of thle rest , h1eat consumled for residential
and industrial pulrpo.ses and the transport sector constitulte the mnajor
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16,2006 FInv 3
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

components , with the residential and industrial sectors having a

somewhat larger share . Practically the entire heat market is supplied by
burning coal , oil , gas , or wood

The residential and the industrial sectors constitute the two major
components of the overall heat market . within the residential sector
while heat for cooking has to be produced directly where it is used , the
demand for space heating can be and is often supplied from a reasonable
distance by a centralized heating system through a district heating
transmission and distribution network serving a relatively large number
of customers

District heating networks generally have installed capacities in the range

of 600 to 1200 megawatt-thermal ( M W(th)) in large cities, decreasing
to approximately 10 to 50 MW (th) in towns and small communities. The
temperature range required by district heating systems is around 100 to
150 °C.Within the industrial sector, process heat is used for a very large
variety of applications with- different heat requirements and with
temperature ranges covering a wide spectrum.Regarding thle power
ranges of the heat sources required, similar patterns are found in most
industrialized countries. In general, about half of the users require less
than 10 MW (tlh) and anotlher 40% between 10 and 50 MW (th). There is
a steady decrease in the number of users as the power requirements
become higher. About 99% of the users are included in the range of less
than 300 MW (th) which acco unts for about 80% of the total energy
consumned. Individual large users withl energy intensive indulstrial
processes cover the remaining portion of the industrial heat market with
requirements up to 1000 M/W (th), and exceptionally even more. Thlis
-shows the highly fragmented nature of thle industrial heat market.
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 I
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

For large size reactors, the usual approach is to build multiple unit
stations. When when used in the co-generation mode, electnrcity would
always constitute the main product. Serval co-generation nuclear power
plants already supplied process heat to industrial users. Carrentand
advanced light or heavy water reactors offer heat in the low temperatture
range, which corresponds to the requirements of several industrial
processes. Heat only reactors have not yet been applied on an industrial/
commercial Scale for the supply of process heat

4- Waste management
The wastes from peaceful uses of nuclear energy tend to receive the lion's
share of public scrutiny, even when they are properly managed,
contained, and have radioactivity levels similar to those from other
sources that are not managed as well. The amount of radioactivity in
waste accunulated as a result of nuclear power production arotund the
world dtuing the last half centtry is also on the order of 1000 EBq; this
inventory is growing at a rate of approximately 1 00 Ebq per year.

The volume of civilian radioactive waste is not very large either. All the
high-level waste accumutlated so far thouglh intensely radioactive could be
accommodated in a large store of arotud one hectare, or one city block.
This is the result of the efficiency of nuclear fuiel and the strict strategy of
concentration and confinement of waste followed by the civilian nuclear
industry. Operating a 1000 megawatt electric nuclear power plant
requires arotmd 27 tonnes of fiuel per year. An equivalent fossil fiel plant
would consume per year approximately 2.6 million tonnes of coal ( or 5
trains of 1400 tonnes each per day ) or 2 million tonnes of oil ( or 10
supertankers per year ) [9,101 Not surprisingly, these differences are seen
in thle wastes being generated. Thle nuclear will produce arounld 27 tonnles
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
Faculty of ElectroniMarch 14-16, 2006 E
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

of high-level radioactive waste, 310 tonnes of intennediate level, and 460

tonnes of low level waste, whereas the equivalent coal plant will release
ito the environment 6 million tonnes of greenhouse gases, 244,000
tonnes of sulphur oxides, 222,000 tonnes of nitrogen oxides, and 320,000
tonnes of ash containing 400 tonnes of toxic heavy metals. These ashes
contain large amounts of concentrated NORMs which may commit the
human race to higher collective doses than those attributable to wastes
discharged into the environment by nuclear plants generating the same
amount of electricity.

4-1 Minimizing Radioactive Waste

A strong requirement for waste minimization arises from the generally
accepted principal objective of radioactive waste management: "... to
deal withfradioactive waste in a manner that protects human health and
the environment now and in the future without imposing undue burdens
on fututre generation [11]. This nile is properly reflected in most of the
relevant IAEA documents and also in basic regulatory and legislative
documents in IAEA Member States
A waste mimmization strategy should be established to serve as a
conceptuial basis for co-ordinated planning and implementation of desired
meastures. Thle following topics, among others, may be covered:
4-1-1 Administrative consideration.
These include the legislative basis for waste management and waste
minimization, including proper and sound waste clearance and dischlarge
policies; identification of responsibilities and commercial arrangements
between uItijites and waste managers; economic assumptions (economic
support, tax rates, discount rates ); the quality assurance system; and
qualification and trainling of staff.
 The 23r National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
Facult of Electronic March 14-16, 2006 i
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

4-1-2 Technical and safety consideration

These include the power plant capacity and performance, reactor type,
location; design principles of the nuclear facility and individual
components; the expected operational lifetime of facilities; the waste
conditioning strategy (national and also facility-specific); and the waste.

4-1-3 Reduction of waste sources.

The most straightforward method for lowering waste processing and
disposal costs is to reduce the generation of wastes in terms of volume
and activity at the source
Considering waste minimization requirements in the design and
construction phase of nuclear facilities may have a direct impact on future
waste production during both operational and decommissioning periods
.The main design-related technical options are [12]:
*the properties of materials (resistance to corrosion , higlh-quality surface
treatments, low tendency to activate and/or produce radio-nuclides that
may cause problems);
*application of the most effective , reliable and up-to date technology, to
assture that equipment will remain operable as long as possible without
replaceinent and /or maintenance;
*high performance of components and prevention of unintended of waste,
and minimization of leakage /drainage to avoid repairing active
components and producing additional waste; and
*strong separation of active and non-active media and segregation of
active media according to thleir nature and activity.
Typical practical steps that can contribute to the reduction of operational
radioactive waste generation are to :
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
0-00,10 March 14-16,2006 TInvT3
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University., Egypt.

*. Limit the number and size of the controlled areas and identify all
points in the working areas and all stages in the process where it is
possible to prevent material from becoining radioactive waste;
*: Establish waste accounting and tracking systems to quantify
sources, types, amount, activities and characteristics of waste;
* Apply recent technological processes (good operational practice)
and modify maintenance and refurbishment procedures leading to
waste reduction;
** Reuse recovered materials (e.g. boric acid, special metals, fission
material) to reduce waste generation and decrease operational costs
* Recycle and reuse liquids within the process (such as
decontamination solutions and laundry water) to reduce the volume
and potential environmental impact of discharged liquids;
*. Establish a system of sorting waste and separating waste streams to
prevent improper mixing and to assure more efficient
charactenrzation and sub sequent processing;
*: Establish a rigorous system for segregation of non-active and
active contaminated waste in the controlled area; and
*. Increase tlie flow of information among staff regarding waste
reduction philosoplhies, teclhiques and improved methods, and
emphasize the training of staffin waste reduction practices.

4-2 Minimization of Waste Volumes for Storage or Disposal.

Storage and disposal costs are often the main, though not the single
reason , for operators to reduce the voltume of generated wastes. In thle
face of public and political opposition to constnmction of facilities ,for
environmental or other reasons, the effiort to maximize thle uIse of space in
existing storage and disposal facilities has taken on added importance for
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 Inv 3 i I
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

waste management organizations Various treatment and conditioning

techniques enable substantial reduction in the final volume of conditioned
waste.

5- Environinental Impacts
Although the use of electricity is relatively benign, its generation is one
of the world's environmentally damaging activities, while the energy
sector contributes. 49% of greenhouse gases, electricity generation alone
produces more than 25% of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions.
During the past 20 years, half of all increases in energy related carbon
dioxide emissions were from electricity generation [13,14].

Table 1 illustrates the potential environmental impacts of the different

electricity generating systems .
Emissions to the environment have been the principal focus of energy
impact studies: other significant impacts such as land disturbance and
population displacement together with their economic and social
implications are less emphasized. Major impacts, such as depletion of
natural resources and large fuel and -transport requirements that influence
a wide range of areas including occupational and public safety as well as
national transport systems, are generally-ignored. The quantity of toxic
pollutants and waste generated from fossil-ftuel plants are much more than
the quantities from other energy options. In-general, the pollution depends
on the impurity level of the fuel, with natural gas cleaner than oil and oil
cleaner than coal. Tabel 2 presents emissions in kg/GWh of power-
generating systems, for the full energy-chain, including the fuel cycle and
the constnuction of the plant.A 1000 MW(e) nulclear-power planlt does not
release noxious gases or other pollutants and produces annually only
somne 30 tonnes of dischlarged h1ighl-level radioactive.
 The 23'd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
Facult of Electronic March 14-16,,2006 LInvi3L1
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

Spent-fuel along with 800 tonnes of low and intermediate level

radioactive waste. Significant reductions in the volume of low level waste
to be managed can be made tlhrough compaction. In the USA, low-level
solid waste from nuclear power plants has been reduced 10-fold over the
past decade to 30m3 annually of compacted waste per plant- a total of
some 3000m3 from all operating plants. Industrial operations in the USA
are estimated to produce annually more than 50 000 000 m3 of solid toxic
waste [14].
The fossil fuels with their combustion-associated C02 emissions, and
inherent CH4 emissions associated with their production and transport are
a separate category of high GHG emission factors, ranging from 500 to
1200g C02 equivalent/k W(e)h. Future energy-efficiency improvements
could lower these emission factors considerably, but it is unlikely that the
large gap between fossil fuels and the other energy sources can be
bridged. A major factor of uncertainty of natural gas is the release of gas
during production and transportation.
The emission factors of non-fossil fuel energies which are mature , viz
wind, geo-thermal and nuclear energy , are very low . They are in the
range of 10-70 g C02 equivalent /kW(e)h. The emission factors of
hydropower and sustainable biomass are uncertain duie to difficulties in
accounting for the emissions of CH4 from anaerobic biodegradation from
the hydropower water reservoir and in -soil biomass ( mainly roots ),
respectively . Hydropower and sustainable biomass energy have emission
factors in the range of 10-400 and 40-80 g C02 equivalent IkW(e)h,
respectively.
 The 23id National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
Facult of Electronic March 14-16,2006 InvI3 iL
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

Tablel Potential Environmental Impacts of Electricity Generating Systems:

Fossil Hydroelectric Renewables:solar, J Nuclear (full
wind, geothermal energy chain
biomass
-Global climate -Population -Air quality -Severe
change displacement. degradation reactor
-Air quality -Land loss and (geothermal, accident
degradation (coal, oil) change in use. biomass) release
-lake acidification and -Ecosystem -Extensive land -Waste
forest damage (coal, changes use repository
oil) and health -Ecosystem release.
-Toxic waste effects. changes
contamination -Loss of -Febncation
(coal ash and slag, biodiversity impact (Solar
abatement residues) -Dam failure. photovoltaic cells)
-Groundwater -Noise pollution
contamination Decommissioni (wind)
-Marine and coastal ng
pollution
(oil)
-Land disturbance
-large fuel and
transport
requirements.
-Resource depletion

Tabel 2Emissions in kg/GWh of power-generating systems, for the frill

energy-chain, including the fuel cycle and the construction of the plant
Emissions(kg/G Wind Solar Coal Nuclear
Wh)
S02 10.9-23.5 300-380 704-709 33-50
NOX 16.0-34.2 300-380 717-721 64-96
Dust 2.0-4.3 60-80 150 6-8

Thle renewable-energy soulrces, whaich are still1 under devel opmnent , viz.
solar and ocean energies , shlow emission factors of 100-3)00 g C02
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 3
[ Tnv
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

equivalent /kW(e)h (Fig3) generally , accounting for methiane sources in

the complete fuel chain increases GHG emission - factors substantially
Table 3 slhows the C02 emissions from selected plant types , together
with their expected costs of electricity generation in the year 2000 . It is
clear that a trade-off will still often be required between low cost and low
C02 emitting electricity-generating technologies, despite the projected
fall in the cost of renewable electricity . Scatter within the emission
factors from different studies of an individual energy source can be
attributed to different methods and data bases . Data bases often are not
up to date . Uncertainties in the global warming potential of CH4 also add
to the scatter in the emission factors
The direct emissions of C02 from nuclear-power generation are very low
However, it releases some C02 if indirect processes are taken into
account. The direct and indirect Co2 emissions from nuclear power
generation were calculated.
Tabel 3 Projected costs of and Co2 emissions from selected electricity-
generating sources [61
Net Cost in the C02
efficiency year 2000 emissions
(%) .U$/kWh) (kWh).
Ptulverized coal 36-43 4.0-6.5 795-950
Atmospheric fluidized-bed 36-43 4.6-5.3 795-950
Pressurized fluidized-bed 40-45 4.9-5.1 760-850
Integrated gasification coal 44-49 4.9-5.1 700-775
Combined-cycle gas-turbine 50-61 3.7-7.3 330-405
Light-water reactor 5.6-7.4 0
Large hydro _3.8-8.7 0
Centralized photovoltaic !-t11.3-62.8 0
Geothermal |_12.4-4.9 0
Wind _ 4.4-7.6 0
Large biomass 7.___5-7.8 0O___-
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 Inv 3 16
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

6- Nuclear Safety :-
Accidents at Three-Mile Island and Chernobyl demonstrated the higl
level of hazardous of existing nuclear power industry. Then two
important theses were put forward. Future nuclear reactors shall have
distinction in Kind with the existing one ; nuclear technology shall be the
forgiving one i-e that some single errors of operator shall not cause high
probability of accident severe consequences. Recognizing the necessity to
take thoroughgoimg decisions has brought the LAEA to a decision to
develop the " User Requirements" [15-18. j
The existing requirements can be Stunmarized as follows:
* A design life of 60 years;
* Reliable and flexible operation, with high overall plant availability,
low level of unplanned outages, short refuelling outages, good
controllability (e.g., 100-50-100% load following capability ). and
operating cycles extended up to 24 months;
* Increased margins to reduce sensitivity to distLrbance and the
number of safety challenges ;
* Improved automation and man-machine interface wlhich, together
with the increased margins, provide more time for the operator to
act in accident/incident situations, and reduce the probability of
operator errors;
* Core damage frequency less than 10-5 per reactor-year and
cumulative frequency of large releases following core damage less
than 10-6 per reactor- year ; and
* Design measures to cope with servers accidents.
In one specific area, th1ere is a distinct difference between requirements
for Eulrope and thle United States. Thlis differenlce is attributed to thle
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 FnvT3 17
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

higher population density in Europe leading to lower release targets for

EUR as follows:
* To limit emergency protection actions beyond 800m from the
reactor during early releases from the containment;
* To avoid delayed actions (temporary transfer of people) at any time
beyond about 3 km from the reactor;
* To avoid long tenn actions, involving pennanent (longer than I
year) resettlement of the public, at any distance beyond 800 m.
from the reactor; and
* To ensure that restrictions on the consumption of foodstuffs and
crops will be li'mited in terms of time and grouid area
User requirements for future nuclear installations represent an
idealization of what is desirable in safety taking into account both
national /regional trends and what is likely to be technologically
achievable
6-1 Basic Safety Functions
For nuclear reactors. basic, safety functions are to: control reactivity;
reactors remove heat from the core; and confine radioactive materials and
shield radiation
For fuel installations (including spent fuel storage at reactor sites),they
are to: control sub-criticality and chemistry ; remove decay heat from
radio nuclides; and confine radioactivity and shield radiation .To ensure
that ftndamental safety ftnctions are adequately fulfilled ,an effective
defence-in-depth strategy should be implemented, combined with an
increased use of inhlerent safety characteristics and passive systems in
nuclear designs.
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 3
LI vI 8J
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

6-2 Defence in Depth':

Defence-in depth provides an overall strategy for safety measures and
features and featuires of nuclear installations .The strategy is twofold :
first ,to prevent accidents and ,second , if prevention fails, to limit their
potential consequences and prevent any evolution to more serious
conditions. Accident prevention is the first priority.
An increased use of inherent safety characteristics will strengtlhen
accident prevention in futtLre nuclear installations. A plant has an
inherently safe characteristic against a potential hazard if the hazard is
rendered physically impossible. An inherent safety characteristic is
achieved through the choice of physical and- chemical properties of
nuclear fuel , coolant and other components.
The resulting approach to safety of INS is otutlined in Fig [4]. The general
direction for innovation to enlhance defence-in-depth are presented in
table 4.

6-3 Application of Basic Safety Approach to Fuel cycle facilities.

There is a common agreement that the defence-in-depth strategy should
be also used for fuel cysle facilities but defence-in depth should be
applied taking into account the major differences between fuel cycle
facilities and reactors, namely:
* The energy potentially released in a criticality accident in a fuel
cycle facility is less than that in a reactor power nrnaway;
* The routine release may be larger due to mechanical or chemical
processes;
* The likelihood of release of chemical energy is higher; and
* Thle power denlsity is orders of magnlituldes less inl comparisonl to a
reactor core.
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 [Inv3
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

Table 4 Innovation to enlhance the levels of defence-in-depth

|1 rPrevention of abnormal |Enhance prevention by increased

|Operation and failures emphasis on inhlerently safe designl
.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---
l | ~~~~~~characteristics and passive safetyl
|- - ___|_
__ _ __ _ _|_ _ features
2 Control of abnomal Give priority to advanced control and
operation and detection of monitoring systems with enhancedl
failures reliability, intelligence and limitingl
.. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
featu res
~ ~ ~ ~

3 Control of accidents Achieve fundamental safety functions by

|within the design basis |optimised combination of active &l
l I~~~~~~passive design features; limit fuell
failures; increase grace period to several
_I__ hours
4 Control of severe plant Increase reliability of systems to control
iconditions, including complex accident sequences; decrease j
prevention and mitigation severe core damage frequency by at least
of thle consequences of one order of magnitude, and even more t
5
________..severe accidents .
Mitigation of radio-
for facilities.
No need for evacuation or relocation
.rban-sited
logical consequences of measures outside the plant site.l
significant releases of ll
L _____
I__ radioactiv e materials ____________________________.......

The basic strategy, however, remuains the same, namely : all levels of
protection should be implemented to keep the whole risk as low as
reasonably achievable, social anld economic factors taking into account.
In addition, dependence on hulman action in assuring thle different levels
of defence-in depth shoulld be reduced

6-4 Basic Principles

There are five Basic Principles, namnely :
Innovative nuclear reactors and fuel cycle installations shall :
 The 23"d National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 Inv3J20
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

1. Incorporate enhanced defence-rn-depth as a part of their

fundamental safety approach and the levels of protection in
defence-in-depth shall be more independent from each otlher than
in current installations;
2- Prevent, reduce or contain releases (in that order of priority) of
radioactive and other hazardous material in construction,, normal
operation, deconmmissioning and accidents to the point that these risks
are comparable to that of industrial facilities used for similar purposes
3- Incorporate increased emphasis on inherent safety characteristics and
passive safety features as a part of their fundamental safety approach;
4- Include associated RD&D work to bring the knowledge of plant
characteristics and the capability of computer codes used for safety
analyses to at least the same confidence level as for the existing plants
5- Include a holistic life-cycle analysis encompassing the effect on people
and on thle environment of the entire integrated fuel cycle.

7- Sustainability and Cost of Nuclear Energy:

Nuclear energy has the advantage that large amotmts of energy can be
released from small amounts of relatively abundant and cheep material.
In the period after the Second World war, there were suggestions that
nuclear electric would be " too cheap to meter [19]
The reality has proved somewhat different .Fifty years on , after very
large investments, the cost of the electricity produced remains hiigh. Only
under special conditions, nuclear energy has proved to be able to compete
well with fossil fuelled altematives.At present the economics of nuclear
power is likely to become even less favorable, as for thle alternatives costs
hlave coming down if competitive conditions are strong .Moreover, in thle
current context of liberalization of the electricity and energy market,
 The 23"' National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
Facult of Electronic March 4-16,2006 I i lUl
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

nuclear's capital intensity constitutes a clear disadvantage . Consequently

at current and expected gas prices , new nuclear power plants cannot
compete against natural gas-fuelled combined cycle technologies in those
places where gas supply infrastructures are in place [ 3,16,17].

Over the years ,new nuclear power plants have become progressively
more capital intensive , taken longer to build than other conventional
power generating facilities , involved increasingly prescriptive and
cumbersome procurement, and entailed longer and costlier regulatory and
licensing procedures. All these factors tend to increase financial and
commercial risks, and delay innovation [12].On average ,the Capital costs
for building new nuclear plants of current reactor Fulled plants desing are
2-4 times more than fossil .The challenge for industry is to reduce these
costs to a generally competitive level. Without innovation., nuclear power
is unlikely to meet this challenge [13] Quantification of the external costs
of today's fossil energy plants would improve the economics of nuclear
plants. But these benefik will not be so great with various advanced fossil
fuel technologies involving ftuel decarbonization and C02 sequestration
[3,17] .Thus direct economic costs will continue to be important in
deternining the ftuture of nuclear power[Fig.5].
In conclusion, as stated in the World Energy Assessment published in
2000: "If nuclear power it to become economically viable again,
innovations will be needed that can provide electricity at costs
competitive with other fututre near-zero-emission energy technologies.
Moreover this hlas to be done in ways that are consistent with meeting
concerns aboult nuclear safety, proliferation and diversion ,and radioactive
waste disposal"[l4, 1 9J
 The 23r National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 E
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

In sumnmary , based on the approaches and conditions in many of the

studies , it is concluded that present day nuclear technology use is not
compatible witlh sustainable development . For nuclear energy to qualify
as a sustainable energy option , concerns regarding safety , waste
management and disposal , proliferation and diversion , and public
acceptance must be addressed in ways that enable nuclear energy to
compete on a economic basis . It requires new concepts and ideas X
technological innovation , as well as improved institutional arrangements
and risk management strategies.

8- Proliferation Resistance
Proliferation resistance is defined as that characteristic of a nuclear
energy system that impedes the diversion or undeclared production of
nuclear material, or misuse of technology, by states intent on acquiring
nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices
The degree of proliferation resistance results from a combination of, inter
alia, technical design features, operational modalities, institutional
arrangements and safeguards meastres. These can be classified as
intrinsic features and extrinsic measures[20,21].
Intrinsic proliferation resistance feattres are those features that result
from the technical design of nuclear energy systems, including those that
facilitate the hinplementation of extrinsic measures.
Extrinsic proliferation resistance measures are those measures that result
from states decisions and Lindertakings related to nuclear energy systems.
Safeguards is an extrinsic neasure comprising legal agreements between
the party having authority over the nuclear energy system and a
verification or control authtority ,binding obligations on bothl parties and
verification uIsing a inter alias, on site inspection.
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 i
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

A1000 Mwe Light Water Reactor discharges about 200 Kg of plutonium

a year This amount is enough to produce twenty nuclear explosives .A
global installed LWR capacity of 3,000 Gwe would produce about
500.000 Kg of plutonium a year. With breeder reactors instead of LWR's,
this figure could increase to about 5 million kg plutonium a year . This
would create a high diversion risk of fissile materials and nuclear
weapons [3] .In addition , also in others parts of the nuclear fuel cycle
technologies and materials can be misused , i.e. applied for non-peaceful
purposes. Therefore, a nuclear system should be developed that is far
more diversion resistant. It requires stronger institutional arrangements to
keep peaceful and military uses separate and to prevent the misuse of
nuclear possibilities. It also requires the development and application of
advanced technologies aimed at limiting opportunities of acquiring
nuclear weapons under the guise of peaceful nuclear energy applications
and stealing weapon-usable nuclear materials.In this context, a number of
"diversion -resistance criteria for future nuclear power" was formulated
[17] that- somewhat modified -can be summarized as follows:-
1-Development of an advanced nuclear and fuel cycle technology that
produces far less fissionable , weapons-usable materials in spent fuel ;
as an indication ,less than a critical mass per year per GW of capacity.
2-The new technology should in principle be applicable in each modem
society in a sound manner, 'culture proof and without discriminatory
conditions among nations.
3- Fissionable weapons-usable material thlat is not contained in spent fuel
and facilities to enrich uranium or to separate plutonium shall not
exist outside international centers that are maintained under tight
phlysical security of the JAEA.
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 4-16,2006 E
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

4- As far as possible, fissionable weapons-usable material produced in

reactors should be contained im spent fuel.
5- Spent ftuel shall be stored in international centers.

9-Health Effects and Risk Comparison:

There has been no credible documentation of health effects associated
with routine operation of commercial nuclear facilities aniywhere in the
world .Widely accepted investigations , such as the comprehensive 1990
National Institutes of Health (NIH) study of some one million cancer
deaths' in people living near nuclear power plants in the USA,
demonstrate no correlation between cancer deaths and plant operation.
Investigations carried out in Canada ,France, Japan and the United
Kingdom support the NIH results In considering health effects from
nuclear power activities , any postulated risks from low level radiation
exposures must be put into perspective with known risks from the toxic
pollutants released from other terms of energy production . Unforttmately
the task of comparison is difficult, as there is vastly more scientific
infonnation about health effects from radiation than from the various
toxic pollutants.

Health effects from energy related pollutants, as with radiation ,are

exposure dependent. For high levels of toxic pollutant exposure there is
doubt about the potential health effects .Acute respiratory disorders are
well documented for high levels of atmospheric pollution ,as are a
number of respiratory disorders at more inoderate levels .Heavy metal
ingestion can cause a wide range of substance specific health disorders
Arsenic-containing coal used in the Czech Repulblic for many years
caused haigh levels of contamnination, and arsenic specific hlealthl effects
h1ave been documented in chlildren livinlg ill affected areas.
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
Faculty of Electronic March 14-16, 2006 Ifl jj25
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

The higher overall death rates observed in areas with persistent

atmosplheric pollution ,particularly from cardiovascular and pulmonary
disorders , is a strong indicator that long term health effects from
continuous low level exposures do develop. The WHO ,in its 1997 report
on sustainable development, estimates that deaths due to indoor and
outdoor air pollution from energy activities account for 6% of the total 50
million annual global deaths.The multiple indirect effect from energy
related environmental pollution are even more difficult to assess.

Beyond doubt, the Chemobyl accident was severe accident in all its
dimensions. For Comparison purposes, a review of other energy related
as well .Industrial accidents is needed .While the perception of nuclear
accidents may not change, such a review provides some perspective. In
the industrial sector, the well known 1984 Bhopal accident at a chemical
plant in India caused some 3000 early deaths and serveral hundred
thousand severe health effects.

In the energy sector, dam failure and overlapping have caused thousands
of deaths and massive disruptions in social and economic activities with
the displacement of entire towns -the Variant dam overlapping in Italy
and dam failures in Gujarat and Orissa in India are tlhree suclh examples,
each with several thousand fatalities. Severe coal mine accidents, causing
several hundred deaths, are not rare. Explosions and major fires in the oil
and gas industry have involved botlh occtupational and public fatalities and
injuries. A pipeline gas leak explosion in the Urals involved-500
fatalities. Energy sector accidents have also led to severe environmental
damage, such as the 1989 "Exxon Valdez " oil-tanker accident in Alaska
[15-16j,
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 IEIIII
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

If risk assessments considered only short-tenr severe accident fatalities,

the reported data would indicate that hydroelectrc and gas fiuel cycles
have led to the largest single event fatality numbers. However, to draw
conclusions about the relative safety of the various energy systems,
fatalities and morbidity - occupational as well as public -- over the longer
tenn must be considered. Equally importanit are the maturity of the
technology, the quality and maintenance of equipment and the safety and
environmental controls .

10- Conclusions
The future potential of nuclear power largely depends on regional energy
demand growvth , Co2 Constraints and relative competitiveness of nuclear
power . In particular, carbon tax could change the relative
competitiveness of nuclear power quite significantly and 20% reduction
of nuclear power generation cost could also increase future nuclear
growth substantially.
In general , it is desirabe to have -a standardized reactor design all over the
world, so that production scale merit can be maximized For nuclear
technology to make a substantial contribution to energy supplies,
innovation is essential- innovation that is global in scope, responsive to
concerns and collaborative in its approach. Environmental impacts caused
by nuclear power generation and its related fiuel cycle activities become
key factors for fuiture nuclear installation.
Environmental concerns should be addressed for the sustainable
development of nuclear power. Active R&D is underway on a number of
new nulclear reactor anld fulel cycle technologies and international
cooperation woulld be h1elpful1 to facilitate those efforts.
 The 23'd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 Inv 37
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

References
1-Sustainable Development in a Dynamic World - World Development
Report - 2003 , World Bank.
2-Energy , Electricity and Nuclear Power Estimates For the period up to
2020 , Reference Data Series No. I ,July 2002 , LkEA.
3-International conference on Innovative Technologies for nuclear Fuel
Cycles and Nuclear power, 23-26 June 2003 , LAEA Vienna, Austria
(Proceeding inpreparation)
4-International Atomic Energy Agency , Guidance for the evaluation of
innovative nuclear reactors and Fuel cycles ", Report ofPhase IA of the
International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles
(INPRO) , IAEA - TECDOC- 1362 , June 2003.
5-OECD International Energy Agency, OECD Nuclear Energy Agency,
Innovative Nuclear Reactor Development Opportunities for International
Cooperation , OECD / LEA, Paris, 2002
6-Rashad S.M., Hammad , F.H; Nuclear Power and the enviromnent;
Comparative assessment of environmental and. health impacts of
electricity generating systems, Applied Energy 65 ( 2000 ) 211- 229
7-International Atomic Energy Agency , Status of non electric ntuclear
heat applications : Technology and safety , IAEA - TECDOC - 11 84,
Nov.2000
8-International Atomic Energy Agency, nuclear Heat applications:
Design Aspects and operating Experience, IAEA- TECDOC-1056, LIEA,
Vienna, 1998 .
9-International Atomic Energy Agency, Waste solutions, IAEA Bulletin,
Vol.42 No.3, 2000, Vienna, Aulstria.
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 E
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

10-Rashad S.M.,) Radioactive west management Overview , Proceedings

of Energy and Environment Development Conference , 3-6 August 1999,
Port Elizabeth , South Africa.
I I-International Atomic Energy Energy Agency, the principles of
Radioactive waste management, safety series No. 11 1 -F, IAEA, Vienna,
1995.
12- International Atomic Energy Agency, changing Realities, IAEA
Bulletin, Vol.40, No.1, 1998 Vienna, Austria.
13-International Atomic Energy Agency, Comparison of energy sources
in terms of their frill-energy-chain emission factors of greenhouse gases
IAEA-TECDOC-892, Vienna, IAEA, 1996.
14-International Atomic Energy Agency, Net energy analysis of different
electricity generation systems, IAEA- TECDO- 754, Vienna, IAEA
1994.
15-Rashad S.M., lessons learned From selected nuclear , radiological and
industrial accidents, Proceedings of seminar on safety , Quality and Risk
Cultures, Cairo , Egypt, 1996
16-International Atomic Energy Agency , Nuclear Technology Review
2002, IAEA , Vienna, 2002
17-International Atomic Energy Agency, safety of Nuclear Power Plants
Design Requirements, safety standards Series No . NS - R - I , LAEA
Vienna, 2000.
1 8-Intemational Nuclear Safety Advisory Group , Basic Safety Principles
for Nuclear Power Plants 75- INSAG - 3 Rev. 1, INSAG -12 , INSAG
series NO.12 , IAEA, Vienna, 1999
l 9-Samejima K. ret al, Economic Viability of Innovative nuclear Reactor
anld fuel cycle Techlnologies, paper presented at the conference on
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 Ijv 3j29
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.
Innovative Technologies for Nuclear fuel Cycles and Nuclear Power,
23-26 June 2003, IAEA, Vienna.
20-International Atomic Energy Agency Department of Safeguards,
Proliferation Resistance Fundamentals for Future Nuclear Energy
Systems , STR - 332 , IAEA, Vienna ( 2002).
21-United States Department of Energy Nuclear Energy Research
Advisory Committee , Technological Opportunities to Increase the
Proliferation Resistance of Global Civilian Nuclear Power Systems,
Report by the Tops Task Force of the Nuclear Energy Research Advisory
Committee, NERAC (2001).

..0 .--.. .b.!

,,_
... .' _.,- .......... .- _ __ ._

.:,- @ _ ~~~~~.. .. :. i_t

Fig (1) World GDP over Time 1950-2010

(.Proceeding of Intemnational Conference on Innovation Technologies for
Nuiclear Fuel Cycles and Nuclear Power, LAEA, Juine, 2003)
 The 23r! National Radio Science Conference (NRG 2006)
March 14-16, 2006;
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufa University, Egypt.

7000 ........

.c 6000

rt :Amera&n _
.2
2 PP 0
:dD o = F
CZ 2EO ;000 --10 020 :203(} 140 2050
.* . I,.

Fig 2 Regional Nuclear Power Generation Prospects

- )t. . . ;

40 0 1 11 1

2000
Z
0
2010
[
10...
2Natg3s
_s6;
2020
-=3:.e ' . Ln-
2040 050PVlo
: l : L-lo 0 z7.
Fig (3) Full Energy Chain Co2Equivalent Emission Factors (IAEA)
 The 23rd National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
March 14-16, 2006 Inv 3
Facuy Of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiya University, Egypt.

General Nuclear Safety Objective

Fundamental Safet Ftmctions

Nuclear Reactors Fuel Cycle Installations
* Control reactivity; | Control sub-criticality and chemistry
* Remove heat from the core; . Remove decay heat from radio-
nuclides;
* Confine radioactivity and . Confine radioactivity and shield
shield radiation radiation.

Defenec, in Demth
Determine istie * Prevent abnormal operation and
Inas Emphasis
& probabilistic failures; on hem safety
Safety Analyses
0
Control abnormal operation, Charcter istics
detect failures;
* Control accidents within the
design basis;
* Assure low damage
frequencies(e.g. a lower core
damage frequency for reactors;
* Contain released radioactive
mnaterals.

Pasive
Fig 4). appranchet
Systems develnopmetiofs UsrRqurmntdo

innovative nuclear energy system in the area of safety.

 The 23r" National Radio Science Conference (NRSC 2006)
N. / v >,March 14-16, 2006 1 Inv 3 3
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, Menoufiyn University, Egypt.

D
1 ;4000 FeW V ' W Y S _ _

TOM

120 0 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :zo%(s~ ~ ~ ~.7t

t :40000

Geeat0
:~~20 in th201Wo2070 2'fY4 ?04 ,:,(JE,I

Fi(5 The Efet of ost.Reduc.tio on Nuclear Poer*TA-8 fi

Fi(5 TGeeato
0hEfetofCsoedcinstNceaoe
0
inO the WorldL = 4Ett