- U.S. Federal District Court Dismisses Westinghouse Lawsuit Against KHNP/KEPCO
- Canada Pumps $3 Billion into Cernavoda CANDUs
- BWXT, Crowley Debut Nuclear Power Generation Vessel Concept
- Regulatory Changes Needed For New Nuclear For Maritime
- INL’s MARVEL Prototype Micro Reactor Starts Testing
U.S. Federal District Court Dismisses Westinghouse Lawsuit Against KHNP/KEPCO
A U.S. Federal District Court has dismissed Westinghouse’s lawsuit against Korea Hydro & Nuclear Power (KHNP) and its parent company Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) over allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights in the development of the KHNP APR1400 PWR type nuclear reactor.KHNP and KEPCO claim that while it received assistance from Westinghouse in the early stages of APR1400 development, the core technology is domestically developed and free from U.S. export restrictions. The firms say they do not intend to pay licensing fees for intellectual property they did not use in their domestic design iteration of the APR1400.
The federal court didn’t rule on the merits of the IP dispute. Instead, it tossed the case saying Westinghouse lacked standing to compel the court to enforce US export laws regarding nuclear technologies.
The court ruled in favor of KHNP and KEPCO accepting the defendants’ argument that the authority to enforce the export restriction had been delegated exclusively to the U.S. Attorney General, and, therefore, a private entity that is not the U.S. government does not have the legal grounds (standing) for enforcement of the law against KHNP.
Aside from the usual public relations spin when a plaintiff loses, e.g., Westinghouse said there will be an appeal of the District court’s decision, the fact is that the court clearly said Westinghouse can’t tell the US government when or how to enforce export control laws.
Regardless of the legal merits of its case, it is unlikely that Westinghouse will give up its efforts to spike KHNP/KEPCO’s effort to bid on a tender for a new 1200 MW PWR at Dukovany in the Czech Republic or to complete a commercial deal to build two units in Poland.
Czech Contract for New Reactors at Dukovany
Interestingly, the Czech Republic, apparently interested in the APR1000 (EUR certified), has extended the timeline for making a decision on a contract award to build a 1200 MW PWR at the Dukovany site apparently in hopes of there being a resolution of the IP dispute. The stakes for the award of a single reactor are high as CEZ, the state owned nuclear utility, has ambitions of building as many as four new reactors at the site.
For this reason the Westinghouse plan for an appeal seems implausible by itself in terms of it producing any results except as a further delay in a resolution of the dispute which may be the firm’s real objective. Also, according to reports in the South Korean English language news media, it appears that it is the intent of Westinghouse to drag out the arbitration process it agreed to with KHNP in August so that it doesn’t reach a resolution until the end of 2025.
The delaying tactic, if successful, would block KHNP/KEPCO from delivering a best and final bid on the Dukovany new build in the Czech Republic. However, the court’s ruling that Westinghouse did not have the authority to file the lawsuit could strengthen KHNP’s hand in its negotiations with Westinghouse which might result in a deal at a much earlier date than the end of 2025.
Saudi Arabia Deal Has National Security Written all Over It.
The Westinghouse lawsuit and its ongoing efforts also may have an impact on South Korea’s bid to build two APR1400s for Saudi Arabia. That country has requested technical assistance from the US for its commercial nuclear program, but it is blocked from buying reactors or other nuclear technologies from any US firm, including Westinghouse, due to the lack of a 123 Agreement with the US.
Saudi Arabia has also said that if the US does not help it with its new build, that it will buy nuclear reactors from China. It is the interests of the US for South Korea to win the contract which keeps China from getting a new foothold in the Middle East.
The Westinghouse lawsuit against KHNP is a significant problem for the Biden Administration’s efforts to prevent China from gaining a 60 year energy platform in Saudi Arabia that could also involve Chinese military bases in that country. It is a national security headache for the White House which seems unwilling acknowledge it or to intervene in the dispute.
If Saudi Arabia really wants the South Korean reactors, it has the option to buy out the Westinghouse IP on a “no fault basis” and resolve the issue once and for all. Going forward, South Korea and Saudi Arabia could then be partners on the other export bids. Saudi Arabia and South Korea already have such an agreement for South Korea’s 100 MW SMR. The potential combination of Saudi financing and South Korean expertise, as evidenced in the four complete reactors in the UAE, would have a strong competitive position in the global market for new nuclear reactors.
& & &
Canada Pumps $3 Billion into Cernavoda CANDUs
The Canadian government this week is providing $3 billion in export financing to support completion of two CANDU-6 type 700MW PHWR nuclear reactors Romania’s Cernavoda power station.The announcement was made by Jonathan Wilkinson, Canada’s of Energy and Natural Resources and Sebastian Burduja, Romania’s Minister of Energy.
Romania has been seeking financing to complete the two partially built units for more than a decade. Natural Resources Canada said CANDU-6 reactors could supply 36% of Romania’s total electricity needs, up from the current 21%. The move will allow Romania to close down coal fire power plants to help meet climate action goals. Nuclearelectrica S.A. (SNN), the national operator of the Cernavoda Nuclear Generating Station, will be the EPC.
In 2020 Nuclearelectrica terminated an agreement signed with China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN) to complete the plants. At the time the government indicated that it had concerns about costs and security. There is also the likelihood that China was pushing to build its domestic PWR design, the 1000 MW Hualong One, in place of finishing the twin PHWRs which would have been a far more costly price tag. China pursued this marketing approach in Argentina which has two PHWRs with a resulting stalemate in negotiations over this issue as well as on issues related to financial terms and who will provide the fuel for the new reactor if built.
This is the second time Canada has provided export financing to Romania. It supported the construction and operation of the first two CANDU-6 reactors at Cernavoda. These reactors, designed by Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL), were completed in 1996 and 2007 respectively and have remained operational ever since.
Canada remains the global center of excellence for CANDU reactors. Canada has exported CANDU technology to Argentina, China, India, Pakistan, Romania and South Korea. There are 19 CANDU reactors in Canada and 27 worldwide. They were built by the crown corporation of Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL). In 2011, with limited prospects for Canadian or export sales of new units, the Canadian government sold the reactor division of AECL to SNC-Lavalin for about $15 million.
Earlier this month SNC-Lavalin changed its name as part of a rebranding effort. The new name AtkinsRéalis is a coined term that combines Atkins, a legacy brand that is well-established across the Company’s international markets, and “Réalis,” inspired by the city of Montréal and the Company’s French-Canadian roots. “Réalis” also resembles the verb “to realize” or “to make happen” which emphasizes our focus on outcomes and project delivery.
What is A CANDU Reactor?
The CANDU (Canada Deuterium Uranium) is a Canadian pressurized heavy-water reactor design used to generate electric power. The acronym refers to its deuterium oxide (heavy water) moderator and its use of (originally, natural) uranium fuel. (Image: Wikipedia)
Most commercial reactor designs use normal water as the moderator. Water absorbs some of the neutrons, enough that it is not possible to keep the reaction going in natural uranium alone.CANDU replaces this “light” water with heavy water. Heavy water’s extra neutron decreases its ability to absorb excess neutrons, resulting in a better neutron economy.
This allows CANDU to run on unenriched natural uranium, or uranium mixed with a variety of other materials such as plutonium and thorium.
This was a major goal of the CANDU design; by operating on natural uranium the cost and risk of enrichment is removed.
This also presents an advantage in nuclear proliferation terms, as there is no need for enrichment facilities, which might also be used for nuclear weapons.
India’s Commitment to PHWRs
Earlier this month (September 2023) India’s first indigenously developed 700 MWe nuclear power reactor started operations at the Kakrapar Atomic Power Project (KAPP) in Gujarat which is also Indian PM Modi’s homsprovince. The PHWR is the first of two similar units to be built there. The Indian PHWRs are a domestic design based on the CANDU type reactor which uses heavy water and U238 to provide a critical reaction.
In 2018 NPCIL authorized the construction of 10 indigenously developed PHWRs in fleet mode at four locations—Gorakhpur in Haryana, Chutka in Madhya Pradesh, Mahi Banswara in Rajasthan, and Kaiga in Karnataka.
Also, construction of 700 MW nuclear power plants is underway at Rawatbhata in Rajasthan (RAPS 7 and 8) and at Gorakhpur in Haryana (GHAVP 1 and 2).
The program will require a massive infusion of people and funding for NPCIL, the state-owned nuclear energy utility. The ten reactor effort is estimated by NPCIL to cost over $11 billion. The state-owned enterprise may be betting on economies of scale for construction of the entire fleet.
However, even with India’s significantly lower labor costs to build the ten units, which is expected it generate 33,000 jobs, the entire program is likely to wind up costing at least twice the the government’s initial estimate. Even so, the 700 MW PHWRs will still come in at a cost per reactor way below the price EDF is quoting for six 1650 MW EPRs at Jaitapur.
The supply chain for the 10 PHWRs will be entirely composed of Indian heavy industry firms including for non-nuclear components such as turbines, transformers, and other grid infrastructure. The government believes that by relying on domestic manufacturing firms that it can produce economies of scale for all 10 reactors. Indian heavy industry firms such as Larsen & Toubro, Kirloskar Brothers, and Godrej & Boyce are the major beneficiaries of the plan.
As part of the plan to build 10 new PHWR reactors, India’s government also reclassified Indian heavy industry firms as “vendors” thus exempting them from the supplier liability law. The law, which was pushed by India’s coal mining interests, was passed under the guise of seeking to prevent another Bhopal industrial disaster. Another element of support for the law was a desire for preservation of the country’s “nonaligned” status which favored use of an indigenous design. The net effect is to lock the domestic nuclear reactor market for Indian firms and their workers.
& & &
BWXT, Crowley Debut Nuclear Power Generation Vessel Concept
Global shipping firm Crowley has teamed with BWX Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: BWXT) through a memorandum of understanding(MOU) for a ship concept that has the potential to generate alternative, zero-carbon emission energy for defense and disaster needs by including a micro nuclear reactor to supply electricity from the onboard reactors to coastal sites. The ship itself would not be nuclear powered but would use traditional fossil fuel propulsion methods.
BWXT –Crowley Floating Vessel Concept. Image: BWXT
The two companies will jointly pursue and develop opportunities to design, engineer and develop new shallow-draft hull ships that will supply small-scale nuclear energy to shoreside locations. The new ships would feature factory fabricated microreactors, readily deployed into a shipyard configuration for ease of installation on the vessel.
The onboard power plant would supply energy to shore facilities, such as military bases in remote island locations, backup utility grids after disasters, and provide power in other scenarios where traditional electricity sources are damaged or not possible.
The new vessel concept envisions a 378-foot ship. This new vessel concept pairs traditional propulsion while carrying a modular reactor between 5 and 50 MW that can be activated upon arrival at the destination and be deactivated and transported after the power supply is discontinued.
Buoyed power delivery cables will enable the ships to deploy energy connections to shore. Shallow draft hulls allow the vessels to maneuver to strategically deliver power for military activities or if disasters limit harbor access. After it’s no longer needed, the power plant could be disconnected and taken elsewhere.
A BWXT spokesperson said, “The idea is to provide power where and when needed, so response to something like a storm or other situation where significant power is needed quickly and for more than just a few days would be one of the best uses of this concept.”
Shiju Zacharia, senior vice president and general manager for Crowley Government Solutions, said in a press statement, “The partnership is Crowley’s first entry into nuclear energy, and it “supports the U.S. Department of Energy’s goal of maintaining U.S. leadership in nuclear energy technology as well as many [of] the U.S. Department of Defense’s strategic goals for operational energy,”
BWXT provides nuclear fuel and components for the U.S. military and is developing other technologies such as nuclear medicine and spacecraft fuel. It employs about 7,000 people, including 2,600 in the Lynchburg area, most of whom work at the company’s Mt. Athos site in Campbell County.
Crowley is a privately owned maritime, energy and logistics solutions company with commercial and government customers. It employs about 7,000 people worldwide.
# # #
Regulatory Changes Needed For New Nuclear For Maritime
(WNN) Nuclear Energy will be needed to help decarbonize the shipping industry – whether by having nuclear-powered ships or using nuclear to produce alternative fuels – a conference organized by Core Power has heard. However, speakers noted that regulatory issues must be resolved before this can happen.The shipping industry consumes some 350 million tonnes of fossil fuel annually and accounts for about 3% of total worldwide carbon emissions. The industry has been mandated by the United Nations to reach net zero by 2050, The conference event titled ‘New Nuclear for Maritime’ was held in London.
Martin Stopford, executive director of MarEcon Ltd, said, “high energy costs [for ships]are going to make capital intensive investments like nuclear reactors much more attractive.”
Chris Hartnoll, CEO and MD of HICO Investment Group, said, “We see a huge potential for maritime nuclear as a floating production site.”
Hartnoll added that nuclear electric ships, especially larger vessels, makes “much sense” and could be a step-change for the shipping industry. However, Hartnoll added, “I think the question is where the regulation will go. Will we be allowed to have nuclear ships pulling into different ports?”
Core Power’s Director of Regulatory Development, Scott Edwards, said there needs to be a “clear, consistent and predictable set of rules and regulations” to make new nuclear for maritime a reality.
“Rules and regulations comes up as one of the potential barriers to the future, but actually what happens with the rules and regulations generally is they tend to catch up with new developments and innovation,” said Core Power Chairman and CEO Mikal Bøe. “And for nuclear it’s exactly the same thing.”
He noted the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO’s) current safety regulations on nuclear maritime were developed in the 1970s and specifically relate to nuclear-propelled naval vessels. “It is the only internationally-recognized safety code for maritime nuclear,” Bøe said.
“New nuclear for maritime requires agnosticism around the type of technologies we can use because we found that the technology that the IMO rules specifically refer to and regulates from the safety perspective, is in fact uninsurable,” he said. “And if it’s not insurable, it’s a showstopper, because we can’t bring it into ports.”
Bøe noted that a comparison between floating nuclear power plants and nuclear-propelled ships “discovered there was close to 95% overlap between the two in terms of safety”. He suggested IMO regulations are updated so as to “create that strong bond between nuclear safety and security and maritime safety and security … that is a framework on which we can prototype and demonstrate already in the 2030s”.
He added: “What we could then potentially achieve is dual-purpose floating nuclear power plants … a nuclear electric vessel entering into a waterway with a marine-appropriate nuclear technology – one that has, because of these new rules at the IMO, been allowed because it is agnostic and different technologies other than naval reactors. It now is insurable.”
Katy Ware, Director of Maritime Safety and Standards at the UK Maritime & Coastguard Agency and Permanent Representative of the UK to the IMO, said she did not think the challenges of creating the necessary safety regulations “are insurmountable and can be done.”
She said the advantage with nuclear, unlike alternative fuels, is that it is a regulated industry, “there is a proven legislative structure for getting nuclear power plants up and running, so it is possible … it can be done. It’s complicated. We are not starting from scratch. It’s going to take time. But we can do it.”
& & &
INL’s MARVEL Prototype Micro Reactor Starts Testing
The electrically primary coolant apparatus test (PCAT) replica of the MARVEL microreactor is installed and testing for an electric-powered microreactor prototype developed by the U.S. Department of Energy at the Idaho National Laboratory.The 12-foot-tall machine is a full-scale replica of the Department’s MARVEL microreactor, which is being built to help advance new reactor technologies.
MARVEL will be the first new reactor at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in more than four decades and is targeting to be operational in 2025.
Testing the PCAT
The primary coolant apparatus test (PCAT) fired up for the first time at Creative Engineers, Inc’s manufacturing facility in New Freedom, Pennsylvania. The company installed the PCAT last May and loaded the system with sodium-potassium and lead-bismuth coolants to demonstrate heat removal from its electrically heated core.
DOE is now working toward collecting new data on the system’s temperatures and coolant flow to ensure the MARVEL reactor will perform as expected.
“The MARVEL project underscores the potential of human innovation to address pressing energy security and climate challenges facing modern society.” said Yasir Arafat, chief designer and project lead for MARVEL.
“This PCAT demonstration is an important step in that process and will help validate and benchmark tools we use to accurately predict how the reactor will perform.”
The MARVEL Microreactor
MARVEL is a sodium-potassium-cooled microreactor that is anticipated to generate 85 KW of thermal energy. It will operate within INL’s Transient Reactor Test Facility and be connected to the lab’s first nuclear microgrid.
MARVEL will be used to test microreactor applications, evaluate systems for remote monitoring, and develop autonomous control technologies. The reactor could be operational as soon as the end of next year.
What’s Next?
PCAT testing will unfold in phases and initially focuses on demonstrating natural circulation, a critical heat removal mechanism within the system.
DOE is close to finalizing the MARVEL design and is in discussion to procure key long-lead components for fabrication, such as Stirling engines and nuclear fuel.
# # #