00/03305 Optimized conventional island design for the European pressurized water reactor (EPR)

Abstract

German and French designers agreed in 1989 to jointly develop a standardized nuclear island for the European Pressurized Water Reactor (EPR). With the support of German and French utilities and safety authorities, the basic design was started 1995 and was finalized by the end of 1998. In parallel with these efforts, the German utilities group contracted the Power Generation Group (KWU) of Siemens AG to develop an optimized conventional island for the EPR. The main objective of the EPR design, i.e. to be able to compete economically with other nuclear power plant designs and fossil-fuel power plants and at the same time to increase nuclear safety, has been achieved. The results of these optimization efforts on the conventional island side can be summarized in the following points: - The plant's electrical generating capacity was increased without any need of additional or new special tools or equipment. - The entire development and implementation process, i.e. from plant design work all the way through to plant service and maintenance, was reviewed and improved without any restricting operational or maintenance aspects. - The efficiency of the steam, condensate and feedwater cycle, including the steam turbine and heat sink, was increased by introducing, among other design changes, the new 3DS/ 3DV blade design. - Common general European codes and related national codes and standards were applied to the designing, sizing, approval and documentation of all conventional island components. - Only specialized personnel with global turn-key know-how were involved. The result is a nuclear power plant with a gross electrical generating capacity of 1850 MW (for a site equipped with cooling tower), a gross efficiency rate of 37.8 percent and a net efficiency of 35.9 percent. The performance figures of the improved design demonstrate the following: - The EPR is economically competitive with modern fossil-fuel power plants. - The EPR is much less dependent on fuel cycle costs as fossil-fuel power plants. - One EPR saves some 10 million tons of CO2 emissions per year compared with a hard-coal-fired power plant.