TechnicalReport

NuclearPowerinIndia: TheRoadAhead
AnshuBharadwaj, LVKrishnan, S.Rajgopal.

CenterforStudyofScience,TechnologyandPolicy(CSTEP), CAIRBuilding,RajBhavanCircle, HighGrounds,Bangalore560001. www.cstep.in

ThisstudywassupportedbySSNEducationalandCharitableTrust,Chennaiandispart ofCSTEPsongoingresearchinIndiasenergyandelectricpowersector. Center for Study of Science, Technology and Policy (CSTEP) is a private, nonprofit (Section 25) research corporation. CSTEPs mandate and vision is to undertake world classresearchandanalysisinchosenareasofscience,technologyandengineeringand their intersection with policy and decisionmaking. CSTEPs studies do not necessarily reflecttheopinionsofitssponsors. Nopartofthisreportmaybereproducedinanyformbyanyelectronicormechanical means(includingphotocopying,recording,orinformationstorageandretrieval)without permissionfromCSTEP. CenterforStudyofScience,TechnologyandPolicy(CSTEP), CAIRBuilding,RajBhavanCircle, HighGrounds,Bangalore560001. Telephone:+918022373311 Fax:+918022372619 www.cstep.in
1

Preface
DrVSArunachalam,Chairman,CSTEP Nuclearenergyisonceagainontheheadlines.Notfortheconcernsthatweigheddownthistechnologyin the pastand these have not vanishedbut for the options it appears to provide for generating electricitywithoutemissionsofthegreenhousegasCO2.Theglobalworkhorseforelectricitygeneration today is coal, producing bulk of the electricity, and, in the process emitting over 12 billion Tons of CO2 annuallyintoatmosphere.Technologiesforcapturing,containingandsequesteringthegasaretoyetto becomecommercial.Thereareincreasingconcernsthatglobalwarming,duetoheattrappinggaseslike CO2 is already beyond control and will only be getting worse, flooding land, turning rich pastures into deserts and making life on earth intolerable. Renewable energy options are still not large enough or commercially viable to substitute coal. What, then, prevents nuclear power emerging to control the unsatiatedthirstformorecoal? There are three major concerns: (i) nuclear weapons proliferation; (ii) perceived high cost of nuclear power,and(iii)safedisposalofnuclearwastes. The fuel for nuclear reactors, Uranium 235 and Plutonium are the very materials for making atomic bombs. A few kilograms would suffice to change the benign fuel for power generation into a fearsome weaponformassdestruction.Consideringtonsofthesematerialsareneededtofuelreactors,howcan webeassuredthatafewkilogramsdontgetstolen?Fortunately,inspiteofover400reactorsoperating indifferentpartsoftheglobe,thishasnothappened.Foronething,thephysicalsecuritysystemsthatare in place, and the internationally accepted procedures that have been erected to account for fissile materialsarerobustandeffectiveandhavesecurednuclearfuelsfromdiversionforoverdecades.There wererealfears,whentheSovietUnionunfolded,thattonsofhighlyenricheduraniumlockedinRussian plants and repositories could be smuggled out for the global black market. Fortunately, this has not happenedandRussiansystemsofcommandandcontrolprovedtoberobustagainstsmugglers.Even aftertwodecades,noclandestineuraniumhassurfacedintheundergroundarmsbazaar.Thereisalsoa technicalsafeguardinherenttonuclearfuels.Thefissilematerialscontentinfuelrodsisalwayslessthan thehighconcentrationsneededformakingthebomb.These,ofcourse,canbeenriched,butwouldtake sophisticated laboratory facilities and knowledgeable technicians and may not easily be available to terrorist groups. The case of nations pursuing weapons development clandestinely is a different case altogetherandmaynotbepreventedbyshuttingoffnuclearpowerstations. Howcostlyisnuclearpower?Therearedifficultiesinobtainingreliabledata.TherecentlyconductedMIT study places it around $2 million for a megawatt. Recent quotations form Light Water Reactor

manufacturers put the cost up to $3 million per megawatt. We believe that these estimates are incomplete. Plutonium, extracted from reprocessed fuel, has as a fuel good commercial value and this should be accounted as also the costs of reprocessing. Such an integrated costing has not as yet been done,mainlybecausethewesterncountriesareonlyinterestedintheoncethroughtechnology,where reprocessing or plutonium extraction is not counted. Preliminary calculations that take into account reprocessing of Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR) fuelsas distinct from Light Water Reactor (LWR)fuelsthatarerelativelymoredifficulttoreprocesssuggestthatnuclearpowerwhenintegrated withspentfuelreprocessingandplutoniumaccountingcanbecostcompetitivetothevariousrenewable energyoptionsthatarenowbeingevaluated. 1 Nuclear waste disposal was seen as a major problem a few decades ago with fears of radioactivity spreadingalloverthecountryside.Thishasnotborneout.Theencapsulationtechnologieswhereceramic impervious containers are able to seal radioactive wastes securely and without leaks are proving to be robust and reliable. Even the amount of high activity wastes when properly graded is smaller than originally calculated especially when fuel reprocessing and fast reactors are also integrated into the system.AroughcalculationindicatesthatIndia,evenafterfollowingthereactorbuildingcampaignswe suggest in this report, will generate just the amount of wastes that France has accumulated and successfullycontainedinthepastfivedecades. IfIndiaseesnuclearpowerasanoptionforgeneratingcarbonfreeelectricpowerinthecomingdecades, howshoulditgoaboutbuildingthiscapability? This report is prepared in an environment that India will not only have its indigenous technologies and reactorsbutalsoimportedreactorsandmaterialstochoosefrom.ImportsmaybeinevitableifIndiaisto overcome the constraints placed by its own limited uranium ore reserves. Even for fully realizing its breeder programs, the country would require adequate uranium fuel. This report evaluates various optionsfromtotalindigenouseffortstoamixofimportsandindigenoussystems.Breedersareincluded andbecomeprominentinthisanalysisandalsoasolethoriumsystem.Thereisalsoasectioncomparing ouranalysiswiththatprojectedbytheDepartmentofAtomicEnergy.Theirsappeartobemoreambitious and the underlying assumptions that suggest such an aggressive growth are not available to us. Our analysis suggests that the Planning Commissions target for nuclear power in the coming years can be met,moreorless.Thereisalsoashortsummaryondifferentclassofreactors.

Windpowerisofcoursecostcompetitive.But,then,ithasitsconstraintssuchaslocationspecificityand intermittencyofgeneration.

Evenwiththeaggressivebuildingofreactorsandatonestagesuggestedinthisreport,Indiawouldbe constructing over 15 reactors of 10,000 Megawatts of total capacity in a single yearnuclear powers contribution to countrys energy mix could grow to about 20% in the coming decades! But this very pursuit of building adequate fuel reprocessing facilities and breeder reactors will provide India with an energysecurityinthelatterdecadesofthecentury.Onlysolarenergy,inspiteofourpresentknowledge constraintsinharnessingit,canpromisethatmuch,andperhapsmore. Has India got the industrial infrastructure or reserves of workforce available for implementing the ambitious options suggested in this report? It hasnt presently, but is capable of quickly ramping, especially when it comes to manufacturing. The industrial growth in the automobile sector in the past decades and the building of quality are signs of encouragement. The training of human resource is anothermatter.Themushroomgrowthofengineeringcollegeswithindifferentteachingandtrainingare sources of concern. But these can be rectified by following the very procedures the Atomic Energy Establishmentadoptedinitsformativeyears,byrunningtrainingschoolsanddeputingitsscientistsand engineersforforeignstudiesandtraining.Butallthese,webelieve,aresecondaryandcanbeaddressed, tothecountryembarkingonanuclearpowermission,similartowhatFranceadoptedinthe1970swhen itwashitbytheoilcrunch. Somepoliticianshavequestionedtherelevanceofnuclearpowerasitcontributesamerepercentor3% thenationsenergymix.ForaperenniallyenergydeficientcountrylikeIndia,everypercentmatters.Just one percent, decides between illuminating 20 lakh households or plunging them into darkness. We submitthatnuclearpowerhasthepotentialforplayingamajorroleinIndiasquestformorepower.

Contents
Preface 2 Figures 7 Tables 9 ExecutiveSummary 10 Acknowledgements 15 Abbreviations 16 Introduction 17 DomesticNuclearProgram 19
UraniumRequirementandSupply 22 FuelFabrication 26 HeavyWater 27 SpentFuelAccumulationandReprocessing 28 FuelFabricationforFBRs 29 SodiumRequirement 29 FBRandTotalCapacityAddition 29

PathofInternationalCooperation 36
CapacityAdditionthroughLWRs 38
EconomicsofLightWaterReactors44 Investments46 OrganizationandManagement49 CivilLiability 49 ManpowerRequirements50 NuclearWasteManagement51

CapacityadditionthroughbothLWRsandPHWRs 53
Investments 57

RecentDAEProjections 60
Projectionsofalargelydomesticprogramme 60
ReprocessingofSpentFuel 62 MetalfuelledFBRswithHighBreedingCapability 62

Projectionswithimportsenabled 63 5

Appendices 67
BriefDescriptionofReactorTypes 67
PressurizedHeavyWaterReactor(PHWR) 67 FastBreederReactors(FBR) 68 LightWaterReactors 69 AdvancedHeavyWaterReactors(AHWR) 70

References 72

Figures
Figure1:PHWRCapacityAdditionProjectionsbasedonNPCILplans......................................... 20 Figure2:Growthinnuclearinstalledcapacitytill2020asperDAEprojections........................... 22 Figure3:Uranium(UO2)requirementofpresentandfuturePHWRs. ......................................... 23 Figure4:Cumulativefuel(UO2)utilizedinthePHWRsforvariouscapacityfactors.. .................. 24 Figure5:PresentandfuturerequirementsofheavywaterbyPHWRs.. ...................................... 28 Figure6:Additionofnewreprocessingplants.............................................................................. 31 Figure7:Totalspentfuelreprocessedandstockofspentfuel. ................................................... 32 Figure8:FBRandAHWRadditionschedule.................................................................................. 33 Figure9:CumulativeplutoniumutilizedintheFBRandAHWRtill2030. .................................... 33 Figure10:ImpactofmetalfuelledFBRsoncapacityadditiontill2030........................................ 34 Figure11:MaximumCapacitypossibleinthedomesticprogramtill2030.................................. 35 Figure12:SeveraltheoreticallypossiblepathwaysinIndiasnuclearlandscapewithinternational cooperation. .................................................................................................................................. 37 Figure13:PresentandfuturePHWRreactorsundersafeguards. ................................................ 38 Figure14:UraniumrequirementofthePHWRs.. ......................................................................... 39 Figure15:CumulativeuraniumutilizationinPHWRs.. ................................................................. 39 Figure16:PossiblescheduleofLWRcapacityaddition. ............................................................... 40 Figure17:ImportsofLightEnricheduranium(LEU)fortheLightWaterReactorstill2030. ....... 41 Figure18:CumulativeplutoniumrecoveredfromspentfuelofLWRsandPHWRsunder safeguards. .................................................................................................................................... 42 Figure19:Likelynuclearcapacityby2030.................................................................................... 43 Figure20:Totalcapitalinvestmentsrequiredforthenuclearpowerprogramtill2030.. ........... 47 7

Figure21:AnnualCostincurredinimportofLightEnricheduranium(LEU),Naturaluraniumand reprocessingofLWRspentfuelabroad. ....................................................................................... 48 Figure22:PHWRinstalledcapacityifcontinuedbeyond10,000MW.......................................... 53 Figure23:ImportsofnaturaluraniumforthePHWRsundersafeguards.. .................................. 55 Figure24:CumulativeplutoniumrecoveredfromspentfuelofLWRsandPHWRsunder safeguards. .................................................................................................................................... 55 Figure25:Likelynuclearinstalledcapacityby2030. .................................................................... 56 Figure26:AnnualinvestmentsrequiredwithexpansionofPHWRprogram ............................... 57 Figure27:Breakupoftotalinvestmentsupto2030withanexpansionofPHWRprogram ........ 58 Figure28:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyDAEwithinternationalcooperation ............................ 64 Figure29:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyDAEwithinternationalcooperation(delayedLWR addition) ........................................................................................................................................ 65 Figure30:SchematicdiagramofaPressurizedHeavyWaterReactor(PHWR)............................ 67 Figure31:Fuelrequirementsof700MWPHWR .......................................................................... 68 Figure32:Fuelrequirementsof500MWFBR .............................................................................. 69 Figure33:Fuelrequirementsof300MWAHWR.......................................................................... 70 8

Tables
Table1:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyPlanningCommission...................................................... 17 Table2:PresentNuclearInstalledCapacity .................................................................................. 18 Table3:Plantsunderconstruction ............................................................................................... 19 Table4:Newreactorsplannedtill2020....................................................................................... 19 Table5:Location,reservesandproductionofuraniuminIndia ................................................. 26 Table6:Maximumnuclearcapacityachievableby2030indomesticprogram ........................... 35 Table7:OperatingcharacteristicsoftheLightWaterReactors ................................................... 41 Table8:Likelynuclearpowercapacityby2020and2030withinternationalcooperation ......... 43 Table9:EconomicsofImportedLightWaterReactors................................................................. 45 Table10:Costofelectricitygenerationfromsomeoftheoperatingpowerplants..................... 46 Table11:AssumptionsofCapitalinvestmentsrequiredfornuclearprogram ............................. 47 Table12:Likelynuclearcapacityby2020and2030withanexpansionofPHWRprogram......... 57 Table13:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyDepartmentofAtomicEnergy ...................................... 60 Table14:ComparisonofMetalfuelledFBRCapacityAddition .................................................... 63 Table15:DAEprojectionsasreadfromthegraphandcomparisonwiththisstudy.................... 66 Table16:Comparisonoffeaturesofvariousreactortypes.......................................................... 71

ExecutiveSummary
Indiasgrowingeconomyrequiresanadequatesupplyofenergy.Asperseveralestimates,Indiasinstalled electricpowergenerationwouldhavetoincreaseto650,000950,000MWby2030tosustaineconomic growth of 8% 9%. India can thus ill afford to disregard any energy source and nuclear energy is an importantsourceoflongtermenergysecurity. Indiaspresentnuclearcapacityis4,120MWandcontributes3%oftheelectricity.Incomparison,future nucleargrowthprojectionsbyPlanningCommissionandDepartmentofAtomicEnergy(DAE)suggestthe needforadramaticgrowthinthecomingdecades.Thisstudyattemptstoexaminepossiblescenariosto achievethesegrowthprojections.Weconsideratwodecadetimeperiod(upto2030)aswebelievethat thefocuscanbesharperandprojectionscanbemorerealisticoverashortertimerange.Weconsidertwo scenarios. In the first, we focus on Indias domestic nuclear power program, in the absence of international cooperation. India is not a signatory to the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has been unabletoimportnuclearfuel,reactortechnologyandequipment.Inthesecondscenario,weconsiderthe likely capacity addition with international cooperation. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) have approved Indiaspecific safeguards agreements and permitted nucleartradeandcommerce.OncethisisratifiedbytheUSCongress,Indiawouldbeabletofreelyaccess nucleartechnology,equipmentandfuel. Indigenousuraniumresources,aspresentlyestimated,areadequatetosupportagenerationcapacityof 10,000MWinPressurizedHeavyWaterReactors(PHWRs)forabout40years.Besideselectricity,these reactors generate plutonium, which is a good nuclear fuel that can be used to operate Fast Breeder Reactors(FBRs).TheseFBRscanbedesignedtogeneratemoreplutoniumthantheyconsumepavingthe waytobuildnewFBRs.Thiswouldallowexpansionofelectricityproductioncapacityinthecountrywith the limited uranium available. This is the basis of the second phase of the Indian nuclear power programme. At a later stage, the FBRs could be used to convert thorium, of which we have a plentiful source,intoaformofuraniumforuseasfuelinnoveltypesofreactors.Thisconstitutesthethirdphaseof thenuclearpowerprogramme. PresentnuclearcapacityisdominatedbyPHWRs.Withtheexperiencegainedoverthepastfewdecades, theNuclearPowerCorporationofIndiaLimited(NPCIL)isnowbuildingPHWRsfairlyquickly,inaboutfive years. It has also graduated to larger designs of 700 MW as against 220 MW earlier. Present PHWR capacity is 3,800 MW. Three more reactors of 220 MW are likely to be commissioned shortly. Further, thereareplanstocompleteeightmorePHWRsof700MWeachby2017.Withthecompletionofthese, PHWRs would reach the peak capacity of 10,060 MW. While the reactors are being designed for an

10

operatinglifeof60years,domesticuraniumresourceswouldlastonlyuptoabout2050withalongterm averagecapacityfactorof75%. NPCILisalsobuildingtwoLightWaterReactors(LWRs)atKudankulam,eachof1000MW.NPCILhasalso plannedforsixmoreLWRs,takingtotalLWRcapacityto8000MW.TherearealsotwoLWRsofvintage design now operating at Tarapur with a combined capacity of 320 MW. The enriched uranium fuel requirementfortheLWRsismetbyimport. A Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor (PFBR) of 500 MW is currently being built by Bharathiya Nabhikiya Vidyut Nigam (BHAVINI) according to the design developed by the Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research(IGCAR).TheDepartmentofAtomicEnergyhasplanstobuildfourmoresimilarreactorsby2020 takingthetotalFBRcapacityto2,500MW. Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) has been developing the design of a thorium based reactor to generate electricity known as the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor (AHWR) and hopes to commence its constructionveryshortly. DAEsprojectionof21,180MWby2020isbasedonalltheaboveplansbeingfulfilled.Theadditionofsix more LWRs at Kudankulam depends on international cooperation. If these fail to materialize, capacity additionby2020wouldbelimitedto15,180MW. UraniumproductioncapacityinthecountryhasnotkeptpacewiththeconstructionofPHWRs.Present production is estimated to be about 360 Tons per year, which is not sufficient to operate the existing reactors at high capacity factors. When the PHWR capacity reaches the peak of 10,060 MW by 2017, uraniumproductionwouldhavetoriseto1,4001600Tonsperyeartooperatethesereactorsat75% 85% capacity factors. There are plans to increase uranium output to about 600 Tons per year by 2013 mainly from the mines in Jharkhand. Therefore, the balance would have to come from new mines in AndhraPradeshandMeghalayawithinthenexteightyearsorso. Besidesuranium,zirconiumalloyisanotherkeymaterialneededforPHWRsforfabricationoftheuranium fuelrodsandpressuretubesthroughwhichcoolantflows.About600Tonsofthealloyisrequiredtomeet theannualneedsofallthePHWRs,asagainstthecurrentproductionlevelof150Tonsperyearandso earlycapacityaugmentationisnecessary. The country appears to be somewhat comfortable with respect to heavy water availability. With an assumedoperationoftheplantsat70%capacity,leadingtoanoutputof430Tonsperyearandastock believedtobeabout1,800Tonsbuiltupovertheyears(arisingfromearlierslowpaceofadditionofthe

11

reactors),nonewplantsseemnecessaryuntil2030whensomeoftheolderoneswouldreachtheendof theirlife. FourFBRsofmetaloxidetype(2,000MW)require12Tonsofplutoniumtoberecoveredfromthespent fueldischargedbythePHWRs.About5000Tonsofspentfuelisestimatedtohavebeenremovedfromall thePHWRssofar.Weassumethatenoughofithasbeenreprocessedtoprovidetheneededplutonium for the FBTR, the PFBR and experiments with MOX fuel in the Tarapur LWRs and other PHWRs. If we assumethatplutoniumfuelforfutureFBRswouldcomefromspentfueldischargedbyPHWRsafter2007, the currently available reprocessing capacity seems to be insufficient and only partial realization of the plansislikely. Newreprocessingcapacityof2,100Tonsperyearisrequiredtobesetupbetween2016and2019.With this, about 7,500 Tons of spent fuel could be reprocessed to recover 26 Tons of plutonium by 2020. Sufficientallowanceisprovidedforthestorageofthespentfueltilltheradioactivitylevelsdecreaseand forthetimeneededtorecovertheplutoniumandfabricatethefreshfuelforanewreactor.Thiscouldbe utilized to start four FBRs after accounting for the plutonium requirements of the 300 MW AHWR. By 2030,24,000Tonsofspentfuelcouldbereprocessedtorecoverabout82Tonsofplutonium.Inaddition toFBRs,IndiacouldchoosetobuildsomemoreAHWRsasthoriumprogramisoflongtermimportance. Inthisoption,by2030,FBRcapacitywouldincreaseto9500MWandAHWRsto1,500MW. The FBR needs only an initial supply of plutonium and none thereafter, but the AHWR requires yearly supplementsofplutonium.Theinitialrequirementisabout1.75Tonsofplutoniumfollowedby500kgper yearforthefirsttenyearsand230kgperyearthereafter.If,afterthecompletionof300MWAHWR,no further AHWRs are built then the FBR capacity would increase to 11,500 MW by 2030. Therefore, plutoniumisbetterutilizedinFBRsandanearlydeploymentofAHWRsappearsundesirableuntilalarge numberofFBRshavebeenbuilt. ThePFBRtypeofreactorsisdesignedtooperatewithamixtureofuraniumoxideandplutoniumoxideas fuel because of the extensive experience available the world over with this kind of fuel. They breed plutoniumataveryslowrate.FBRswithametallicalloyofuranium,plutoniumandzirconiumareknown to offer significant breeding. DAE is working on designs that can produce enough excess plutonium to startanewreactorinaboutnineyearsandintendstointroducethemby2020.WiththeseFBRcapacity couldincreaseto15,500MWby2030.Therealimpactofthisstepwouldbefeltintheyearsafter2030. In the absence of international cooperation (beyond the Kudankulam reactors), the domestic nuclear program could reach a maximum of 27,760 MW by 2030. This assumes uranium mining of 1600 Tons,

12

total PHWR spent fuel reprocessing capacity of 2300 Tons and early introduction of metal fuelled FBRs andassociatedfuelcyclefacilities. International cooperation presents India with the opportunity to build many more LWRs. The higher ratingofthesereactorscomparedtothecurrentlyproposedPHWRsmeansawelcomelargerriseinthe shareofnuclearenergyforthesamenumberofreactorsbuilt.Evenwithanaggressivecapacityaddition from LWR imports on a turnkey basis, India would still have to do a lot of groundwork in several fields such as site selection, large investments, availability of industrial infrastructure and trained manpower. Assumingafiveyearconstructionperiod,theLWRscouldstartgettingcommissionedfrom2014onwards. If India adds two reactors almost every year then up to 15 reactors would be under construction simultaneously for several years. Indias total LWR capacity could then go up to about 32,000 MW by 2030.Itcouldbehigherifreactorswithalargerratingthan1,000MWarechosen.Thesereactorsimport LightEnrichedUranium(LEU).Atpeakcapacity,annualimportsofLEUwouldbeabout600Tons.By2030, about8,000TonsofLEUwouldbeimported. Indiahasoffered2060MWofPHWRstobeputunderinternationalsafeguards.Itisreasonabletoassume thatallfuturePHWRswouldbeplacedundersafeguards.Thus,whenthePHWRsreachthepeakcapacity of10,060MW,7660MWwouldbeundersafeguardsandthebalance(2,400MW)outsidesafeguards.To maximize electricity generation, PHWRs under safeguards could be operated at high capacity factors of 85% with 1,200 Tons year of uranium imported. The reactors outside safeguards could likewise be operated at high CF with 380 Tons year of indigenously produced uranium. By 2030, PHWRs under safeguards would utilize about 21,000 Tons uranium. Reactors outside safeguards would utilize about 9,000Tons. About 65 Tons of plutonium can be recovered from the PHWRs under safeguards. This would enable a totalFBRcapacityof11,500MW(assumingthatallFBRsbuiltafter2020aremetalfuelledtype).Spent fuel from theLWRs is assumed to containabout11kg of plutonium per Ton. Withhigher fuelburn up levels associated with LWRs, we allow longer cooling time of three years and a further two years for reprocessingandfuelfabrication.Alittlelessthan30Tonsofplutoniumwouldbecomeavailableby2030 from the LWRs which would enable establishing 4000 MW of FBRs. All together, total nuclear capacity couldreach57,760MWby2030and182,120MWby2050. InadditiontoimportingLWRs,IndiacouldalsodecidetobuildmorePHWRsgoingbeyond10,000MW. Thereisconsiderablemeritinthisoption.Indiacouldimporturaniumfrominternationalmarketsandis thusfreedfromthepresentconstraintsofdomesticminingandreserves.Second,thereisconsiderable experience of having built several PHWRs indigenously. Natural uranium is cheaper to import than LEU

13

andspentfuelfromPHWRsiseasiertoreprocess.Also,foreachtonofuraniumused,PHWRsproduce more plutonium than LWRs. The PHWR capacity could be increased to 25,360 MW. By choosing this option,thetotalnuclearcapacitycouldreach78,160MWby2030.Thisinvolvestheconstructionof70to 100 new reactors, spent fuel reprocessing capacity of 4200 tons, new heavy water plants, FBR fuel fabricationplantsandwastemanagementfacilities.Inthiscase,thetotalnuclearcapacityby2050would alsobehigher,285,520MW. AnexaminationoftherecentlybuiltororderedLWRsshowsthecapitalcosttovaryfrom$23million perMW,whichtranslatestoRs913CroresperMW.Thecostoftheelectricitygenerationworksoutto aboutRs3.18to4.32perunit. IndiasnuclearpowerprogramwouldrequireoverallinvestmentsofaboutRs35,00040,000Croresper annum for about twenty years, equivalent to a total of about $ 160 billion. Over a lakh of trained personnelwouldbeneededforconstructionandoperationofthereactorsandassociatedfacilities.Early introduction of courses in nuclear science and engineering in our universities would help meet the requirements to some extent while training courses are also run by the operators of the facilities. ExpertiseinthefieldintheUniversitieswouldenableairingofindependentviewsonsafetyaspects. At the government level, several steps need to be taken expeditiously to realize the full potential of nuclearpower.PrivatesectorshouldbeallowedtoparticipateinthebuildingofLWRsandthisrequiresan amendmentoftheAtomicEnergyAct.Thereshouldalsobeappropriatelegislationsforinsuranceandcivil liability. Management of radioactive wastes from privately operated reactors is another area that deservesattention. The assumptions used in this study lead to estimates of realizable nuclear power capacities less than thosefoundinthedocumentsandpresentationsoftheDAE.

14

Acknowledgements
CSTEPisgratefultoseveraloutstandingexpertswhoprovidedkeyinsights,inputsandfeedback during detailed interactions. We thank Prof V S Arunachalam, Chairman CSTEP, Dr N BalasubramanianandDrRahulTongiafortheirvaluablesuggestionsandcriticalfeedbackduring variousstagesofthereport.Wealsothankseveralpresentandformercolleaguesforindepth discussions. For this study, we did not seek or obtain any classified information from the government.WegratefullyacknowledgethefinancialsupportprovidedbySSNEducationaland CharitableTrust,Chennai.ThisstudyispartofCSTEP'songoingresearchonIndia'senergyand electricpoweroptions.

15

Abbreviations
AEC AERB AFFF AtomicEnergyCommission AtomicEnergyRegulatoryBoard AdvancedFuelFabricationFacility AdvancedHeavyWaterReactor BoilingWaterReactor CapacityFactor DepartmentofAtomicEnergy FastBreederReactor FastBreederTestReactor FuelCycleFacility FuelReprocessingPlants InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency LightEnricheduranium LightWaterReactor MixedOxideFuel NuclearFuelComplex NuclearPowerCorporationofIndiaLtd NonProliferationTreaty NuclearSuppliersGroup PrototypeFastBreederReactor PressurizedHeavyWaterReactor SystemsDoublingTime WasteImmobilizationPlants

AHWR BWR CF DAE FBR FBTR FCF FRP IAEA LEU LWR MOX NFC NPCIL NPT NSG PFBR

PHWR SDT WIP

16

Introduction
Indiasgrowingeconomyrequiresanadequatesupplyofenergy.Indiasfutureenergyrequirementsand fuelsupplyoptionshavebeenassessedbyvariousstudies[14].Moststudiesestimatethattheelasticity ofGDPwithelectricityisclosetoone 2 .Hence,electricpowerwouldhavetogrowat8%9%tosustainan equivalenteconomicgrowth.Thus,by203132,Indiasinstalledelectricpowergenerationwouldhaveto increaseto650,000950,000MWforvariousassumptionsofelasticityandeconomicgrowthprojections [1,2].Thisis57timesthepresentgenerationcapacityof140,000MW. Among the fuel supply options, wind, hydro, biomass and gas even if exploited fully, could contribute 20%25%ofIndiasfutureenergyrequirements 3 .Therefore,coal,nuclearandperhapssolarwouldhave toprovidethebulkofIndiasenergyinthecomingdecades 4 .Indiastotalcoalreservesareestimatedto be around 250 billion Tons, out of which 95 Billion Tons is proven reserves. Planning Commission estimatesthatifcoalconsumptionincreasesat5%perannum,theneconomicallyextractablecoalcould run out in 45 years. Therefore, nuclear power is crucial for Indias longterm energy security. Planning Commission considers the likely growth prospects of Indias nuclear power as in Table 1 [1]. A more recentprojectionfromDepartmentofAtomicEnergy(DAE)confirmsthe2020targetat21,180MW[5].
Table1:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyPlanningCommission[1]

2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

Optimistic 11,000MW 29,000MW 63,000MW 131,000MW 275,000MW

Pessimistic 9,000MW 21,000MW 48,000MW 104,000MW 208,000MW

ElasticityofGDPwithelectricpower()isthe%increaseinelectricitygenerationrequiredforevery%GDPgrowth.

Indiashydroelectricitypotentialis150,000MW(35%capacityfactor).Windpotentialis50,000MWandistoo intermittent(~20%capacityfactor).Biomasspotentialisestimatedat18,000MWfromagroresiduesandanother 5,000MWfromcogenerationinriceandsugarmills. MostpartsofIndiareceivegoodsolarradiation.Using2millionhectaresoflandcouldgenerateabout500,000MW. However,intermittency,costandenergystorageissueswouldhavetobeaddressed.

17

Indiaspresentnuclearcapacityis4,120MWandcontributes3%oftheelectricitygenerated[6](Table2). Inthiscontext,theaboveprojectionsarestaggeringnumbersandsuggesttheneedforadramaticgrowth innuclearpowerinthecomingdecades.

Table2:PresentNuclearInstalledCapacity[6]

Project TAPS1 TAPS2 RAPS1 RAPS2 MAPS1 MAPS2 NAPS1 NAPS2 KAPS1 KAPS2 Kaiga2 RAPS3 Kaiga1 RAPS4 TAPS4 TAPS3 Kaiga3

Location Tarapur Tarapur Rawatbhatta Rawatbhatta Kalpakkam Kalpakkam Narora Narora Kakrapar Kakrapar Kaiga Rawatbhatta Kaiga Rawatbhatta Tarapur Tarapur Kaiga

Reactor Type BWR BWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR

Dateof Commissioning 28Oct69 28Oct69 16Dec73 1Apr81 27Jan84 21Mar86 1Jan91 1Jul92 6May93 1Sep95 16Mar00 1Jun00 16Nov00 23Dec00 12Sep05 18Aug06 6May07 Total

Capacity (MW) 160 160 100 200 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 220 540 540 220 4120

To achieve the above projections, India would have to significantly augment its capabilities in a large number of interconnected activities, such as: uranium mining, fuel fabrication, spent fuel reprocessing, siteselection,investmentdecisionsandwastemanagementetc.Eachoftheseisaseparatesubjectinits ownrightandrequiresanindependentandcomprehensivestudy. In this study, we attempt to examine possible scenarios for India to achieve the above targets. We consider a two decade time period (up to 2030) as we believe that the focus can be sharper and projections can be more realistic over a shorter time range. We also realize that longer term nuclear projections would depend on the technology developments and achievements in the near term in high breedingfastreactorsystemsandassociatedreprocessingactivities. Inthefirstscenario,wefocusonIndiasdomesticnuclearpowerprogram.Indiaisnotasignatorytothe Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and has been unable to import nuclear fuel, reactor technology and

18

equipment.Therefore,IndiahasplacedrelianceonthedomesticprogramconsistingofPressurizedHeavy WaterReactors(PHWR),FastBreederReactors(FBR)andThoriumreactors. Recently the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) have approvedIndiaspecificsafeguardsagreementsandpermittednucleartradeandcommerce.Oncethisis ratifiedbytheUSCongress,Indiawouldbeabletofreelyaccessnucleartechnology,equipmentandfuel. Thesecondscenariopresentsthepossibilityofnuclearcapacityadditionwithinternationalcooperation.

DomesticNuclearProgram
Indiaispursuingthethreephasenuclearprogram.ThefirstphaseconsistsofbuildingPressurizedHeavy Water Reactors (PHWR). In the second phase, the spent fuel from the PHWR will be reprocessed to produceplutoniumtobeusedintheFastBreederReactors(FBR).Finally,the3rdphasewillhavereactors using thorium as fuel 5 . Indias domestic program now has several reactors under different stages of construction(Table3)andinaddition,severalnewprojectsareplannedforthecomingdecade(Table4).
Table3:Plantsunderconstruction[6]

Project Kaiga4 RAPP5 RAPP6 KKNPP1 KKNPP2 PFBR

Location Kaiga Rawatbhatta Rawatbhatta Kudankulam Kudankulam Kalpakkam

Reactor Type PHWR PHWR PHWR LWR LWR FBR

FirstPourof Concrete Mar08 Dec07 Oct08 Dec08 Jun09 Dec04 Total

Capacity(MW) 220 220 220 1000 1000 500 3160

Table4:Newreactorsplannedtill2020[6]

ReactorType PHWR FBR LWR AHWR

Capacity 700MW 500MW 1000MW 300MW

Number 8 4 6 1 Total

TotalCapacity 5,600 2,000 6,000 6 300 13,900

Thoriumisafertilematerialandneedstobemixedwithafissilematerialsuchasplutonium. Intheabsenceofinternationalagreement,theseadditionalLWRswouldnotmaterialize.

19

IndiahasmadegoodprogressinthePHWRprograminthelastfewdecades.NuclearPowerCorporation ofIndiaLtd(NPCIL)hasstandardizedthedesignofPHWRsof220MWcapacity.Indiahasalsosuccessfully scaledupthepowerto540MWreactorsoperatingatTarapur.ThreemorePHWRsof220MWeachare likely to be commissioned during 200809. In addition, DAE is planning to build a series of 700 MW reactorsbefore2020.Indiahasalsodemonstratedimpressivecapabilityinundertakingsuccessfullymajor repairsandrefurbishmentsofthePHWRsystems. Asperthepresentplan,PHWRinstalledcapacitywouldreachapeakof10,060MWby2017(Figure1). Thispeakcapacitymayappearrelativelysmall,butisextremelycrucialasitprovidesabaseforaswitchto plutoniumfuelforFBRsandlaterforthoriumutilization.Subsequently,asthePHWRreactorsreachthe end of their life (assumed to be 60 years in this study 7 ), the PHWR capacity gradually declines. Indias domestic uranium reserves are estimated to be 61,000 Tons and this can support a PHWR capacity of 10,000MWfor40years 8 .Therefore,Indiamayhavetolookforadditionaluraniumtorunthereactorsup tothedesignlife.
Figure1:PHWRCapacityAdditionProjectionsbasedonNPCILplans.PHWRcapacityreachesapeakof10,060MWby 2017andthengraduallydeclinesasreactorsgetdecommissioned(Reactorlife60years).IfthePHWRsoperateat 80%90%capacityfactors,thedomesticuraniumreservesarelikelytorunoutin20472057.

DAEplanstodesignnewPHWRstohavea60yearlife.

Thermalburnupof6500MWdaysperToninitialheavymetal,75%capacityfactorandelectricalefficiency30%. ThermalburnupistheheatenergyreleasedperTonofinitialheavymetal.

20

India is building two Light Water Reactors (LWR) of 1,000 MW each at Kudankulam with Russian collaboration.ThesealongwiththetwooperatingBWRsatTarapurdependonimportedLightEnriched uranium(LEU).ThereisalsoaplantobuildsixadditionalLWRof1000MWeach,butthisissubjecttoan internationalagreement. Indiaisalsoconstructinga500MWprototypefastbreederreactor(PFBR)atKalpakkam.Thisisfuelledby amixtureofuraniumandplutoniumrecoveredfromthespentfueldischargedbythePHWRs.Thisreactor initiallyrequiresabout3Tonsofplutonium[7].OncethePFBRbeginsoperationwithitsownfuelrecycle facility,itisexpectedtogeneratesufficientplutoniumtobeselfsustaining.Followingthecompletionof thePFBR,thereareplanstobuildfourmoreFBRsby2020. As part of Indias longterm objective of the thorium program, there is a proposal to build a 300 MW AdvancedHeavyWaterReactor(AHWR)inafewyearstime.Thiswilloperateonamixtureofthoriumand plutonium. The reactor needs an initial load (fuel) of about 1.75 Tons of plutonium. In addition to recyclingitsspentfuel,italsorequiresanannualreloadof500kgplutoniumforthefirsttenyearsand 230kgthereafter[8]. Ifallthereactorsunderconstruction(Table3)andplanned(Table4)arecompletedonschedule,thetotal installedcapacitywouldreach21,180MWby2020.IfthesixLWRsindicatedinTable4donotmaterialize, thenthecapacitywouldbelimitedto15,180MW(Figure2).Further,asdiscussedlaterinthereport,the present PHWR spent fuel reprocessing capacity in the country is inadequate to recover sufficient plutoniumrequiredforthefourFBRsasinTable4.Withoutthese,thecapacitywouldbefurtherreduced to13,180MW.Thisfallsshortoftheprojectionof21,000MWbythePlanningCommission(Table1)and by NPCIL[5]. The scenario of domestic program beyond 2020 depends entirely on the development of FBRsandthiswillbeexaminedinthesubsequentsections.

21

Figure2:Growthinnuclearinstalledcapacitytill2020asperDAEprojections.Cumulativecapacityisexpectedtobe 15,180MW(PHWRs10,060MW,FBR2500MW,LWR2000MW,AHWR300MWandBWR320MW).

UraniumRequirementandSupply
ItiscrucialtooperatethePHWRsathighcapacityfactorsforreasonsofeconomics,fulfillingtheenergy needsandgenerationofplutoniumforthebreederreactors.Thisrequiresanadequateandcontinuous supply of uranium. Natural uranium production in the country has to rise to cater to the 15 PHWRs alreadyinoperation(3800MW),threemore(220MW)expectedtobecommissionedduring200809and eight (700 MW) reactors to be commissioned in the coming decade. Uranium production in 200607 is estimated at about 360 Tons of UO 2 9 , which can support the existing reactors at an average capacity factor of about 50%, generating about 16.6 billion kWh of electric power. To operate these reactors at higher capacity factors, the production would have to correspondingly increase. For instance, capacity factorsof75%and85%requireannualproductionof533Tonsand605TonsofUO2respectively.Clearly, thepresentproductionisnotadequatetoruneventheoperatingreactorsatthehigherpowerlevels.

Thisisanestimatebasedontheactualnuclearpowergenerationof16.6millionkWhduring200607andan averageThermalBurnUpof6500MWDaysperTon.

22

Three new PHWRs (220 MW) are expected to be commissioned in 2008 09. These would require an initialfuelloadofabout135TonsofUO2inadditiontothereloadrequirementsoftheexistingreactors. Consequently, unless uranium production goes up, the existing reactors will be forced to operate at around 35% capacity factor when the new reactors are commissioned. The first two units of 700 MW reactorsareexpectedtobecomeoperationalby2014.Theserequireaninitialfuelloadofabout280Tons ofUO2.WhenthePHWRinstalledcapacityincreasesto10,060MW,theannualproductionwouldhaveto growtoabout1,400Tonsand1,600TonsofUO2foroperationat75%and85%respectively(Figure3). Thusthepresentproductionwouldhavetoincrease45timesoverthenexttenyears.
Figure3:Uranium(UO2)requirementofpresentandfuturePHWRs.Anew220MWreactorrequiresaninitialloadof about45Tons[2].The700MWreactorsrequireaninitialloadof140Tons[2].Thus,thereisajumpinuranium requirementintheyearofcommissioningofnewreactors.Atpeakcapacity(10,060MW),PHWRswouldrequire 14001600Tonsuraniumperannumfor75%85%CF.

If uranium production goes up to meet the requirements of 10,000 MW at 85% capacity factor, then Indiasestimatedreservesof61,000Tons(UO2)wouldgetconsumedby2047(Figure4).Atlowerlevelsof uraniumproductionsupporting60%75%capacityfactors,thereservescouldlastupto205567.Itmust

23

bereemphasizedthatoperationofthePHWRsathighcapacityfactorsiscrucialnotjustforgenerating moreelectricitybutalsoforproductionofplutoniumforthebreederprogram.
Figure4:Cumulativefuel(UO2)utilizedinthePHWRsforvariouscapacityfactors.Ifthereactorsoperateat85% capacityfactor,theuraniumreservesarelikelytorunoutby2047.Atlowercapacityfactors(60%75%),thereserves couldlastupto205567.

Uranium ore found in the country contains uranium (U3O8) to the extent of less than 0.1% 10 [9]. At Jaduguda,theoregraderangesfrom0.03%to0.06%[10].Therearealsootherplacesintheworldwhere uraniumoreofthisgradeisbeingmined 11 .Theworldaverageoregradeisabout0.15%.Atabout0.05%, which is closer to the average grade of the Indian ore, about 2100 Tons of ore have to be mined and processedtoobtainaTonofUO2.Therefore,tosupportthePHWRrequirementof1400TonsofUO2,the miningcapacityshouldgrowto9,500Tonsoforeperday(assuming300daysofoperationperyear).

10

UraniumoccursintheoreasU3O8andthisisreferredtoasYellowCake.

11

OlympicDampolymetallicmineinAustraliaprocessesoreof0.06%gradeandproducesabout4,000Tonsof uraniumperannum.RossingmineinNamibiaprocessesoreofpoorergrade(0.03%)toproduceover3,000Tonsof uraniumannually.

24

 Awati and Grover report the availability of uranium in the category of Reasonably Assured Resources (RAR)tocomprise64,400TonsofU3O8equivalentto61,500TonsofUO2or54,600Tonsofmetal[11] 12 . TheAERBcitesahigherfigureinitsNationalSafetyReportcompiledmorerecentlyandstates,uranium reservesinthecountryareestimatedtobeabout95,000Tons(metal)excludingreservesinspeculative category.Afteraccountingforvariouslossesinmining,millingandfabrication,theneturaniumavailable forpowergenerationisbelievedtobeabout61,000Tons(metal)[12] 13 .Thisisaratherhighestimatefor lossesduringoreprocessing.Ifthelosses areminimizedandspeculativeresources(17,000Tonsmetal) areupgraded,thepowerpotentialinPHWRswouldbehigher[11]. Thedetailsofthelocation,reservesandproductionofuraniumareprovidedinTable5.TheJharkhand regionhasthecountryslargestdeposits,exceeding20,000Tonswithanoregradeof0.03%0.067%.A miningcapacityof5000Tonsoforeperdayisexpectedtobeavailableinafewyears.Theaverageore grade being about 0.04% 14 , it works out toannual production close to600 Tons of UO2. This has tobe further augmented by 800 Tons of UO2 per year from the proposed mines in other areas like Andhra PradeshandMeghalayatoreachthedesiredlevelof1400TonsofUO2by2017. The mines atLambapurPeddagattu area in Nalgondadistrict of Andhra Pradesh arebelieved to have a modest resource of about 6,800 Tons. According to reports, an opencast mine and three underground minesareplannedtobesetuphere,whichwouldproduceabout150TonUO2peryear[13]. TheTummalapalleareainCudappahdistrictofAndhraPradeshreportedlycontainsabout15,000Tonsof uranium (0.042% grade) comparable to the reserves in Jarkhand. An underground mine and associated plant to process about 3,000 Tons of ore per day could yield about 360 Tons of UO2 per annum [14]. Uraniumsupplyfromthismineislikelytobeginin2010. To meet the needs of the PHWRprogram, about 300 Ton of UO2 peryear would be required from the proposed mines in Meghalaya In addition to the production from the mines in Jharkhand and Andhra Pradeshasabove.Theuraniumreservesherearefairlysubstantialatabout9,500Tonsandtheoreisof relatively better quality (0.1% grade). The ore is located fairly close to ground making possible the

12

1kgofU3O8isequivalentto0.962kgofUO2and0.848kgofuraniummetal.

13

TheAERBestimateof95,000Tonsmetalappearstoincludethethreecategories:ReasonablyAssuredResources, EstimatedAdditionalResourcesI,andEstimatedAdditionalResourcesII. ParliamentQuestion1707

14

25

relativelyeasierprocessofopencastmining(orinsituleaching).Therearereportsthatamillingcapacity of2000Tonsperdayisproposedandtheproductionislikelytocommencelaterthan2010[15].Itwould produceabout600TonsofUO2peryeartakingthetotalUO2productionto1700Tonsandsupportthe operation of all the PHWRs at about 85% capacity factor. However, the area experiences heavy rainfall during the monsoon season and is also close to the Bangladesh border. These aspects need careful attentionforuninterruptedproduction.Clearly,theproductionfromMeghalayabecomesimportantifitis desiredtooperatethePHWRsathighcapacityfactors.Otherwise,thecapacityfactorwouldbelimitedto about60%.
Table5:Location,reservesandproductionofuraniuminIndia[9]

MineLocation

EstimatedOre OreGrade(Tons Reserves U3O8perTonof Ore) (Tons) Over20,000 0.03%0.067%

CurrentMilling PossibleUO2 Production 15 Capacity (Tonsoreperday) (TonsperYear) 5000[16,17] 600

Jharkhand: Jaduguda(including Bhatin,Narwapahar, Turamdih,Bagjata, Banduhurangand Mohuldih) AndhraPradesh: LambapurPeddagattu AndhraPradesh: Tummalapalle Meghalaya: Domiasat

6800 15,000 9500

0.093% 0.042% 0.104%

1250[15] 3000 2000[15] Total(ifrealized)

150 360 600 1710

FuelFabrication
TheNuclearFuelComplex(NFC)plantatHyderabadhasthecapacitytofabricate600TonsofPHWRfuel annually[18].Thiscanmeettheannualneedsofallpresent(3800MW)andthethree220MWreactors even at higher capacity factors of 85%. However, this would not be able to cope with the fuel requirementswhenthe700MWreactorscomeonlineinthenextdecade.TheDepartmentisproposing tobuildtwomorefuelfabricationplantstocatertothefutureneeds,oneforPHWRsandtheotherfor FBRs [18]. The new plant for PHWR fuel is planned to be set up at Palayakayal in Tamilnadu with a

15

Estimatebasedon300daysofoperationperyearandanaverageoregradeof0.04%.

26

capacity of 600 Tons per year and will have to be operational by 2014. It might have to be somewhat largerasotherwiseitwouldprovetobeinadequateevenifoperatedatnear100%capacityfactor,when thePHWRinstalledcapacityreaches10,000MWandifthecapacityfactorsareintherangeof85%and above. Zirconium Niobium alloy is another key material needed for fuel fabrication. Present manufacturing capacity for this alloy is about 150 Tons per annum[18]. Substantial increase in production is a prerequisiteforsuccessfulimplementationofthePHWRprogram.WhenthePHWRprogramreachesthe peakcapacityof10,000MW,therequirementofzirconiumalloyforfuelfabricationwouldbeabout600 Tons per annum. In addition, new 700 MW reactors would also require zirconium for manufacture of coolant channels. A new plant of 250 Tons per annum is under construction at Palayakayal [19]. The capacity of the new plant would have to be appropriately resized to ensure availability of 600 Tons of zirconiumincombinationwiththeexistingplantatHyderabad.

HeavyWater
HeavywaterplantsoftheDAEhavebeenoperatingwellforseveralyearsnow,andhaveovercomethe problemsencounteredintheveryearlystagesoftheprogram.Thetotaldesigncapacityofexistingheavy water plants is about 600 Tons 16 [20] The existing 15 PHWRs (3800 MW) are believed to require a 3% makeupoftheinitialinventory,whichworksoutto150Tonsperannum.Inaddition,thenewreactors require an initial core heavy water inventory. The three reactors of 220 MW expected to be commissionedin200809wouldrequireabout750Tonsofinitialinventory.Similarly,theeightreactors of700MW,whichgetcommissionedduring201417,requireacumulativeof4000Tons(1000Tonsper annum) leading to a sharp increase during that period (Figure 5).When the PHWRs reach the peak capacityof10,000MW,theannualheavywatermakeupwouldreachasteadystatevalueofabout250 Tons. Theexistingheavywaterplantsareassumedtooperateat70%capacityfactorleadingtoanannualheavy waterproductionofabout430Tons.Ifwetaketheaccumulatedheavywaterreservestobeabout1800 Tons,itshouldbeabletotakecareoftheheavywaterrequirementsofPHWRswhenthepeakcapacityis reachedandintheyearsbeyond.However,someoftheoldplants(TuticorinandBaroda)couldreachthe endoftheirlife(40years)by2030andmightbedecommissioned.Inthatcase,onenewplantmayhave tobebuiltatsometimeinthefuturetomeettheheavywaterrequirement.

16

HeavyWaterplantsarelocatedatNangal,Baroda,Tuticorin,Kota,Thal,HaziraandManuguru.

27

Figure 5: Present and future requirements of heavy water by PHWRs. The new PHWRs require an initial core inventory(250Tonsfor220MWand500Tonsfor700MW).Theannualheavywatermakeuprequirementistaken to be 3%. We assume a present heavy water stock of about 1800 Tons. This along with existing heavy water productioncapacitycouldadequatelymeettherequirementsofthePHWRprogram.

SpentFuelAccumulationandReprocessing
Spent fuel generation and reprocessing is a vital step in Indias breeder and thorium program. We can makereasonableestimatesaboutthespentfuelgenerationfromallthereactorsoperatingtillnow.Total electricpowergenerationfromnuclearpowerplantsuptoJanuary2008is213,370millionkWh 17 .This impliesthatabout5000Tonsofuraniumhasbeenconsumedsofarbyallthereactorsoperatinginthe country 18 .Thishowever,representstheminimumvalue.Ifactualaverageburnuplevelswerefoundto belower,itwouldleadtoproportionatelylargerquantityofspentfuel.Butthiswill alsoimplyalower quantityofplutoniuminthespentfuel. Therearepresentlytworeprocessingplants,eachwithareporteddesigncapacityof0.5Tonsspentfuel perdayandanannualthroughputof100Tons[21].Inthisstudy,weassumethattheseplantsoperateat

17

DatacompiledfromNPCILwebsite(Plantsunderoperation),http://www.npcil.nic.in/

18

ThermalBurnUpistakentobe6500MWDaysperTonandElectricefficiencyofpowerplantstobe30%.

28

aconservative65%capacityfactorwhileanyfutureplantswouldoperateat75%.Theplutoniumcontent inaTonofspentfuelistakentobe3.5kg. Intheabsenceofpublisheddataabouttheamountofspentfuelthatislikelytohavebeenreprocessedso far,weassumethatenoughofithasbeenreprocessedtogenerateplutoniumforFBTRpowerupgrade andthePFBR.Further,significantamountofplutoniumhasalsobeenusedupinfabricationofMOXfuel forirradiationintheBWRreactorsinTarapurandinPHWRs[22].Wetherefore,assumethatplutonium foranyfutureFBRswouldhavetobeobtainedbyreprocessingspentfuelgeneratedafterJanuary2008. Any leftover stock of spent fuel may be taken to serve as a reserve, but that could provide enough plutoniumperhapsforjustaboutone500MWFBR. As mentioned earlier, India is planning to build four new FBRs by 2020. Sufficient plutonium (12 Tons) wouldhavetoberecoveredandmadeavailableintimeforthesereactors.Presentreprocessingcapacity isinadequateandcanatbestsupportone500MWFBRoverthenexttenyears.NewFuelReprocessing Plants(FRPs)wouldhavetobebuiltandweexaminethisindetailinasubsequentsection.

FuelFabricationforFBRs
ThefirstfewcoresforthePFBRarelikelytobemanufacturedbytheAdvancedFuelFabricationFacility (AFFF)atTarapur[23].Subsequently,theFastReactorFuelCycleFacilityadjacenttothePFBRwillbecome operationaltoprovidereloadfuel.AsnewFBRscometobebuiltinquicksuccession,freshfuelfabrication capacitywouldhavetobeaugmentedtoabout10Tonsperannumforfabricationoftheinitialcores.

SodiumRequirement
About1,500Tonsofsodiumisrequiredforeach500MWFBR.Thishastobeavailablewellintimeforthe commissioningofthereactor.Facilitiesformanufactureandpurificationofsodiumtotherequiredlevels havetobeestablishedtocatertotheserialinstallationofFBRs.Tomeettherequirementsofthe4FBRs planned to be built by 2020, annual sodium production capability of 600 Tons would be needed. This wouldhavetobeaugmentedfurtherfortheFBRswhichwouldcomeupbeyond2020.

FBRandTotalCapacityAddition
PlanningCommissionsprojectionof20,000MWinstalledcapacityisbasedontwoassumptions:sixLWRs of 1000 MW each and four FBRs of the PFBR type to be built by 2020. As mentioned earlier, in the absence of international cooperation, the prospects for six new LWRs are uncertain 19 . Therefore, India

19

However,subsequenttotheIAEAandNSGapprovals,theprospectsofthesenewLWRscominguparebrighter.

29

mustfocusonadditionalFBRsbeyondthefouralreadyplannedFBRs.Thisdependsonenhancedeffortsin uraniumminingandevenmoreonspentfuelreprocessing. Thereareindicationsthattwonewreprocessingplants,eachof300Tonsperyearcapacityarelikelytobe takenupshortly[24].Itsuggeststhatdesignsareavailableandthattheplansmaybeawaitingclearances. These plants when completed will take the total installed capacity to about 800 Tons of spent fuel per annum,oranoperationalcapacityof580Tonsatacapacityfactorof75%fornewplants. Itisgenerallyobservedthatthereisalongtimeintervalbetweenthecommencementofdesignactivities andthefinalcommissioningofaFuelReprocessingPlant(FRP).Japaninitiatedbasicdesignforthelarge Rokkasho Reprocessing plant to be built in private sector, with generous borrowing from the French, British and German technologies in 1985. They selected the technology in 1987, finalized the design in 1988andapprovedtheproposalforbuildingthenewplantin1992.Thecommissioningtestsbeganten yearslaterwithhelpfromaFrenchcompany.Inactivetestswithuraniumwerecarriedoutin200406and activetestingbeganonlyin2007.TheIndiansituationcouldbedifferentasconsiderableexperiencehas been accumulated in the design, construction and operation of two plants so far with no outside help. Selectionofsuitablesitesforthenewplantsisakeystep,whichifnotdoneearlycouldresultindelays. TheperformanceofFRPsvariesfromcountrytocountryandsodothecausesforthevariation.France claimshighcapacityfactors,followedbyUK.InRussia,theplantRT1hasoperatedforseveralyearsat less than half the design capacity. Therefore, assumptions in this study could be considered relatively optimistic. Unless the performance is in this range or better, the power addition from the fast reactor programcouldturnouttobelessthanpredicted. If we assume action is initiated without delay and first of the new reprocessing plants of 300 Tons becomingoperationalin2014andthesecondin2018,theseplantscouldcumulativelyreprocessabout 3500Tonsofspentfuelby2020andproduceabout12Tonsofplutonium.Thiswouldbejustenoughto catertotheneedsoftwoFBRsof500MWandAHWRby2020.Thetotalinstalledcapacitywouldthen reachonly14,180MWby2020. By2030,thetotalspentfuelreprocessedwouldbeabout10,000Tonsyielding35Tonsofplutonium.This couldtaketheFBRinstalledcapacityto4,500MWandthetotalnuclearcapacitytoonly16,760MWby 2030.TheeightFBRstogetherwouldhaveutilized24Tonsofplutonium,whilethe300MWAHWRwould consumealmost7Tonstill2030.About15,000Tonsspentfuelwouldstillbeavailableby2030,whichif reprocessed could facilitate building more FBRs. Without further capacity addition in reprocessing of spentfuel,theinstallednuclearpowercapacitywouldbelimitedtotheabovelevel.

30

Clearly,furtherexpansionofreprocessingcapacityisrequired.Weassumethatoneplantof600Tonsis establishedeveryyearforthreeconsecutiveyears20162018andonemoreof300Tonsin2019.Thus, thetotalinstalledreprocessingcapacitywouldbe2300Tonsofspentfuelperannumby2020(Figure6). This would make Indias reprocessing capacity the largest in the world 20 . Eventually (by 2019), the correspondingoperationalcapacityat75%capacityfactorof1700Tonsperyearwouldmatchthespent fuelgenerationfromPHWRs.
Figure6:Additionofnewreprocessingplants.Anewplantof600Tonsisassumedtobecommissionedeveryyearfor threeyears(20162018)andonemoreof300Tonscommissionedin2019.By2020,thetotalinstalledcapacityfor reprocessingwouldgoupto2300Tonsandoperatingcapacityto1700Tons.

Theexpandedreprocessingcapacitywouldenablerecoveryofplutoniumfromalltheaccumulatedspent fuelby2026acceleratingtheadditionofmoreFBRs.By2030,acumulativeof24,000Tonsofspentfuel couldbereprocessedtoyieldabout82Tonsofplutonium(Table7).

20

Francehasareprocessingcapacityof1600Tonsperyear.

31

Figure7:TotalspentfuelreprocessedandstockofspentfuelwithareprocessingcapacityasinFigure6.Thespent fuelaccumulateswhilethenewreprocessingplantsarecomingup.However,after2020,thespentfuelinventory decreasesandinsteadystateitmatcheswiththespentfuelgeneration.

With such a rapid addition of reprocessing capacity, ten more FBRs could be commissioned taking the cumulativeFBRcapacityto9500MWby2030.FourmoreAHWR(eachof300MW)couldalsobebuiltin additiontotheproposed300MWAHWRtakingtheAHWRcapacityto1500MWby2030.Itisrecognized that thorium program is important for Indias longterm energy security. Therefore, even though plutoniumcouldbebetterutilizedinFBRs,itwouldbehelpfultobuildafewmoreAHWRstogainmore knowledgeandexperienceofthetechnology.Theplutoniumrecoveredinthereprocessingplantswould be almost immediately utilized for fabrication of FBR fuel. Therefore, there would be no stock piling of plutonium;theinventorybeinglimitedtoabout56Tonsattheendofeveryyear(Figure8). FBRs require 54 Tons of plutonium for an installed capacity of 9500 MW 21 as against 21 Tons for 1500 MWofAHWR(Figure9).IfitisdecidednottobuildfourmoreAHWR(1200MW),thentheFBRcapacity couldgrowupto11,500MW(asagainst9,500MW).ThisisbecausethefouradditionalAHWRswould consume nearly 15 Tons of plutonium, which could be utilized to start four more FBRs. Therefore, an earlydeploymentofcommercialAHWRsappearsundesirableuntilalargenumberofFBRreactorshave beenbuilt.Ifmetalfueledfastreactorsbecomeavailableinthisperiod,thenplutoniumutilizationwould bemoreeffectiveinbuildingmoreFBRsratherthantheAHWRs.

21

Thisexcludesthe3Tonsofplutoniumalreadyutilizedinthe500MWPFBR.

32

Figure8:FBRandAHWRadditionschedule.NewFBRandAHWRarescheduledtomatchtheplutoniumproduction fromthereprocessingplants.By2030,FBRcapacitywouldriseto9500MWandAHWRcapacityto1500MW. Plutoniumstockinanyyeardoesntexceed56Tonsafterutilizationinreactors.

Figure9:CumulativeplutoniumutilizedintheFBRandAHWRtill2030.FBRscapacityof9500Tonsutilizes54Tonsof plutonium,while1500MWofAHWRrequires22Tonsplutonium.IfIndiadecidesnottobuildfouradditionalAHWRs, thenfourmoreFBRs(2000MW)couldbeadded.

33

WenowassumethatthedesignofmetalfueledfastbreederswithaSystemsDoublingTime(SDT)of8.9 years 22 and associated fuel cycle facilities is ready and their introduction can begin from 2020 [2]. However,ifthereisastartingbaseofseveralmetalfuelledFBRs,thenthepoolingofplutoniumgenerated everyyearbytheseenablesstartingnewreactorsbeforetheSDT.Weprovideanallowanceoftwoyears forcoolingandfreshfuelfabricationforanewreactorafterreprocessingofspentfuel.Inthismanner, thetotalFBRcapacitycouldriseto15,500MWby2030asagainst11,500MWintheabsenceofmetal fueled reactors (Figure 10). The impact of metal fueled reactors would be realized in the subsequent decades.
Figure10:ImpactofmetalfuelledFBRsoncapacityadditiontill2030.

Inthiscase,thetotalnuclearinstalledcapacitywouldbe27,760MWby2030(Figure11,Table6).Inour assessment,thisisaboutthelimitofthedomesticnuclearpowerprogramtill2030.Thisiswellshortof PlanningCommissionspessimisticprojectionof48,000MW.Itshouldbereiteratedthatevenachieving 27,760MWcriticallydependsonfollowingassumptionsandtheactualcapacityadditionwouldbelowerif thesearenotrealized:

22

TheSystemsDoublingTime(SDT)isdefinedasthetimeperiod(years)duringwhichonereactorwouldproduce excessplutoniumsufficientforstartinganotherreactor.

34

Uraniumminingcapabilityof1600Tonsperannumfromthepresent350Tons Spentfuelreprocessingcapacityof2300Tonsperannumfromthepresent200Tons IntroductionofmetalfueledFBRsandassociatedfuelcyclefacilitiesafter2020.

Figure11:MaximumCapacitypossibleinthedomesticprogramtill2030.Totalnuclearcapacitycouldreacha maximumof27,760MW.Thisassumesspentfuelreprocessingcapacityof2300Tonsperannumandintroductionof metalFBRsandassociatedfuelcyclefacilitiesafter2020.

Table6:Maximumnuclearcapacityachievableby2030indomesticprogram 23

PHWR FBR(Oxide) FBR(Metal) LWR AHWR Total

9,960 2,500 13,000 2,000 300 27,760

23

320MWBWRatTarapurisassumedtobephasedoutby2021.PHWR(RAPS1)of100MWisphasedoutby2012.

35

PathofInternationalCooperation
If India receives international cooperation in its nuclear program it could transform the nuclear power landscapebyremovingthecurrentconstraintsonthedomesticnuclearpowerprogramatseverallevels. Figure12showsseveraltheoreticallypossiblescenariosifIndiaisallowedimportofnucleartechnology, equipmentandfuel.Aspertheseparationplan,Indiahasidentifiedandofferedforsafeguards14thermal powerreactorsoutof22,between2006and2014.Thisincludesthefourpresentlysafeguardedoperating reactors(TAPS1&2,RAPS1&2)andKK1&2,whichareunderconstruction.Inaddition,8morePHWRsof 220MWhavebeenplacedundersafeguards.Asforfuturethermalpowerreactors,Indiahasdecidedto place under safeguards all future civilian thermal power reactors and civilian breeder reactors, and the GovernmentofIndiaretainsthesolerighttodeterminesuchreactorsascivilian. The reactors under safeguards would have the option of using importing uranium fuel or using domestically mined uranium. The possibility of assured fuel supply should enable these reactors to operate at higher capacity factors. The spent fuel from PHWR or LWRs under safeguard could only be reprocessed in a facility under safeguards. Another option is to send the spent fuel abroad for reprocessing.TherecoveredplutoniumcouldthenbeutilizedinaFastBreederReactorundersafeguards. Cooperation with other countries and import of uranium for safeguarded reactors opens up several options, each with its own merits and limitations (Figure 12). India could, in addition to KK 1&2, build moreLWRsundersafeguardswithforeigncollaboration.Thesereactorsuselightenricheduranium(LEU), which would have to be imported. In either case, the spent fuel could be reprocessed domestically, in which case several new reprocessing plants would have to be established. Alternatively, the spent fuel could be sent abroad for reprocessing. Another possibility is to seek plutonium or LEU from other countriestofuelreactorsinIndia.Inaddition,freedfromthecurrentlimitationsofuraniumavailability, domesticprogramcouldbeexpandedtobuildmorePHWRstogobeyondthepresentlimitof10,000MW. WeexaminetwooptionsforthelikelyfutureshapeofIndiasnuclearpowerprogram.

36

Figure12:SeveraltheoreticallypossiblepathwaysinIndiasnuclearlandscapewithinternationalcooperation.Redcolorindicatesanactivityunderinternationalsafeguards.Blue colorisforactivitiesoutsidesafeguards.

Domestic uraniumMining

PHWRFuel Fabrication

PHWR

Domestic Reprocessing

FBR/AHWRFuel Fabrication

FBR/AHWR& FCF

Naturaluranium Imports

PHWRFuel Fabrication

PHWR Domestic Reprocessing FBR/AHWRFuel Fabrication FBR/AHWR& FCF

FabricatedLight Enricheduranium

LWR

Reprocessingin OtherCountries

Plutonium Import

37

CapacityAdditionthroughLWRs
In this option, we consider a halt to the present series of PHWRs after the installed capacity reaches a peakof10,060MW.ifweassumethatinadditiontothepresentcommitmentof2060MW,alltheeight 700MWreactorsareputundersafeguards,thenatotalcapacityof7660MWwouldbeundersafeguards and 2400 MW outside safeguards (Figure 13). The PHWRs under safeguards would utilize imported uranium and operate at higher capacity factors, enabling increased production of plutonium for FBRs. Theywouldrequireabout1200Tonsuraniumannuallytooperateat85%capacityfactor(Figure14).The cumulativeimportsofuraniumforthesereactorswouldbeabout21,000Tonsby2030(Figure15).We alsoassumecontinuationofthebreederprogramutilizingthespentfuelfromthePHWRs.Inthiscase,a reprocessingcapacityofabout1800Tonsperannum(3plantsof600Tonsperannumeachcommissioned during201517)couldbesufficienttoreprocessthespentfuelcomingoutPHWRcapacityof7660MW. About65Tonsofplutoniumcouldberecoveredby2030.Intheory,eventhespentfuelofPHWRsoutside safeguards could be reprocessed and the plutonium utilized in an FBR under safeguards. However, we havenotconsideredthatoption.
Figure13:PresentandfuturePHWRreactorsundersafeguards.Indiahasalreadycommittedtoplace2060MWof PHWRsunderinternationalsafeguards.Alltheproposednew700MWPHWRsareassumedtobeplacedunder safeguards.ThetotalPHWRcapacityundersafeguardsgoesupto7660MWandoutsidesafeguards2400MW.

38

Figure14:UraniumrequirementofthePHWRs.WhenthePHWRsundersafeguardsreachpeakcapacityof7,660 MW,theywouldutilizeabout1200Tonsofimporteduraniumperannumat85%CF.Unsafeguardedreactors(2400 MW)requireabout380Tonsuraniumfromdomesticproduction.

Figure15:CumulativeuraniumutilizationinPHWRs.Reactorsundersafeguardsutilizeabout21,000Tonsofuranium fromimports.Unsafeguardedreactorsutilizeabout9000Tonsofdomesticuranium.

39

InternationalcooperationpresentsIndiawiththeopportunitytobuildmanymoreLightWaterReactors (LWR).ThehigherratingofthesereactorscomparedtothecurrentlyproposedPHWRsmeansawelcome largerriseintheshareofnuclearenergyforthesamenumberofreactorsbuilt.Thereiskeennessonthe part of some supplier countries, notably Russia and France to sell LWRs to India. Now that IAEA has approved India specific safeguards and NSG has granted waiver, Russia could possibly build four more LWRsatKudankulamifthepriceiscompetitive. EvenwithanaggressivecapacityadditionfromLWRimportsonaturnkeybasis,Indiawouldstillhaveto doalotofgroundworkinseveralfieldssuchassiteselection,largeinvestments,availabilityofindustrial infrastructureandtrainedmanpower.WeassumeafiveyearconstructionperiodforLWRsandthusthe reactors could start getting commissioned from 2014 onwards. If India adds two reactors almost every yearthenupto15reactorswouldbeunderconstructionsimultaneouslyforseveralyears.Franceatone pointoftimehad30reactorsunderconstructionandcommissioned9reactorsin1980.IndiastotalLWR capacitycouldthengouptoabout32,000MWby2030(Figure16).Weconsiderthistobeareasonable assessment.ItisalsopossibletoimportLWRsofhigherratingof14001650MW.Withapropermixof reactorsofdifferentratings,thetotalachievableLWRinstalledcapacitycouldbehigher.
Figure16:PossiblescheduleofLWRcapacityaddition.Weassume5yearconstructiontime.Tworeactorsare commissionedalmosteveryyear.ThetotalLWRcapacityreaches32,000MWby2030.

40

WeassumetheLWRstooperateataburnupof50,000MWdaysperTonandat85%CF(Table7).India wouldhavetoimportLightEnricheduranium(LEU)tooperatethesereactors.AnewLWRof1000MW ratingrequiresaninitialloadingof75TonsofLEUandanannualreloadof18TonsLEUtooperateat85% CF.WhentheLWRinstalledcapacityreaches32,000MW,theannualoperatingLEUrequirementwould bearound600Tons.Indiawouldhaveimported8000TonsofLEUby2030,includingtheinitialloadingof thesereactors(Figure17).

Table7:OperatingcharacteristicsoftheLightWaterReactors

LWRCapacity BurnUp CapacityFactor InitialLoadingofLEU(3%4%U235) AnnualLEUutilizationat85%CF Plutoniumcontentinspentfuel

1000MW 50,000MWDaysperTon 85% 75Tons 18Tons 11kgperTonspentfuel

Figure17:ImportsofLightEnricheduranium(LEU)fortheLightWaterReactorstill2030.Atpeakcapacity(32,000 MW),LWRreactorsrequireabout600TonsofLEUannually.CumulativeimportsofLEUwouldbeabout8000Tons.

TheLWRspentfuelcouldbereprocessedtoproduceplutoniumforuseinFBRs.However,spentfuelfrom modernLWRdesignshashigherradioactivity.Thisisbecause,comparedtothePHWRs,abouttentimes more number of fissions occur in the fuel of the LWRs. Hence, LWR spent fuel requires longer cooling timesofatleastthreeyearstoallowtheradioactivitylevelstodropbeforeplutoniumcouldberecovered

41

foruseinFBRs.Inthisstudy,weassumethatabout11kgplutoniumisrecoveredfromeveryTonofLWR spentfuel.Itisassumedtobeavailableasfabricatedfuelaboutfiveyearsafterbeingdischargedfromthe reactor. The first of the LWRs in Kudankulam is expected to become operational in late 2010. Hence, plutoniumfromLWRspentfuelwouldbeavailableattheearliestbyaround2019.Asofnow,thereareno facilitiesforreprocessingLWRspentfuelinIndiaandthereforeitmayhavetobesentabroad. A recent proposal in the UK suggests that an advance allocation of plutonium from the existing stock couldbeofferedagainstcontractsforreprocessingofforeignspentfuelinthecountry.Iftheproposalis acceptedthatcouldhelpgainearlieraccesstoplutoniumfromtheLWRspentfuel[25].By2030,alittle less than 30 Tons plutonium could be recovered from the LWR spent fuel (Figure 18), which would be sufficientforstartingup4FBRsof1000MWeach.Thisaugmentsthe65Tonsofplutoniumderivablefrom PHWRspentfuelundersafeguards.WeassumethattheFBRsbuiltafter2020aremetalfuelledtype.
Figure18:CumulativeplutoniumrecoveredfromspentfuelofLWRsandPHWRsundersafeguards.By2030,about65 TonsofplutoniumcanberecoveredfromPHWRspentfuelandalittlelessthan30TonsfromLWRspentfuel.

42

This scheme could lead to a totaled installed capacity of 27,080 MW by 2020 and 57,760 MW by2030 (Figure 19 and Table 8). International cooperation thus enables a larger capacity addition than the pessimistic projection of 48,000 MW indicated by Planning Commission for 2030 24 . However, it is emphasizedthatachievingsuchaprojectiondependsonPHWRSpentfuelreprocessingcapacityof1800 TonsandLWRspentfuelisreprocessedabroadordomesticfacilitiesareestablishedontime.
Figure19:Likelynuclearcapacityby2030.Thetotalcapacitycouldbe57,760MW

Table8:Likelynuclearpowercapacityby2020and2030withinternationalcooperation

PHWR FBRfromPHWRSpentFuel LWR FBRfromLWRSpentFuel PWR AHWR Total

2020 9,960 2,500 14,000 0 320 300 27,080

2030 9,960 11,500 32,000 4,000 300 57,760

24

However,PlanningCommissionsestimateof48,000MWdoesnotconsiderlargescaleLWRimports.

43

EconomicsofLightWaterReactors
The nuclear industry is making serious efforts to introduce design modifications andnovel construction methods to make nuclear power more economic and safe. While there is significant success in this direction,thishasbeenoffsettosomeextentbyrecentincreaseinthecostofmaterials,equipmentand services. AnMITstudyin2003reportedanovernightconstructioncostofLightWaterReactorsof$2000perkW [26]. In May 2008, a report of Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) of US concluded that a power plant that cost $ 1 billion in 2000 would on average cost $2.31 billion in 2008 [27]i.e., a rise of 131%! Recent estimates by NEI, a body reflecting nuclear industrys views, places the overnight cost of new nuclear power plants in the US at $2,400/kW to $4,540/kW. The costs of recently built LWRs as reported in the literature show considerable variation. Overnight construction costs of plants built in JapanandKoreaintheperiod1994to2005rangefrom$1880to$2818perkW[28].In200607,China builttworeactorseachof1060MWwithRussianassistance.Thesereportedlycost$3.2billionorabout $1600perkW[29]. InDec2006,ChinasignedacontractwithWestinghouseforbuildingfourreactorsof1,100MWeachata totalcostof$8billion(about$1800/kW)[30].Thisisbelievedtoincludesometechnologytransferas well.InNovember2007,ChinaenteredintoanagreementwiththeFrenchfirmArevatobuildtwo1600 MW reactors at a cost of about $ 10 billion (about $ 3120/kW) [31]. The contract includes supply of materialsandservicestooperatethereactors.Thepressreleasedoesnotmentionthedurationofthese suppliesbutitisreportedtocoverfuelsupplyfor12years.ChinahassoldElectricitedeFrance(EDF)a 30% share in the Taishan Nuclear Power Company that will own and operate the reactors. This is presumably to reduce to cost burden and to secure cooperation in handling operational problems as required. InJanuary2008,RussiannewsagencyPrimeTassreportedthatthegovernmentsofRussiaandBulgaria have signed a Euro 4 billion ($5.9 billion) deal on the construction of the Belene nuclear power plant consisting of two 1000 MW reactors [32]. In South Korea, the first pair of thirdgeneration APR1400 reactors is to be built at a cost of $5 billion ($1850/kW) with the first pour of concrete expected in October2008[33].

44

WiththeobservedrangeincapitalcoststhatworksouttoRs913CroresperMW,thecostofelectricity fromLWRsislikelytobeRs3.18to4.32perkWh(Table9).Intheabsenceofdatatocomparethecostof electricity from a new LWR and other types of power plants constructed at about the same time, we examinehowthecostfromnewLWRscompareswiththatofexistingplantsofdifferenttypes(Table10). The cost of electricity from coal plants is found to lie in a range of Rs 1.44 4.82 per kWh, with most valuesbetweenRs23perkWh 25 .GasandnaphthabasedpowerisfoundtocostbetweenRs2.88to7.54 perkWh 26 .Asistobeexpected,costofgenerationofmanyhydropowerplantsiswellbelowtherange mentionedabove,thoughsomeoftherecentprojectsindifficultterrainaremoreexpensive(Rs3.51per kWh) 27 .Thenuclearpowercostsarefoundtobequitecomparableastheyliesomewhereinthemiddle of the wide range of values cited in Table 10. There could be a further reduction if a large number of LWRsareconstructed.
Table9:EconomicsofImportedLightWaterReactors[3,34] CapitalCost PlantSize CapitalCost WeightedAverageCostofCapital DecommissioningCharge PlantLoadFactor Interestduringconstruction CapitalCostsnormalizedperkWh OperatingCosts FuelCost OtherOperatingCosts WasteDisposalCost TotalCost 1000MW Rs913CroresperMW 10% Rs0.45CroresperMW 85% 20% Rs2.283.42perkWh Rs0.16perkWh Rs0.67perkWh Rs0.07perkWh Rs3.184.32perkWh TypicalLWRcapacity $20003000perkW Assuming70:30debtequityratio 5yearconstructionperiod FabricatedLEUcostof$1.5Million perTon

25

Coalbasedelectricitycouldbecomemoreexpensiveby50%100%fromCO2emissioncontrolconsiderations. Gaspricesexhibitconsiderablevolatility.

26

27

FuturelargehydropowerprojectswillmainlybeinHimalayanregionsandwouldencounterhighenvironmental andconstructioncosts.

45

Table10:Costofelectricitygenerationfromsomeoftheoperatingpowerplants NameofPowerPlant Coal Anpara,UttarPradesh NTPC,Ramagundam,AndhraPradesh NTPC,Dadri,UttarPradesh NTPC,Tanda,UttarPradesh PanipatThermalPowerStation(2x250) IndraprasthaPowerStation,Delhi FaridabadThermalPowerStation Panki,UttarPradesh Obra,UttarPradesh Ennore,TamilNaduElectricityBoard Hydro BhakraComplex,Punjab Chamera,NHPC,HimachalPradesh Ranganadi,NorthEasternElectricPowerCorporation,Arunchal Pradesh Tehri1,TehriHydroDevelopmentCorporation,Uttarakhand Gas&Naphtha DadriGas,NTPC,UttarPradesh Kawas,NTPC,Gujarat RajivGandhiKayankulam,NTPC,Kerala Nuclear(NPCIL) Rajasthan Madras Narora Kaiga InstalledCapacity 1000 2600 840 440 500 247 165 220 550 450 1480 300 405 1000 830 656 360 640 440 440 440 CostofGeneration(Rs perkWh) 1.49 1.44 2.25 2.48 2.47 3.62 4.82 3.30 3.30 3.80 0.13 1.49 1.21 3.51 2.88 5.54 7.60 1.77 1.39 1.78 2.08

Investments
Wenowconsiderthelikelyinvestmentsinthenuclearpowerprogram.Table11liststheassumptionsused in this analysis. These may be considered simplistic assumptions; however, they provide a reasonable estimate of the investments required. We consider the investments required to build LWRs, fuel reprocessingplants,PHWRs,fuelfabricationplants,wasteimmobilizationplantsandFBRs.Torealizethe indicated large contribution from nuclear power, an annual investment of at least Rs 20,000 25,000 Crores would be required for more than two decades (Figure 20), about 0.5% of Indias present GDP. Thus,thereisatotalinvestmentofaboutRs400,000500,000Croresinthesetwodecades.Duringthis period the PHWRs and LWRs are completed and thereafter, FBRs continue to be built. Therefore, the annualinvestmentsdeclineintheyearsfollowing2030.

46

Table11:AssumptionsofCapitalinvestmentsrequiredfornuclearprogram

LightWaterReactors (LWR) FuelReprocessingPlants (FRP) PHWR FBR FuelCycleFacility (per2000MWFBR)

OvernightConstruction Cost Rs10CroresperMW Rs5CroresperTon Rs9CroresperMW Rs10CroresperMW Rs1000Crores

Construction Time 5Years 5Years 5Years 6Years 5Years

YearwiseCostBreakdown 25%,25%,20%,20%,10% 25%,25%,20%,20%,10% 25%,25%,20%,20%,10% 25%,25%,20%,10%,10%,10% 25%,25%,20%,20%,10%

Figure20:Totalcapitalinvestmentsrequiredforthenuclearpowerprogramtill2030.Indiawouldhavetoinvest aboutRs20,00025,000Croresperannum.

Inadditiontothecapitalinvestmentsrequiredtobuildthereactorsandotherfacilities,Indiawouldhave toimportLightEnricheduranium(LEU)andnaturaluraniumforareasonabletimeperiodtoguardagainst suddeninterruptionsinsupply.Intheabsenceofanyplanstosetupalargeenrichmentplantwithinthe country, the stockpile for LWRs would have to be either fabricated fuel or as lightly enriched uranium (LEU).The60yearlifetimestockpile,asproposedinsomequarters,foreach1000MWLWRamountsto about1080TonsofLEUasfabricatedfuel.Attodayscost,thiscomestoabout$1.6billionforasingle plant. If eventual indigenous fuel fabrication is considered, LEU would be imported as uranium hexafluoride gas to be used for fuel fabrication as and when needed. The corrosive nature of the gas

47

warrants attention to long term storage problems. Till such time indigenous fabrication capacity is established,onehastoconsiderpotentialproblemsofqualityassuranceduringstorageoffabricatedfuel. Inrelativeterms,thequantityoffueltobestockpiledperLWRreactorisaboutafifthofthatforaPHWR. But,theprocessofconvertingtheyellowcakeintouraniumhexafluorideandenrichingittotherequired level increases the cost of a kilogram of LEU by about 100% over natural uranium. A recent report estimatesthatnaturaluranium(asUF6)costs$300perkgandLEU(asUF6)costs$670perkg[35] 28 .The cost of reprocessing LWR spent fuel abroad, if that option is chosen, would also have to be taken into account.Naturaluraniumpriceshaveexhibitedconsiderablevolatilityinrecenttimesandweassumea priceof$150,000perTon.ThepriceofimportedfabricatedLEUfuelforLWRsisreportedas$1.6million per Ton. Recently, France has quoted a figure amounting to about $ 2 million per Ton for reprocessing spentfuelfromItalyincludingthecostoftransportationandfixingofhighlevelwasteinglass. Figure21 givesthedetailsofcombinedcostofimportingfabricatedfuelforLWRs,naturaluraniumforPHWRsand reprocessingofLWRspentfuelabroad.ThisreachesamaximumofaboutRs8000Croresperannumby 2030.LWRfuelaccountsforbulkofthiscostandnaturaluraniumimportsaccountonlyabout10%.
Figure21:AnnualCostincurredinimportofLightEnricheduranium(LEU),NaturaluraniumandreprocessingofLWR spentfuelabroad.

28

ThisdependsontheU235contentofthedepleteduraniumleftbehindaftertheenrichmentprocessiscomplete.

48

OrganizationandManagement
As Indias nuclear power program grows with a large number of reactors being built, it is important to examine whether all of them could or should be under one operating organization. In France, all 59 reactorscomeunderElectricitedeFrance,whichissomewhatsimilartoaPublicSectorUndertaking(PSU) in India. The 37 reactors in Japan were built and are operated by nine different utilities in the private sector. Several utilities in the US own and operate the 104 reactors. There are 17 reactors now in operationinChinawith6moreunderconstruction.Sevencompanieshaveundertakentheconstruction andoperationofthesereactors.ThesecompaniestooappeartobesomewhatsimilartotheIndianPSUs. For rapid expansion of the nuclear power program, it is desirable that the government encourages participationoftheprivatesectorafterestablishinganeffectiveregulatorymechanismtoensuresafety and security. There are several activities relating to the front end and back end of the fuel cycle that wouldhavetobeundertakenbythegovernment.Withitsestablishedexpertise,DAEcouldcontinuewith thePHWR,FBRandAHWRprogramsandtheprivateindustrycouldparticipateintheLWRprogram.The governmentwouldhavetoamendtheAtomicEnergyActtoallowtheentryofprivateindustryinnuclear power.Thelegislativeprocedurewouldtakeitsowntimeandtherefore,inthemeantime,PSUssuchas National Thermal Power Corporation(NTPC),Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited (BHEL)andNuclear Power CorporationofIndiaLtd(NPCIL)couldbeallowedtobuildLWRwithforeigncollaborators.Severalother issues would need to be addressed: civil liability arrangements, cost and purchase agreement of the powergenerated,valueofplutoniumproducedandchargesforserviceslikeultimatewastemanagement anddecommissioning. Theentryofprivateplayerswouldalsohaveanimpactonsafetyregulation.Goingbytheexperienceof othercountries,AERBwouldhavetoensurethatthatsafetyisnotcompromisedeitherbecauseofalarge numberofreactorsunderconstructionorduetocostconsiderations.Atthesametime,AERBmaybenefit bychargingtheprivatesectorplayersfortheservices.TheNuclearRegulatoryCommissionintheUSis obligatedbylawtorecover90%ofitsexpensesfromlicensees[36]However,itwouldalsorequiretimely clearanceswithoutunduedelays.Ifsafetyiswellregulated,thepresenceofmorethanoneplayermight alsoleadtoahealthycompetitioninallaspectsincludingsafety.

CivilLiability
Despite the elaborate safety and protective measures, operators of nuclear plants are required to considerthelikelihoodofaccidentsthatcouldcausesomeformofdamagetothepublicandproperty. Someformofinsurancethereforebecomesnecessary.Bycommonconvention,itistheoperatorwhois liableexclusively,bothlegallyandeconomically,inmostcountrieseveninforcemajeureconditions.The

49

designer of the systems or the supplier of equipment or materials is not liable except in some case of accident during transportation. With the possible entry of private operators in the nuclear power, it is essentialtoestablishmeasuresforclearliabilityarrangements.Mostcountriesarepartytooneorbothof twointernationalconventionsoncivilnuclearliability,oneknownastheParisConventionandtheother the Vienna Convention. There are also some countries, Japan for instance, that are not party to any conventionbuthavenationallawsthatgenerallyconformstotheprovisionsoftheconventions.Boththe conventions require the operator to establish financial security in the form of insurance or other resourcesandtheStatemakesacontributionoverandabovethat. These conventions prescribed an overall liability level of 360 million Euros. In 1997, Member States of IAEAadoptedaConventiononSupplementaryCompensationthatdefinedcontributionbytherespective Statesofanequalvalue.IndiaisnotapartytothisConvention.MorerecentlytheParisconventionhas set new limits of 700 million for the operators, 500 million from public funds by the State and a collectivecontributionofmemberStatesof300million.Thishasnotyetenteredintoforce.

ManpowerRequirements
Thenuclearprogramwouldrequirethetrainingofalargenumberofpersonnelforreactorconstruction andoperation.Theconstructionofatwinreactorpowerstationrequiresabout1000personnelofvarious education levels and its operation needs about 800 personnel. Therefore, the nuclear program would requirecloseto100,000personnelinthecomingtwodecades.ThesewouldhavetobetrainedinIndiaor abroad. Some of them could be trained abroad. However, in the long run, India would have to significantly augment the training facilities in the country to cater to construction and operation of the largenumberofPHWRs,FBRs,AHWRsaswellastheLWRsandFRPs.Toaccelerateinduction,engineering institutions will have to run special courses in these subjects. The country went through a similar experienceafewdecadesagowhenmanynewsteelplantswerebuiltatthesametime.Theuniversities cameforwardbytrainingalargenumberofengineers.Wehavetorepeatthisexperience;fortunatelywe havefarmorepublicandprivateeducationalinstitutionstodependon. There is some concern in the US about the likely shortage of trained manpower with nuclear skills at variouslevelstosupportrevivalofnuclearpower.Thismayevokesomesurprisesincethereareatleast 14UniversitiesthatoffercoursesinNuclearEngineeringandmanyofthesealsohavearesearchreactor in the campus to help train the students. Clearly the challenge is in finding personnel with relevant trainingcouldturnouttobeamoreformidableoneinIndiawherepresentlythevariousunitsoftheDAE aretheonlyplaceswithrequiredtrainingfacilities.

50

AnNEA/OECDpublicationof2003onNuclearEducationandTrainingspeaksofworryingerosionofthe knowledgebase.SomeoftherecommendationsmadeinthereportareequallyvalidforIndiawherewe needasignificantexpansionoftheexistingresourceandexpertisetocatertotheambitiousprogramthat is being charted for harnessing nuclear energy. Urgent efforts have to be made to set up facilities for educationinnuclearscienceandengineeringintheuniversities.Educationalnetworkorbridgeshaveto be developed between Universities, Industry and Research Centers in the DAE. Generous investments couldbemadebyIndustryforUniversityR&DProjectsandbytheGovernmentforexperimentalfacilities likeresearchreactorsforresearchaswellaseducation.TheGovernmentalsupportbecomesparticularly important in all R&D activities relating to development work in the fields of reprocessing, reactor engineering,metalfuelledfastreactorsandifeventuallyanindigenousdesignoftheLWRsisenvisaged.

NuclearWasteManagement
Presently,theresponsibilityforoperationsrelatingtomanagementofradioactivewastesfromallnuclear installations is with BARC. This is in addition to undertaking development of appropriate methods and techniquesforthesafemanagementofthewastes.Thishasworkedwellbecauseoftherelativelysmall sizeoftheprogram. Asthenuclearpowerprogramexpandsandalargenumberofreactorsarebuiltatdifferentlocationsin thecountry,quitepossiblyinboththepublicaswellastheprivatesector,measuresmustbeinplacefor coordinationofstepsforsafemanagementoftheradioactivewastesgeneratedbythevariousfacilities. The general practice as in many countries is to entrust the responsibility for waste management to a singlegovernmentalagency. On average, the volume of low and intermediate level radioactive waste generated in one year by differentreactortypesnormalizedtoapowerlevelof1,000MWisasgivenbelow[37]: BWR PWR 500m3 250m3 200m3

PHWR

AccordingtotheWorldNuclearAssociation,atypicallarge(1000MW)LWRwillgenerate200350m3 lowandintermediatelevel wasteperyear.(MorrisRosen:200m3lowlevel,70m3intermediatelevel). Theapproachcurrentlyadoptedistostoretheoperationalwastesofthereactorsattherespectivesites. Theyareexpectedtoremainthereevenafterthereactorsreachtheendoftheirlife. Forcommercialnuclearpowerplantsbuiltbyprivatepartiesatsitesownedbythem,somearrangements wouldneedtobeworkedoutforsafeguardingthewastesaftertheplantsceaseoperation.Ifitisdecided

51

tomovethewastestoacentrallocationasisbeingpracticedinsomecountries,suitablesiteswouldneed tobechosenandanorganizationidentifiedtotakechargeofthemanagementofthewastes.Thegeneral practice is to assign ownership of the operational waste to the producer namely the power plant operator.Itisnottransferabletotheorganizationthatmighteventuallytakechargeofthewastefora fee. Some decisions then need to be made on determination of the cost payable by the owners of the wastesonwhosebehalfthewastewouldbemanagedbythecentralagency. Spent fuel discharged from the power reactors is sent to fuel reprocessing plants. High level wastes remaining after recovery of plutonium from the spent fuel are fixed in glass blocks in a Waste ImmobilizationPlant(WIP).Theblocksaresuitablyencasedinstainlesssteelcontainersandstoredatthe Plant Site awaiting eventual removal to a deep geological repository after a few decades. The low and intermediate level wastes could be stored at the reprocessing plant site and eventually removed to a centrallocationifsodecided.ItisenvisagedthatthereprocessingplantsaswellastheWIPswouldalways beinthegovernment.

52

CapacityadditionthroughbothLWRsandPHWRs
Inthissection,weconsideranalternateapproach.InadditiontotheimportofLWR,Indiacanchooseto continue to build more PHWRs beyond 10,000 MW. This option has several merits. India has gained considerableexperienceandexpertiseindesign,constructionandoperationofPHWRs.AsperDAEsplan, 8 PHWRs of 700 MW are expected to be commissioned before 2020 and this appears to be within the reachofNPCIL.BuildingmorePHWRshasanadditionaladvantage.ForeachTonofnaturaluraniumused in them, PHWRs yield nearly twice the amount of plutonium compared to LWRs 29 . India is banking on plutonium availability for the fast breeder and thorium programs for longterm energy security and additionalPHWRsassistinthisgoal.IndiacouldcontinueandbuildmorePHWRsinthedecade202030. ItcouldbepossibletoincreasethetotalPHWRcapacityto25,360MWby2030.PHWRsundersafeguards wouldbeabout23,060MWandtheremainingreactorsoutsidesafeguards.Allthenewreactorsunder safeguardswouldoperatewithimportednaturaluranium.
Figure22:IfthePHWRprogramiscontinuedbeyond2020,thetotalPHWRinstalledcapacityin2030couldriseto 25,360MW.Outofthis23,060MWwouldbeundersafeguards.

29

CorrespondingtoaBurnUpof50,000MWdaysperToninLWRs.

53

At the same time as more PHWRs are built, it is also necessary to set up a fairly large reprocessing programwithnewplantsbuilttorecovertheplutoniumfromthespentfueldischargedbythePHWRs. Thetotalreprocessingcapacitywouldhavetogouptoabout4200Tonsperyear 30 .Eightnewplantsof 600 Tons per annum each would have to be commissioned between 2015 and 2022. All of these new plants can be under international safeguards since they would reprocess the spent fuel from PHWRs under safeguards. An International Nuclear Fuel Recycle Facility, along the lines proposed by the IAEA, couldbesetupinIndiatoservicetheIndianPHWRsaswellasreactorsfromotherinterestedcountries. Expansion of PHWRs also requires augmenting the heavy water production capability. Two new plants, eachof600Tonscapacitywouldhavetobebuiltby2017and2020totakecareoftherequirementsof PHWRstobecommissionedinthedecade202030. Apart from recovery of plutonium from the spent fuel discharged by the PHWRs, the reprocessing programwouldalsoincludeconstructionoffuelcyclefacilitiesassociatedwiththeFBRsandAHWRs.The design and operation of these would need to be such as to permit high availability factors to make recycledplutoniumavailableintimeforuninterruptedreactoroperationonaselfsustainingmode. Theremovalofbarriersforcooperationwithothercountriescouldassistinacceleratingthereprocessing programandinfinalizingthedesignofplantsforreprocessingmetalfueldischargedfromfastbreeders, earlierthanifithadtobeatotalindigenouseffort.Asforthereactors,switchingfromoxidefueltometal fuelwouldrequirenosignificantmodifications.IfmetalfuelledFBRswithhigherbreedingratioaresetup beginning2020,theirimpactwouldbemarginalinthedecade202030. Beingalargerprogram,thiswouldrequiresignificantcontributionfromthepublic/privatesectoranda morerobustregulationofsafetyandsecurityofthefacilities.WhenalltheproposedPHWRsarebuilt, Indiawouldimportabout3500Tonsofuraniumperannumtooperatethereactorsat85%capacity factor.Thecumulativeuraniumimportstill2030areexpectedtobe36,000Tons(

Figure23).ThespentfuelfromPHWRscouldberecoveredtogenerateabout100Tonsplutoniumby2030
( Figure24).Thisisinadditionto30TonsofplutoniumfromLWRspentfuel.

30

ThiscapacityismorethandoublewhatexistsinFrancepresently.

54


Figure 23: Imports of natural uranium for the PHWRs under safeguards. At the peak capacity of 23,060 MW, they wouldrequireabout3500Tonsannuallytooperateat85%capacityfactor.Thecumulativeuraniumimportstill2030 wouldamounttoabout36,000Tons.

4000 NaturalUraniumImportsperannum(Tons) ImportsPerAnnum 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0
20 20 20 18 20 10 20 12 20 16 20 14 20 26 20 24 20 28 20 22 20 30

40000 CumulativeImports 35000 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0

CumulativeImportsUranium(Tons)

Figure24:CumulativeplutoniumrecoveredfromspentfuelofLWRsandPHWRsundersafeguards.

55

120 CumulativePlutoniumrecovred(Tons) 100 80 60 40 20 0

2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

PHWR LWR

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

2027

2028

2029

2030

In this scenario, total nuclear capacity is likely to be 78,160 MW by 2030 (Figure 25, Table 12). This exceedstheoptimisticprojectionof63,000MWbyPlanningCommission(Table1).Itmustbenotedthat thisisbasedonthefollowingassumptions: LWRimportof32,000MW ExpansionofPHWRsto25,360MW PHWRspentfuelreprocessingcapacityof4200Tons DevelopmentofmetalFBRsandassociatedfuelcyclefacilitiesandintroductionafter2020

Figure25:Likelynuclearinstalledcapacityby2030.Totalcapacityisexpectedtobe78,160MW

56


Table12:Likelynuclearcapacityby2020and2030withanexpansionofPHWRprogram

PHWR FBRfromPHWRSpentFuel LWR FBRfromLWRSpentFuel PWR AHWR Total

2020 11,360 2,500 14,000 0 320 300 28,480

2030 25,360 16,500 32,000 4,000 300 78,160

Investments
UsingtheassumptionsmentionedinTable11,thetotalannualinvestmentsinthisoptionworkstoabout Rs 35,000 40,000 Crores per annum for the next two decades, or a cumulative of about Rs 750,000 Crores(Figure26).OncetheLWRsandPHWRsgetcompleted,theannualinvestmentsdeclinetoaboutRs 20,000CrorescorrespondingtothesimultaneousconstructionofalargenumberofFBRs.
Figure26:AnnualinvestmentsrequiredwithexpansionofPHWRprogram

57

 ImportedLWRsconstitutealmosthalfofthis(Figure27).Evenimportedreactorsneedactiveparticipation from indigenous industry: ancillary equipment, civil works, forgings, electronics, computers and other engineeringequipmentswouldallhavetobebuiltindigenously.Thus,Indianindustryshouldbelookingat a market of at least Rs 300,000 Crores over the next two decades. The manufacturing base of existing engineeringcompanieswouldhavetoincreaseseveraltimestomeetthisandtheyshouldplanforitnow. It is important to note that fuel reprocessing plants constitute a mere 3% of the total investments; however,itisessentialthattheseplantsarebuiltonpriority.Otherwise,thebreederscannottakeoff.
Figure27:Breakupoftotalinvestmentsupto2030withanexpansionofPHWRprogram

58

TotalInvestmentstill2030:RS750,000Crores($ 160Billion)
Others 8%

Fuel Fabrication 1 % Fuel Reprocessing Plants 3%

HeavyW ater Reactors 25%

Light W ater Reactors 43%

Fast Breeder Reactors 20%

59

RecentDAEProjections
Projectionsofalargelydomesticprogramme
Well before the IndoUS civilian nuclear cooperation was mooted, DAE published a study titled A Strategy for Growth of Electrical Energy in India[2]. A table from the above study is reproduced here (Table13) 31 .ThisstudyexpectedthatPHWRcapacitywouldreachthepeaklevelof10,000MWbefore 2022 and taper off rapidly to 4060 MW by 2052. Further, 6000 MW additional capacity was planned through LWRs at Kudankulam, over and above the 2000 MW already under construction with Russian assistance.Thestudyconsidered2500MWofoxidefuelledFBRsusingplutonium fromPHWRspentfuel. Inaddition,italsoconsidered9000MWofmetalfuelledFBRsby2022amajorpartofit(6000MW)from PHWRspentfuelandtherest(3000MW)fromLWRsspentfuel.
Table13:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyDepartmentofAtomicEnergy[2,38]

Year

PHWR,AHWR&FBR,basedonplutonium fromPHWR Thermal Oxide Fast Oxide 2,400 9,960 9,400 7,860 4,060 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,500 Metal 6,000 33,000 87,000 199,000

LWR&FBR,basedonplutoniumfrom LWR Thermal Oxide 320 8,000 8,000 8,000 8,000 Fast Oxide Metal 3,000 10,000

Total

2002 2022 2032 2042 2052

2,720 29,460 62,900

26,000 131,360 61,000 274,560

The Table provides some indication of how the projections in the Planning Commission Report were workedout(Table1).Thetotalnuclearcapacityin2032istheoptimisticprojectionof63,000MW.Ifthe contributionfromLWRs(6,000MW)andmetalfueledFBRsderivedfromLWRspentfuel(10,000MW)are excluded,wegetafigurenearlythesameasthepessimisticprojectionof48,000MW. Tongia and Arunachalam had earlier examined the technology, viability and options of Indias breeder programmein1998[39].TheyconcludedthatahighperformancePHWRprogrammewithhighplantload factorsandalargereprocessingcapabilityarevitalforlaunchinganFBRprogramme.Further,thebreeder

31

ThisTablecanalsobefoundontheDAEwebsiteaspartofDocument10titledAStrategyforGrowthofElectricity inIndia(http://www.dae.gov.in/publ/doc10/index.htm)

60

design must be so chosen preferably the metal fuelled system as to permit a significant excess production of fissile material. In the absence of these developments, they saw no alternative but to importLWRsonafairlylargescale.Intheirresponse,RodriguezandLeeexudedconfidencethathighload factorsareachievableasalsoearlyintroductionofmetalfuelledFBRs[40]. Impressive changes can be seen in the Indian nuclear programme since then. That includes very high performance levels of the PHWRs. This is limited now only by availability of fuel supplies, which are currently running very low. Short construction times as low as five years and deployment of multiple constructionteamsnumberingfiveatatimearetheothernotableachievements. ItisnotedfromTable13thatPHWRinstalledcapacitydropsdownfrom9960MWin2022to4060MWby 2052accordingtoDAEprojections.Wehaveassumedaslowerdecreasetakingthereactorlifetobe60 yearsleadingtoaresidualcapacityof8880MWby2052.IfthePHWRsoperateat85%capacityfactor, then the presently estimated uranium reserves of 61,000 Tons could run out by that time. The rate at whichthePHWRcapacitytapersoffhasasignificanteffectonthecontinuedgenerationofplutoniumfor theFBRprogram. APrototypeFastBreederReactorofentirelyindigenousdesign,basedonoxidefuel,isnowbeingbuilt withallmajorcomponentsfabricatedwithinthecountry.Thereisnowahighdegreeofconfidencethat morereactorsofthekindcouldbebuiltfollowingitscommissioning.But,importantly,thechangesyetto bebroughtaboutincludeexpansionofreprocessingcapacityandearlyintroductionofmetalfuelledfast reactors of high breeding capability, both of which are very essential if the FBRs are to make any significantcontribution.Thereisongoingworktoestablishaprocessforrecoveryofplutoniumfromthe metallic spent fuel of the FBRs, but it would take several years before it can be implemented on a commercialscale 32 .Asaresult,itwouldseemthatasubstantialincreaseinnuclearsharecouldonlycome frombuildingseveralLWRswithexternalhelpsimilartothesuggestionmadebyTongiaandArunachalam. Presently,therequisitecapabilitytobuildPHWRsexistsandthatforFBRsmaybeexpectedtobeavailable oncethePFBRissuccessfullycommissioned.SpentfuelavailabilityfromthePHWRsisnotindoubt.What remainstobeestablishedisthereprocessingcapacity.

32

ThedesignofFBRsthatrunonmetallicfueliseasierdone.However,withouttheavailabilityofprovenmethodsfor reprocessingthespentfuelfromthemtorecycletheplutonium,capacityadditionthroughFBRscannotoccur.

61

ReprocessingofSpentFuel About51TonsofplutoniumwouldhavetobereprocessedfromPHWRspentfueltoestablishtotalFBR capacityof8,500MWindicatedinTable13(3TonsforeachFBRof500MW,assumedtobesomewhat indep endent of the fuel type). About 15,000 Tons of PHWR spent fuel would need to be reprocessed before 2022 and this requires a reprocessing capacity of at least 800 Tons per year operating at 100% capacityfactorfor18years 33 (reckonedfromthedateofpublicationofthearticle).Thereareindications ofplansfortwonewplantsof300Tonseach[24].Iftheseplantsareoperationalby2015,itwouldenable the recovery of 13 Tons plutonium, sufficient for only four new FBRs (2000 MW) by 2020. There is no information on steps to implement the above plans and to consider addition of required reprocessing capacity. Similarly,18Tonsofplutoniumwouldhavetoberecoveredfrom180TonsofLWRspentfueltoestablish 3000MWofFBRsindicatedinTable13.Ifweassumethe8LWRsarecommissionedinsuccessiveyears beginning2010,thecumulativespentfuelby2020wouldcontainonly11Tonsofplutonium 34 . Thesuccessoftheprojectionsthuscruciallydependsontheavailabilityofreprocessingcapacity.Inthe absenceofearlyplansfornewreprocessingcapacity,thereisuncertaintyabouttheFBRprojectionsupto 2022. MetalfuelledFBRswithHighBreedingCapability ThecurrentDAEplanscallforintroductionofmetalfuelledsystemsfromthebeginningofthedecadeof 2020s.Thisrequirestheconstructionofaprototypewellbeforethatdate.Perhaps,atleastoneofthe fourbreedersnowplannedtobebuiltbefore2020shouldbeofthisdesign,completewiththeassociated fuelrecyclefacility.Unlessthedesignisreadynow,thiswouldappearunlikely,sincesafetyreviewand constructiontimedemandsufficienttimeforcompletion.ThereareplanstoutilizebothFBTRandPFBRas testbedsformetalfueltofinalizethecoredesign.Apilotplantforreprocessingthemetalfuelwouldbea usefulfirststepbeforethelaunchofacommercialprogram. Rapid expansion of installed capacity of power generation through breeders depends on the breeding gainaswellastheinitialstartingbasecapacity.DAEsprojectionsassumeanSDTof8.9years[2]anda startingbaseof6metalFBRsin2022(Table13).Asmentionedearlier,weconsiderarapidexpansionin theinstalledreprocessingcapacityto2300Tonsperannum(Figure6),whichenablesrecoveringabout38

33

Presentreprocessingcapacityis200Tons

34

Withaburnupof50,000MWdaysperTon,atacapacityfactorof85%,spentfuelaccumulationwouldamountto 1000Tonsby2020.Plutoniumyieldistakenas11kgperTonofspentfuel.

62

Tonsplutoniumby2022.ThisissufficienttostartfourFBRsofmetaloxidetype(2000MW)andfourmore of metal fuel type (2000 MW) by 2022. With a starting base of 2000 MW of metal fuelled FBRs, the capacity addition in the future decades would be slower than shown in Table 13 as given below (Table 14).
Table14:ComparisonofMetalfuelledFBRCapacityAddition

2022 2032 2042 2052

DAEProjections 6,000 33,000 87,000 199,000

ThisStudy 2,000 15,000 45,000 113,000

Theestimateinthisstudyisbasedonthefollowingassumptions: PHWRsreachpeakcapacityof10,060MWby2017andoperateat85%capacityfactor PHWRspentfuelisallowedtocoolforoneyearbeforereprocessing Spentfuelreprocessingcapacityof2300Tonsperannum(about1700at75%CapacityFactor) 3.5kgplutoniumperTonspentfuel FBRfreshfuelfabricationcapacityof40Tonsperannumofmixedoxide TwoyearsallowanceforcoolingandreprocessingofFBRspentfuel SitesandinvestmentsaremadeavailablewellintimeforbuildingnewFBRs

Projectionswithimportsenabled AtarecentmeetingorganizedbytheIndianAcademyofSciences,theChairman,AECspokeofaprojected aggressiveimportofLWRstoadd40,000MWby2020in8yearsbasedonenablementofIndiasnuclear tradewithothercountries[41].PlutoniumcontainedinthespentfueldischargedbytheseLWRsisthen expected to help build a very large fleet of FBRs with a capacity nearly ten times that of the LWRs themselves,by2050.ItfollowsthatthereshouldbeasimultaneousplanforreprocessingLWRspentfuel. IfamixtureofLWRunitsofcapacity1000MWand1500MWischosen,therewouldbe16unitsofeach kind.Forsometimenow,therehavebeensuggestionsthatlargeclustersofsixtoeightreactorsshouldbe built at a site. With eight units at a site, just four sites could accommodate the required number of reactors.Itwouldfreeotherpotentialsitesforlocatingfuelreprocessingplants. The aggressive schedule as proposed would require a wide range of decisions regarding safety review, private sector participation, financial investments, power purchase agreements and manpower availabilityandtraining.Thesedecisionsandarrangementswouldhavetobecompletedwithinthenext4

63

years so that the construction of the first of the LWR series could commence at least by 2012 35 . This wouldrequireanaverageannualinvestmentofaboutRs35,000Croresfortheyears201220onLWRs. TheexpectationthattheimportofLWRsinsuchashorttimecouldhastenthelaunchofamuchlarger FBR capacity presupposes the existence of a matching reprocessing program. At the peak capacity of 40,000MW,LWRswouldgenerateabout720Tonsofhighburnupspentfuelperannumyielding8Tonof plutonium.However,thereprocessingoperationshavetoprovideforsufficientcoolingtimeforrecovery ofplutonium.Alternatively,thespentfuelcouldbereprocessedabroad.
Figure28:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyDAEwithinternationalcooperation[41]

Another observation made in the course of the lecture is that the FBR build up would be reduced to nearly half the value if the LWR installation of the same capacity is deferred by ten years (Fig 28). The samewouldresultiftheLWRsweretobebuiltasprojectedbuttherecoveryofplutoniumisdelayedby 10yearsduetotheabsenceofadequateplansforreprocessingeitherdomesticallyorabroad.

35

ItistobenotedthatconstructionofadditionalunitsinKudankulamcouldcommenceearlierthan2012.

64

Figure29:NuclearpowerprojectionsbyDAEwithinternationalcooperation(delayedLWRaddition)[41]

DAEprojectionsasreadfromthegraph(Figure28)for2030and2050andcomparisonwiththeresultsof thisstudyareinTable15.Forthisstudy,wehaveusedthefollowingassumptionsasmentionedinearlier sections: LWRcapacityadditionof32,000MWduring20142030. Inonescenario,PHWRspeakat10,060MW(7,660MWunderinternationalsafeguards).Inthe second,morePHWRsarebuilt25,360MW(23,060MWundersafeguards). The spent fuel from only PHWRs under safeguards is considered for adding FBRs after reprocessing. In theory, spent fuel from reactors outside safeguards (2400 MW) could also be usedtobuildmoreFBRsundersafeguards;howeverwehavenotconsideredthatoption. 3.5kgplutoniumperTonPHWRspentfuel PHWRspentfuelreprocessingcapacityof2300Tonsand4200Tonsperannumcorrespondingto PHWRcapacitiesof10,060MWand25,360MWrespectively AllowanceofoneyearforcoolingofPHWRspentfuelbeforereprocessing LWRspentfueliseitherreprocessedabroadordomesticreprocessingcapacityisestablished 11kgplutoniumperTonLWRspentfuel Total allowance of five years for cooling, transport, reprocessing and fuel fabrication for preparingFBRfuelfromLWRspentfuel FBRfuelfabricationcapacityof48Tonsand80Tonsperannumofmixedoxidecorrespondingto PHWRcapacitiesof10,060MWand25,360MWrespectively MetalfuelledFBRsandassociatedfuelcyclefacilitiesareavailableafter2020 AllowanceoftwoyearsforcoolingandreprocessingofFBRspentfueltorecoverplutonium

65

Table15:DAEprojectionsasreadfromthegraph(Figure28)andcomparisonwiththisstudy

DAE Projections

Domestic3 PhaseProgram (PHWR&FBR fromPHWR spentFuel) LWR FBRfromLWR spentfuel AHWR Total

50,000

2030 ThisStudy DAE PHWRspeak Expansionof Projections at10,060MW PHWRsto 25,360MW 21,460 41,860 275,000

2050 ThisStudy PHWRspeak Expansionof at10,060MW PHWRsto 25,360MW 87,820 191,220

40,000 44,000 300 134,300

32,000 4,000 300 57,760

32,000 4,000 300 78,160

40,000 350,000 300 665,300

32,000 62,000 300 182,120

32,000 62,000 300 285,520

IfPHWRspeakat10,060MWthenthetotalcapacitycouldgoto57,760MWby2030and182,120MWby 2050. If more PHWRs are built, then total capacity could be 78,160 MW in 2030 and 285,520 MW by 2050.Iftheseprojectionsarerealized,thennuclearpowercouldcontributeabout10%ofthetotalpower by 2030 and at least 25% by 2050. If international cooperation is realized, it assists in quick capacity addition from import of LWRs in the initial years; 32,000 MW of installed capacity or more could be achievedby2030.Further,thespentfuelfromLWRscouldadd62,000MWFBRsby2050.However,the domestic program consisting of PHWRs and FBRs is still vital for large capacity addition. International agreementallowsimportofuranium,whichfacilitatesoperatingthePHWRsathighcapacityfactorsand makes plutonium available early which is crucial for the breeder program. Thus, there is considerable meritinbuildingmorePHWRsbeyond10,000MW.

66

Appendices
BriefDescriptionofReactorTypes

PressurizedHeavyWaterReactor(PHWR)
The Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR) uses heavy water as moderator and natural uranium as fuel.ItwasfirstconceivedbyCanadianscientists,whichearneditthenameCANDU(CanadianDeuterium uraniumreactor).IndiabuilttwounitsinRajasthanwithCanadianhelpandsubsequentlywhollyadopted thedesignwithsignificantmodifications. There actorconsistsof acylindricalvessel,known ascalandria,placedwithitsa xishorizontal,withboth endsclosed.Severalhundredhorizontaltubespass throughthecalandria(Figure30).Thespacebetween thetubesisfilledwithheavywateratlowpressurethatserves toslowdowntheneutronsproducedin fission.Througheachcalandriatubepassesacoolantchannel,whichisatubethathousesthefueland allows coolant heavy water to flow around the fuel and carry the heat generated by fission when the reactorisrunning.
Figure30:SchematicdiagramofaPressurizedHeavyWaterReactor(PHWR)(fromWorldNuclearAssociationweb pageonNuclearPowerReactors)

Thefuelisintheformtinypelletsofuraniumoxidewhicharepackedinathintubeabouthalfameter long,madeofzirconiumalloyandsealedhermetically.Thepackedtubesareknownasfuelrods.Nineteen such rods are held together to form a fuel bundle. Twelve such bundles are placed in each coolant channel. The space between the coolant channel and the calandria tube is filled with an inert gas to preventlossofheattothemoderator.Hotheavywaterfromthecoolantchannelsistakentotheboiler

67

whereitheatsupordinarywatertoproducesteam.Thesteamdrivesaturbinegeneratorandproduces electricity.Mostofthereactorsnowbuiltaredesignedtogenerate220MW.Twolargerunitshavealso beenbuiltwitha540MWrating.Thereareplanstobuildeight700MWunitsinthenextdecade.A700 MW PHWR requires a fuel requirement of 110 tons UO2 per annum. Thus, about 231,540 Tons of ore wouldhavetobeminedandmilledtoproducethis(assuminganoregradeof0.05%).Thespentfuelcan bereprocessedtoyieldabout385Kgplutonium (Figure31).
Figure31:Fuelrequirementsof700MWPHWRoperatingat85%CF

Ore Milling Fuel Fabrication UO2 110Tons PHWR 700MW Reprocessing Plant Plutonium 385Kg

231,540Tons

AnattractivefeatureofthePHWRisthatunloadingofusedfuelandloadingofnewfuelcanbecarried outwithouthavingtoshutdownthereactor.Theseoperationsareperformedbytwofuellingmachines placed at each end of the calandria which lock on to a coolant channel from either side. One of them pushesnewfuelintothechannelwhiletheotherreceivestheusedfuelattheotherend.Tenfuelbundles arereplacedeachday(15inthelargerversionofthereactorof500MW),ifthereactoroperatesatfull power.

FastBreederReactors(FBR)
InreactorsofthePHWRtypeandtheLWRtype,thefastmovingneutronsreleasedinfissionareslowed down by collision with atoms of a moderator material. This is because slow moving neutrons have a betterchanceofcausingfissiontosustainthechainreaction.But,theslowneutronsarealsolikelytobe lostbecauseofcapturebyatomsofothermaterialthanthefuel. Reactors can also function with no moderator, with the chain reaction sustained by the fast moving neutrons.Suchreactorsareknownasfastneutronreactorsorsimplyfastreactors.But,theyrequirefuel withahighconcentrationoffissilematerial,likeuranium235,plutonium239oruranium233.Thecore sizeisquitesmallinthistypeofreactorsandsoacoolantthatisaverygoodconductorofheat,likeliquid sodiumorliquidleadisusedinthem. An advantage of these reactors is that neutron loss through capture by atoms of coolant or structural materialsismuchless.Thereforesomeexcessneutronsareavailableforconvertinguranium238atoms intoplutonium239ortoproduceuranium233atomsfromthorium232atoms.Ifthisconversionissuch that there is more fissile material produced in the reactor than is consumed, the system becomes a breeder reactor. Some fast reactor designs are such that there is enough fissile material produced to provideforrefuelingthereactor,notmuchmore.ThePFBRwithoxidefuelisonesuchdesign.Thereare otherpossibledesigns,forexampleonewithfuelintheformofametalalloyofplutonium,uraniumand zirconium,thatcangeneratemorefissilematerialtostartupanotherreactorincourseoftime.

68

While a fast breeder reactor can be commissioned with the core fully loaded, some extra fuel is also neededtokeepthereactorrunninguntilthespentfuelisreprocessedandthefissilematerialisrecovered andrecycledtofeedthereactor.Thetotalquantityoffissilematerialmadeupofboththecomponentsis thesysteminventory.Thetimeperiodoverwhichtheaccumulationofexcessfissilematerialproducedby the breeder equals the system inventory is the system doubling time. A 500 MW FBR has an initial requirementof3Tonsofplutonium(Figure32).
Figure32:Fuelrequirementsof500MWFBR

PHWRSpent fuel857Tons

Uranium 500Kg FuelCycle Facilityfor plutonium recovery& refabrication

SpentFuel Reprocessing

Plutonium 3Tons FreshFuel Fabrication Uranium 28tons

FBR 500MW

Surplus plutonium

LightWaterReactors
In the beginning of the nuclear age, large plants were built to produce highly enriched uranium for weaponspurposes.Withahugesurpluscapacityforenrichmentavailableintheseplants,theywerethen used to produce lightly enriched uranium as fuel for compact reactors to provide propulsion power in submarines.Successinthedesignofsuchreactors ledtodesignoflargerversionstogenerateelectricity tofeedindustriesandcities.Withlightwaterservingasmoderatorandalsoascoolant,theycametobe knownasLightWaterReactors. TwoversionsofLWRscanbefound.Inone,thecoolantwaterisallowedtoboilandturntosteamwithin thereactorcoreandthissteamathighpressureisdirectlymadetodrivetheturbinegenerator.Thisisthe BoilingWaterReactor(BWR)version.ThefirsttworeactorsbuiltatTarapurinIndiaareofthistype. In another version of LWRs, coolant water flows through the reactor core at higher pressures so that boilingisprevented.Itisthentakentoaboilerwhereitismadetotransferitsheattoanotherloopof water producing steam for driving the turbine generator. This is referred to as the Pressurized Water ReactororPWR.ThetwoRussianreactorsbeingbuiltatKudankulamarePWRs.ThereactorsthatFrance appearswillingandreadytobuildinIndiaalsoarePWRs.JapaneseAmerican companiesareinterestedin sellingIndiaBWRs.

69

AdvancedHeavyWaterReactors(AHWR)
Indianinterestintheutilizationofthoriumhasledtoamoreseriousresearch,designanddevelopmentof a power generating reactor that is initially started up with plutonium and thorium, but subsequently producesuranium233whichreplacestheplutoniumgradually.A 300 MWAHWRinitiallyrequires1.75 Tonsofplutonium.Subsequently,itrequires500kgperyearfor10yearsand230kgthereafter(Figure33). Known as the Advanced Heavy Water Reactor or AHWR, it incorporates many features to enhance safetyaswellaseconomics.Forinstance,itusesheavywaterasmoderatorbutordinarywaterascoolant insteadofthemoreexpensiveheavywater.Thecoolantisnotpumpedintothecore,butflowsthroughit bynaturalconvection.Also,thewaterpassingthroughthecoreis allowedtoboilandthesteamusedto drive the turbine. With no pumps and a separate steam generator, the system is more economical to buildandlesssusceptibletoequipmentfailure.Therearealsoothersafetyfeaturesthathelpmitigateand evenpreventadverseeffectsofaccidents.
Figure33:Fuelrequirementsof300MWAHWR

Plutonium1,750Kg Thorium52,000Kg

Plutonium 500Kgperyearfor10years 230Kgperyearthereafter

AHWR 300MW

Recoveryof Plutoniumand Uranium233

Plutonium, U233/Thorium

Nevertheless, there are some complex issues that relate to fuel design and fuel reprocessing. The fuel assembly is a mixed cluster of pins some containing thorium and plutonium and others containing thorium and uranium233. Reprocessing of spent fuel should include steps to separate all three components.Thefuelrefabricationoperationswouldberequiredtobecarriedoutremotelybecauseof ratherhighradioactivitylevelsarisingfromthepresenceofsomeuranium232atoms. Initially,thereactorwouldbefuelledwithamixtureofthoriumandplutoniumonlytogenerateuranium 233, which would then be recovered and recycled replacing some of the plutonium. As a result, the system is not a breeder but is well suited to burning plutonium, which is of current interest in many countrieswithlargestocksofplutonium. AcomparisonoftheoperatingcharacteristicofvariousreactorsisinTable16

70

 Table16:Comparisonoffeaturesofvariousreactortypes ThermalPower (MW) ElectricalPower (MW) Efficiency(%) FuelType PHWR 800/2060 220/700 30 UO2 (Natural) LWR 3300 1000 33 UO2 (4%LEU) FBR 1250 500 40 UO2 (Depleted) withPuO2 (21and28%) 12ofuraniumoxide and2ofplutonium oxide 5 AHWR 750 300 29 ThO2with2.74 %PuO2initiallyand later ThO2with35% 233 UO2 1.75tonsPuinitially plus56tonsthorium 500kgPufor10 yearsand230kgPu afterthat HeavyWaterwith amorphouscarbon About250 LightWater 285 20,000

FuelinCore(Tons)

56/140

70

AnnualFuelReload (Tons) ModeratorMaterial HeavyWaterTotal Inventory(Tons) CoolantMaterial SteamTemperature (C) FuelBurnUp

33/110 at65%CF HeavyWater 250 HeavyWater 290 6,500

18

LightWater LightWater 500 50,000

None Sodium 493at17MPa 100,000

71

References
1. PlanningCommissionIntegratedEnergyPolicyReport;GovernmentofIndia:NewDelhi, 2006. DepartmentofAtomicEnergyAStrategyforGrowthofElectricalEnergyinIndia; GovernmentofIndia,http://www.dae.gov.in/publ/doc10/index.htm:August2004. Bharadwaj,A.,Tongia,R.,Arunachalam,V.S.,WhitherNuclearPower?Economicand PoliticalWeeklyMarch25,2006,12031212. Bharadwaj,A.,CarbonCounting.EconomicandPoliticalWeeklyDecember15,2007,13 15. Jain,S.K.,ChairmanandManagingDirector,NuclearPowerCorporationofIndiaLtd, ICAPP,Nice,France,2007. NuclearPowerCorporationofIndiaLtdAnnualReport;GovernmentofIndia:Mumbai, 200607. Govindrajan,S.InEconomicsofFBRFuelCycle,IndNuclSocAnnConfINSAC2003. Bhattacharjee,B.,InvitedTalk:"AnOverviewofR&DinFuelCycleActivitiesofAHWR", INSAC,2003. Sinha,R.M.,ExplorationforAtomicMineralsinIndiaAnOverview.IANCASBulletin June2005. Kundu,A.C.,JadugudaUraniumMine,Singhbhum,Jharkhand:Somefactson Radioactivity,RadiationandEnvironmentalImpact.NuclearIndia2006,39,(78). Awati,A.B.,Grover,R.B.InDemandandavailabilityofUraniumResourcesinIndia,p7 etseqinIAEATecdoc1463onRecentDevelopmentsinUraniumExploration,Production andEnvironmentalIssuesProceedingsofaTechnicalMeeting2004. AERB,NationalReporttoTheconventiononNuclearSafety,September2007. Anonymous,UCILhopefulofnodforNalgondaproject, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/07/22/stories/2005072202630900.htm. TheHinduBusinessLineJuly22,2005. Somasekhar,M.,'UraniumCorpsettostartproductionsoon', http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2007/11/29/stories/2007112951190300.htm TheHinduBusinesslineNovember29,2007. Ramachandran,R.,BettershoreupdomesticUraniumresources.TheHinduJuly11, 2008. 72

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7. 8.

9.

10.

11.

12. 13.

14.

15.

16.

Gupta,R.,Towardssustainablesupplyoffuelfornuclearpower.NuPower2004,18,(2 3). http://www.worldnuclear.org/info/inf53.html,WorldNuclearAssociationonNuclear PowerinIndia. Sanyal,T.,ZirconiumTechnologyforCladdingandCalandriaTubes,IANCASBulletin,July 2005. Somasekhar,M.,NFCsZirconiumProjectGetsGreenSignal, http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2004/10/25/stories/2004102502120500.htm BusinessLineOct25,2004. HeavyWaterBoardDepartmentofAtomicEnergy,GovernmentofIndia. Dey,P.K.,SpentFuelReprocessing:AnOverview.InINSAC2003. Sahoo,K.C.,Bharadwaj,S.A.,FuelPerformanceinWaterCooledReactorsInIT12/2, INSAC,2003. Kamath,H.S.,Kumar,A.,DevelopmentofPlutoniumFuelforThermalandFastReactors. IANCASBulletinJuly2005. Kumar,S.V.,FormerViceChairman,AERB,'ReprocessinginIndia:Development, DemonstrationandDeployment',TalkgivenontheoccasionofBARCFounder'sDay,Oct 30,2007,http://www.barc.ernet.in/webpages/special_talks/spltalks.htm BERRProposalonhowtomanageoverseasspentfuelawaitingprocessingatSellafield, www.berr.gov.uk/files/file42361.pdf;DepartmentforBusinessEnterpriseand RegulatoryReform,UK:2007. MITFutureofNuclearPower:AnInterdisciplinaryStudy;2003. CambridgeEnergyResearchAssociates(CERA)Constructioncostsofnewpowerplants continuetoescalate,energy.ihs.com/news/pressreleases/2008/ihscerapowercapital costindex.html;May27,2008. www.keystone.org WorldNuclearAssociationNuclearPowerinChina,http://www.world nuclear.org/info/inf63.html;September2008. www.nucwatch.com/platts/2006/platts061221.txt. www.uic.com.au/news108.htm www.nucwatch.com/platts/2008/platts080123.txt. 73

17.

18.

19.

20. 21. 22.

23.

24.

25.

26. 27.

28. 29.

30. 31. 32.

33.
HU

http://www.chns.org/s.php?id=15&id2=293.
UH

34.

Fetter,S.,EconomicsofNuclearPower.InSummerworkshopontheroleofnuclear power,WashingtonandLeeUniversityandCouncilonForeignRelations,September 2007. Shropshire,D.E.,Williams,K.A.,Boore,W.B.,Smith,J.D.,Dixon,B.W.,DunzikGougar, M.,Adams,R.D.,Gombert,D.AdvancedFuelCycleCostBasis;IdahoNational Laboratory,PreparedforUSDepartmentofEnergy,ContractDEAC0705ID14517:April 2007. http://www.nucwatch.com/platts/2008/platts080208.txt,In.

HU UH

35.

36. 37.

InternationalAtomicEnergyAgency(IAEA)EstimationofGlobalInventoriesof RadioactiveWasteandOtherRadioactiveMaterials,Tecdoc1591;June2008. Kakodkar,A.,NuclearEnergyinIndiaRetrospectandProspects.NuPower2004,18,(2 3). Tongia,R.,Arunachalam,V.S.,India'sNuclearbreeders:Technology,viabilityand options.CurrentScience1998,75,(6). Rodriguez,P.,Lee,S.M.,WhoisAfraidofBreeders?CurrentScience1998,75,(10). Kakodkar,A.,EvolvingIndianNuclearProgramme:RationaleandPerspectives.InPublic lectureatIndianAcademyofScience,Bangalore,http://www.dae.gov.in/,July4th, 2008.
HU UH

38.

39.

40. 41.

74