Nuclear Fuel Diversification in CEE
PhDr. Tomáš Vlček, Ph.D.
International Relations and Energy Security
Department of International Relations and European Studies
Introduction
 European Energy Security Strategy (May 2014) - utilities to
diversify their nuclear fuel supply sources
 Euratom opened call NFRP-16-2015 to support the licensing of
Western nuclear fuel for reactors in VVER units in December 2013,
with an application deadline of November 2014
 Six months later, Westinghouse Electric Company LLC led a group
that won €2 million in backing from the EU to diversify nuclear fuel
supplies to these reactors, with a focus on licensing alternative
nuclear supplies for Russian-designed pressurized water reactors
operating inside the EU
 The Euratom Supply Agency understands the importance of the
security of supply, mandating that there should always be at least
two alternative fuel designs from two different suppliers qualified
for each reactor
Nuclear Fuel Cycle
Front End Price Break-down (2013)
Uranium 9.0 kg U3O8 $ 50 per lb $ 990
Conversion 7.6 kg U $ 13 per kg $ 99
Enrichment 7 SWU $ 150 per SWU $ 1050
Fabrication 1 kg $ 300 per kg $ 300
Total $ 2439
Need about 20 tonnes of enriched uranium for an average
large reactor refuel, so cost will be about $ 50 million
Total front end world market is now worth about $ 25 billion
annually
Source: Steve Kidd, World Nuclear Association
Nuclear Fuel Economy
The reactor fuel buyers fight hard to save every last cent because
this is cost they feel they can influence. It has however minor role
on the NPP operating costs.
Impact of 50 % increase in fuel costs on generating costs
Source: Global Energy Decisions, ERI, Inc.; IEA WEO 2006; in Steve Kidd, 2010, Nuclear
Fuel: Myths and Realities
Uranium
Agency
/ Year
Low /
GWe
High /
GWe
IAEA
2030
435 722
IEA
2040
620
OECD
NEA
2035
399 678
According to WNA, as of 31 December 2014 there were 437 nuclear reactors
operational in 30 countries generating 377.8 GWe of electricity. There were
70 nuclear reactors under construction in 14 countries (52 in top five: China,
Russia, India, South Korea and USA).
Uranium
 Rising NPP capacity factors (10 % in 1990s)
 Rising enrichment levels (up to 5 % U235)
 Uranium price levels limit usable deposits exploration and extraction (proven
reserves vs. pure guesses) – U from oceans
 According to Red Book, there is 7,635 Mt of Identified resources of U, not
counting resources with current production price above 260 USD/1 kg
 400 junior uranium companies emerged recently (largely still in exploration
stage)
 Stockpiles of natural and enriched uranium
 RepU (expensive U = pressure on reprocessing)
 P239 (Spent fuel, weapons)
 Down-blended weapons-grade uranium
 Re-enriched uranium tails assay (currently 0.25-0.3% U235)
 Higher enrichment (expensive U = pressure on higher enrichment/U235
extraction)
 Breeder reactors (U238 to P239)
 Fusion (?)
 Extreme short-term measures (lowering NPP production output means
longer fuel campaigns)
Uranium Production Perspective
Uranium Production Perspective
Source: CRU Strategies
Source: Euratom Supply Agency
-China´s capacity is expected to grow considerably in 2025 and beyond
-Plan to develop Ulba plant in Kazakhstan (12 000 tU)
Conversion
Source: World Nuclear Association Nuclear Fuel Report 2013 & 2105, Areva 2014
Reference Document for most 2013 figures.
Enrichment
SWU calculator: http://www.wise-uranium.org/nfcue.html
Difference to every other step:
 1) Fabrication is a highly specialised service rather than commodity
(barrier for newcomers enetring the market)
 2) TVEL offers full front end process as a product (i.e. fuel) vs. steps
in the fuel cycle
 3) Main technology (NPP) suppliers are also main fuel producers
 4) Fuel is manufactured according to public tenders specifing the
product in details
 5) VVER technology was developed paralelly with western
technology (legacy of cold war)
 6) Markets were opened 25 years ago with no experience on both
sides
 7) The nuclear fuel quality is critical for NPP production. The financial
implications of reduced plant performance would quickly outweigh
any benefit from potentially lower fuel prices
Fabrication
Fabrication
Fabrication
OperatingVVER Design Nuclear Units Outside Russian Federation
Country Reactor Type In Operation
From
End of Life-
Cycle
Fuel Supplier Fuel Contract Until
Armenia Metsamor2 VVER-440/V-270 1980 2026 OAO TVELB 2026
Bulgaria Kozloduy 5 VVER-1000/V-320 1987 2017A OAO TVEL 2020
Kozloduy 6 VVER-1000/V-320 1991 2019A OAO TVEL 2020
China Tianwan 1 VVER-1000/V-428 2006 2046 OAO TVEL 2023C
Tianwan 2 VVER-1000/V-428 2007 2047 China Jianzhong Nuclear Fuel
Company, Ltd. (CNNC)
2047C
Czech Republic Dukovany 1 VVER-440/V-213 1985 Indefinite OAO TVEL 2028
Dukovany 2 VVER-440/V-213 1986 2016A OAO TVEL 2028
Dukovany 3 VVER-440/V-213 1986 2016A OAO TVEL 2028
Dukovany 4 VVER-440/V-213 1987 2017A OAO TVEL 2028
Temelín1 VVER-1000/V-320 2000 2020 OAO TVEL 2020
Temelín2 VVER-1000/V-320 2002 2022 OAO TVEL 2020
Finland Loviisa1 VVER-440/V-213 1977 2027 OAO TVEL 2027D
Loviisa2 VVER-440/V-213 1980 2030 OAO TVEL 2030D
Hungary Paks 1 VVER-440/V-213 1982 2032 OAO TVEL 2032
Paks 2 VVER-440/V-213 1984 2034 OAO TVEL 2034
Paks 3 VVER-440/V-213 1986 2016A OAO TVEL 2016E
Paks 4 VVER-440/V-213 1987 2017A OAO TVEL 2017E
India Kudankulam1 VVER-1000/V-412 2013 2073 OAO TVEL 2073F
Kudankulam2 VVER-1000/V-412 2016 2076 OAO TVEL 2073F
Iran Bushehr 1 VVER-1000/V-446 2011 2071 OAO TVEL 2021
Slovak Republic Jaslovské Bohunice V2 1 VVER-440/V-213 1984 2024A OAO TVEL 2021
Jaslovské Bohunice V2 2 VVER-440/V-213 1985 2025A OAO TVEL 2021
Mochovce1 VVER-440/V-213 1998 2028 OAO TVEL 2021
Mochovce2 VVER-440/V-213 2000 2030 OAO TVEL 2021
Ukraine Rivne 1 VVER-440/V-213 1980 2030 OAO TVEL 2030G
Rivne 2 VVER-440/V-213 1981 2031 OAO TVEL 2030G
Rivne 3 VVER-1000/V-320 1986 2016A OAO TVEL 2030G
Rivne 4 VVER-1000/V-320 2004 2034 OAO TVEL 2030G
Khmelnitsky1 VVER-1000/V-320 1987 2017A OAO TVEL 2030G
Khmelnitsky2 VVER-1000/V-320 2004 2034A OAO TVEL 2030G
South Ukraine 1 VVER-1000/V-302 1982 2023 Westinghouse EC LLC 2020G
South Ukraine 2 VVER-1000/V-338 1985 2025 Westinghouse EC LLC 2020G
South Ukraine 3 VVER-1000/V-320 1989 2019 Westinghouse EC LLC 2020G
Zaporizhzhya1 VVER-1000/V-320 1984 2015A OAO TVEL 2030G
Zaporizhzhya2 VVER-1000/V-320 1985 2016A OAO TVEL 2030G
Zaporizhzhya3 VVER-1000/V-320 1986 2016A OAO TVEL 2030G
Zaporizhzhya4 VVER-1000/V-320 1987 2017 OAO TVEL 2030G
Zaporizhzhya5 VVER-1000/V-320 1989 2019 OAO TVEL 2030G
Zaporizhzhya6 VVER-1000/V-320 1995 2025 OAO TVEL 2030G
AlternativeFabricatorsof VVER Design NuclearUnits Fuel
ReactorType Company Previous Experience Current Contracts Operationalexperience and Limitations
VVER-440
Westinghouse Electric
Company LLC*
Nova E-3 fuel type for
Loviisa NPP Unit 1 (Finland)
in 1998-2007
- The fuel performed in accordance with expectations
during operation. BNFL signed a contract with Finnish
NPP operator IVO and Hungarian Paks NPP in 1996 for
the design, development, licensing and supply of test
fuel assemblies for the VVER-440 reactor at Loviisa NPP.
At the same time, Hungarian Paks NPP was considering
using an alternative supplier for at least one reactor. But
no BNFL fuel was ever loaded into Hungarian reactors
(likely because of the Hungarian-Russian contract for fuel
supply until the end of plant´s life-cycle) and BNFL´s fuel
was licensed in Hungary only until 2008.
VVER-1000
Westinghouse Electric
Company LLC
VVANTAGE-6 fuel type for
Temelín NPP (Czech
Republic) in 2000-2009;
VVANTAGE-6 (TVS-W) fuel
type for South Ukraine NPP
(Ukraine) in 2009-2014;
TVS-RW fuel type for South
UkraineNPP since 2015
South Ukraine NPP
(Ukraine)until 2020
Temelín NPP experienced massive malfunctions related
to the geometric stability of the fuel that eventually led
to premature unloading of all of Westinghouse's fuel
assemblies despite financial losses, and replacement
with TVEL fuel. Problems with fuel recurred in Ukraine to
a lesser extent, but still enough to cause a lengthy
unscheduled outage at two of the units, which eventually
led to technological adjustments to the fuel and
consequent relabeling to Robust (TVS-RW).
China National Nuclear
Corporation (CNNC)
- Tianwan NPP (China)
until the end of plant´s
life-cycle
As part of the 2008 contract with TVEL and CNNC, TVEL
sold production technology for TVS-2M fuel for VVER-
1000 units. China's Yibin fabrication plant will thus
produce the fuel for Tianwan Units 1 and 2 and future
Units 3 and 4 (currently under construction) from fourth
refuel onwards. The contract is for Tianwan NPP only.
VVER-1200 - - - *
This contract was operated by British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL), owner of Westinghouse Electric Company LLC between 1999 and 2006. All
Westinghouse’s nuclear power business was restructured by BNFL, including ABB Group's nuclear power business, bought and merged into
Westinghouse in 2000. In 2007, BNFL sold Westinghouse Electric Company LLC to Toshiba Corporation and Toshiba sold shares of the company to
minorities (20% to The Shaw Group and 3% to Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries Co. Ltd.; later in 2007 10% to Kazatomprom) leaving the Japanese
company with 67% share. When BNFL bought Westinghouse, it was decided that the reload fuel for Loviisa NPP Unit 1 would be assembled via a
manufacturinglicense by Enusa Industrias Avanzadas, S.A. in Spain instead of at Westinghouse´s Springfieldsplant in UK.
Source: public sources; company information;compiledby T. Vlček.
What is it for?
 Potentially the biggest single obstacle to fuel market diversification is the
license.
 It is here that Euratom makes its entrance. The Euratom funding noted
earlier is targeted directly at diversifying the VVER-440 fuel market by
qualifying a second supplier for the EU’s VVER-440 reactor fleet. The
program will chiefly focus on establishing the methods and methodology
required to license a VVER-440 fuel design.
 To support the business of a Western nuclear company by removing
market barriers to allow entry to the relatively small EU market for VVER-
440 reactors—fourteen in operation, two in construction—seems
nonsensical from at least two vantage points.
 The Euratom funding is targeted directly at diversifying the VVER-
440 fuel market by qualifying a second supplier for the EU’s VVER-
440 reactor fleet.
 The Dukovany NPP in the Czech Republic, the Loviisa NPP in Finland,
and the Paks NPP in Hungary all have lifetime fuel contracts with
OAO TVEL for all their VVER-440 units.
 Only at the Jaslovské Bohunice and Mochovce NPPs in Slovakia do
the contracts expire in 2021.
 There are thus no contractual obstacles to changing suppliers in
subsequent years, and the plants will continue in operation well
beyond that point: up to 30 years for Mochovce NPP Units 1 and 2;
up to 10 years for Jaslovské Bohunice V2 Units 1 and 2; and up to 60
years for Mochovce NPP Units 3 and 4.
Euratom Grant as a Direct Market Support I
 Since Westinghouse Electric Company LLC truly is the sole
alternative provider of fuel for VVER-440 reactors, the evidence also
backs the argument that financial support for the diversification of
fuel to VVER reactors in fact constitutes direct support of one
private company on the market.
 But this is not the key reason for Euratom’s grant scheme, nor for
the European Commission’s diversification efforts. It is a mere
corollary outcome; Westinghouse is indeed the only alternative
supplier of nuclear fuel for this region.
 Finally, we may expect the instalment of Lead Test Assemblies in a
VVER-440 reactor in the near future. It may occur either at Ukraine’s
Rivne NPP, since Westinghouse already has a commercial presence
in Ukraine, or at Slovakia’s Jaslovské Bohunice and Mochovce NPPs.
Euratom Grant as a Direct Market Support II
 The Slovak Government has discussed the possibility of cutting dependency on
Russian nuclear fuel, and in November 2014, information emerged about a
contract for uranium fuel supply being signed with a non-Russian company
 Additionally, in 2014 Slovakia began a diversification effort targeting not only
uranium enrichment, but also nuclear fuel manufacture, crude oil and natural
gas infrastructure, and military equipment based on Resolution 146 of the
Committee of the Slovak Republic National Council for Defence and Security
However:
 “Our business with TVEL has always been very smooth. Slovenské Elektrárne
has never experienced any technical problems with the fuel, not even small
leakages, which may occur in one out of a thousand fuel assemblies. The
quality has been outstanding, and even during this period of tension we have
not experienced any delivery disruptions. When the situation was especially
tense, we used aerial transport to avoid passing through Ukraine by train.”
Nicola Cotugno, general-director of Slovenské Elektrárne
What is it for?