Contemporary ENERGY Vol1 No1 (2015) by REMOO

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY Peer-reviewed open-access E-journal

ISSN 2363-6440

Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015) February 2015 www.Contemporary-ENERGY.net

Publisher

Get It Published Verlag e.k. Allee am Röthelheimpark 14 91052 Erlangen GERMANY

T 00 49 (0)9131 917 96 14 E info@get-it-published.de W www.get-it-published.de

Copyright This journal and all published articles, including all illustrations contained in authors’ papers block, are protected by copyright. Upon an article being accepted for publication, all rights of publication, for translation, further reproduction, distribution, transmission, display, broadcast, of storage in any electronic form and producing photocopies are transferred to the publisher. Without the written permission of the publisher, any usage outside the limits of the copyright act is forbidden.

© Copyright by Get It Published Verlag e.K. Notice The publisher does not assume any responsibility for any harm and/or injury to property and persons resulting from any ideas, instructions, methods or products contained in the material published in this journal, as well as a matter of inattention or creation liability, or from any use or operations.

Cover Illustration ENERGY; Source: http://de.123rf.com; Copyright: studiom1

Founding Editor & Editor-in-Chief Zoran V. Stosic

–

editor@contemporary-energy.net

Director RENECON International, GERMANY; Former Vice President ICO South East Europe at AREVA, GERMANY

Editorial Board Prof. Jan Blomgren

–

Uppsala University; CEO of INBEx, SWEDEN

Ass. Prof. Leon Cizelj

–

University of Ljubljana; Head of Reactor Engineering Division at IJS, SLOVENIA

Ass. Prof. Davor Grgić

–

Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb, CROATIA

Prof. Nikola Čavlina

–

Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb, CROATIA

Dr. Ludger Mohrbach

–

Head of Competence Center Nuclear Power Plants at VGB PowerTech e.V., Essen, GERMANY

Dr. Maximilian Emanuel Elspas

–

Head of Energy Law and Lawyer Partner at Beiten Burkhardt Law Munich, GERMANY

Dr. Dietmar O. Reich

–

Co-Head of Competition Practice Group and Lawyer Partner at Beiten Burkhardt Law Brussels, BELGIUM

Prof. Gligor H. Kanevče

–

Member of Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Faculty of Technical Sciences, “St. Climent Ohridski” University Bitola, MACEDONIA

Dr. Miodrag Mesarović

–

Secretary General of the SerbianWEC Member Committee; Senior Advisor to Energoprojekt-ENTEL, Belgrade, SERBIA

Prof. Nikola Rajaković

–

Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Belgrade, SERBIA

LL.M. Ana Stanič

–

Lawyer Principal at E&A Law London, UNITED KINGDOM

Prof. Li Ran

–

School of Engineering, University of Warwick, UNITED KINGDOM; Deputy Director of China State Key Lab in Power Transmission Apparatus Security, Chongqin University, CHINA

Dr. Changxin Liu

–

Deputy Director General of China National Nuclear Corporation – CNNC, Beijing CHINA

Prof. Xu Cheng

–

Institute of Fusion and Nuclear Technology, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology – KIT, GERMANY; School of Nuclear Sciences and Engineering, Shanghai, Jiao Tong University, CHINA

Prof. Josua P. Meyer

–

Department of Mechanical and Aeronautical Engineering, University of Pretoria, SOUTH AFRICA

Prof. Zhao Yang Dong

–

Chair Professor and Head of School of Electrical and Information Engineering, University of Sidney, AUSTRALIA

Prof. Jordan Yankov Hristov

–

Faculty of Chemical Engineering, University of Chemical Technology and Metallurgy, Sofia, BULGARIA

M.Sci.Engng. Jukka Tapani Laaksonen

–

Vice President ROSATOM Overseas, Moscow, RUSSIA; Former Director General of the STUK, FINLAND

M.Sci.Engng. Jože Špiler

–

Head of TechnicalServices and Investments at GEN-energija, Krško, SLOVENIA

Prof. Michael Narodoslawsky

–

Institute for Process and Particle Engineering, Technical University of Graz, AUSTRIA

Dr. Raffaella Gerboni

–

Post-Doc Fellow Researcher, Energy Department, Politecnico di Torino, ITALY

Prof. Henryk Anglart

–

Deputy Head of Physics Department, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, SWEDEN

Dr. Suna Bolat

–

Assistant Professor, Eastern Mediterranean University – EMU, Famagusta, North Cyprus, TURKEY

Prof. Nikola Popov

–

Faculty of Engineering Physics, McMaster University, Hamilton; President DENIPO Consulting Ltd., Toronto, Ontarion, CANADA

Prof. Milovan Perić

–

Managing Director of CoMeT Continuum Mechanics Technologies GmbH, GERMANY; Senior Corporate Consultant CD-adapco, UNITED KINGDOM

Prof. Umberto Desideri

–

Department of Energy Engineering, University of Pisa, ITALY

Prof. Chul-Hwa Song

–

University of Science and Technology – UST, Seoul; Director of Thermal-Hydraulics Safety Research Div., KAERI, Daejeon, SOUTH KOREA

Prof. Hakan F. Oztop

–

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Firat University, Elazig, TURKEY

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

A WORD FROM THE EDITOR-IN-CHIEF As of today, almost 7.3 billion humans live on the planet and about 20% of the global population lack access to electricity and more than 35% rely on the traditional use of biomass for cooking. At the same time, mankind is using 1.5 of Earth to sustain current human activities, thus jeopardizing future of next generations and somehow overlooking increasing population with growth rate of almost three humans every second. Is this sustainability? Today we rely on various diversified technologies for energy generation. Renewable energy sources have figured prominently on the international agenda in last time. However, can a rigorous shift to the sustainable energy resources and technologies that are available today meet the more than doubling of global energy demand projected by 2050 and cover already foreseen deficit in electricity generation, which will account for about 15–20% until 2035, while avoiding dangerous climatic change of more than 2 oC above pre-industrial levels? Founding Editor & Editor–In–Chief Zoran V. Stosic

Talking about the reliability, affordability and sustainability of energy future opens the important question about readiness of investors to commit capital in a fast-changing energy world, where nature of risks affecting investments has already changed significantly with the liberalization of electricity markets. Financing the transition to a low-carbon energy system is a major challenge, requiring strong policy and price signals to ensure that low-carbon and energy efficiency investments offer a sufficiently attractive risk-adjusted return. In this course, the International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY aims to reach and to bridge the gap between researchers, scientists, engineers, technology developers, strategy planners, policy makers, energy regulators and lawyers and academic professionals, willing to contribute both to better understanding of vital energy issues and to sustainable energy supply. Thus, the Journal provides an active interface between theory, science and practice serving both researches and practising professionals. So, take time and enjoy reading and submitting …

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ A Word from the Editor–in–Chief

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ A Word from the Editor–in–Chief

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

REMOO–2014: Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop by Dabor Grgić

Maximilian Emanuel Elspas, Alexandra Mützelburg EU Guidelines on Environmental and Energy Aid for 2014–2020 and its Impact on the National Promotion Schemes for Renewable Energy

Leon Cizelj Research and Higher Education: A Disposable Part of Fundamental National Infrastructure

Elvis Mikac, Vedran Kirinčić, Srdjan Skok Smart Protection Scheme for the Power Subsystem of Istria Region

Daniele Grosso, Raffaella Gerboni Geopolitical Instability in Ukraine and Security of Energy Supply. The Effects on Natural Gas Supply to Italy under Different Scenarios

Michael Narodoslawsky, Michael Eder, Stephan Maier, René Kollmann The Challenge of Utilising Bio–Resources: A Regional Perspective

Davor Grgić, Vesna Benčik, Siniša Šadek, Ivica Bašić Independent Review of NPP Modifications and Safety Upgrades

Borut Stražišar Shared Radwaste Repository – Do we need Update in International Law?

e16

About the Journal

e17

Instructions for Authors

e19

Advertisements

Authors‘ Papers

e10

Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible by Jan Blomgren

The Journal

Editorial

CONTENT

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Content

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Editorial

.e1

Contemporary Energy — The Art of The Impossible by Jan Blomgren

.e10

REMOO–2014 Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop by Davor Grgić

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

CONTEMPORARY ENERGY — THE ART OF THE IMPOSSIBLE Please misunderstand me right – it is not the International Journal of Contemporary Energy the headline refers to, but reality: How do we reach a consensus about how to tackle contemporary energy issues? Rather than presenting a standard (and dry) editorial not aiming at offending anyone – and thereby be uninteresting to everybody – I will give a highly subjective view, taking examples from my own point of observation in the energy landscape. First, let us ponder why it seems to be so difficult to get agreement on appropriate actions in the field of energy. I believe the ultimate reason is that energy is such a multi-faceted problem. It involves technology, economy, ethics, environment, national security and a whole range of other aspects. Humans have different values, resulting in that also when we agree on the facts, we can still draw different conclusions about the way forward, simply because we give different weight to these various factors. When I was a relatively young professor of nuclear physics some decades ago, I was teaching energy issues at a distancelearning course. Most of the students were teachers taking this class for competence development. One notable exception was a delegate of the national parliament, and not just any member. It was the lady who pioneered the antinuclear power movement in my country a generation earlier, and now in the end of her career she was interested in getting a deeper understanding of energy. We had many discussions on various topics, and it turned out that we agreed on essentially all facts on what energy sources are available, their potential for growth, the expected population changes in the future, economy and whatnot. We still did not agree on what would be the optimal way forward – although we disagreed amicably and respectfully. The reason was our different values. She had the conviction that we need to develop a re-circulation society, in which all human undertakings need to fit in. This means she discarded all energy sources that were not renewable. I, on the other hand, argued that the one billion inhabitants on planet Earth presently lacking access to fresh water to drink need to get reasonable living conditions now, not to be delayed by the development of these renewable energy sources. Also, we agreed that the climate challenge is important. I argued that all non-fossil energy sources be needed to tackle the ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible”

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

challenge, and suggested nuclear power and renewables work together, whereas she claimed renewables only should do the job. Next eye-opener for me was when I realized how different results you can get in energy analysis depending on what factors you introduce (and which you disregard). One day, I had a research group from a university of agriculture knocking on my door. They made system analyses of the efficiency of intensively grown willow bushes for energy production, primarily to be used as fuel in district heating plants. In their first analysis, they had looked at the explicit energy only, i.e., they had counted the diesel in the tractors used to harvest the willow ”crop” and in the truck to drive it to the heating plant, and compared this with the produced useful energy. With such an approach, the result was positive – the system produced an energy output larger than the input with a reasonable margin. However, in next step, they also introduced the energy needed to manufacture the tractor and truck, and the energy to produce the fertilizers used. With that approach, the net production came close to zero: It would be an equally good solution to burn diesel directly in the district heating plant. With this – from their point of view – disappointing result, they wanted someone to make a similar analysis of nuclear power to get a comparison. We made such an analysis, following the same prescription. This means we had to introduce the energy used in uranium mining and enrichment, but also in producing the concrete of the plant (this turned out to be a relatively large energy negative effect). In the end, we got a ”return-on-investment” of around 10, which is about the same as you get for fossil fuels. My bio-fuel colleagues sent this report to a well-known advocate of renewable energy (and – surprise! – ardent anti-nuclear…). He replied this work was all ”garbage” without even presenting any arguments why it was inferior. I tried to discuss the issue with him, but unsuccessfully. In all debates, he refers to analyses that give the result he wants, without telling the pre-conditions in the analysis. Another example comes from a recently published book by a well-known leading character of the domestic anti-nuclear movement. She claims nuclear power is not part of the solution of the climate challenge, because a life-cycle analysis by professor Jacobsen at the well-renowned Stanford University has revealed nuclear power produces large carbon dioxide emissions. What she forgot to tell her readers is that these large purported emissions are due to two factors you definitely can question. First, Jacobsen notes that it takes 10-15 years from the start of the new-build process until you have power to the grid (which is true). He then argues you need electricity from another source during this waiting time, and therefore charges 15 years of emissions of coal-fired electricity production in the analysis of nuclear power (!). This argument might make some sense in a country that already uses coal-fired plants and want to change to nuclear power. However, it implicitly presumes people are too stupid to foresee a need and start construction before the need arises. In that way, it has an anti-intellectual character. The second presumption by Jacobsen is even more interesting. He states that the use of nuclear power will inevitably lead to nuclear war. In his analysis, he introduces a ”limited” war with 100 Hiroshima-size nuclear weapons every 30 years somewhere in the World, and the CO2-emissions from the burning cities are introduced in the CO2 budget. Needless to say, I disagree with his way of reasoning. We have had nuclear power about 60 years, so by now we should have seen 200 major cities burned to ashes by nuclear weapons. The real outcome is zero, so the empirical support is weak, to put it in diplomatic terms. What is more worrying is that the results of his analysis are used in the public debate, without referring to the dubious presumptions used. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible”

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

It is not surprising it is difficult to debate energy issues. Even without such confusing interventions as above, the issues are multi-faceted and complex. The recent changes in the European energy landscape can serve as an illustration. About ten years ago, there seemed to be some kind of consensus to establish a joint European energy market. There was a strong conviction that a de-regulated free market should result in more efficient use of resources and lead to lower consumer prices, which in turn should improve European competitiveness on the global market. It can be noted that in all industries with enormous investments, you seem to get 2-3 major players over time, possibly complemented with a few small niche companies. Aviation can serve as example: there are two producers of large civil airplanes, Boeing and Airbus.

Not surprisingly, the large utilities in Europe started to buy each other, or merge. They had the perception they had to choose between eating others or being eaten themselves. This resulted in significant over-prices whenever a company was up for sale. The situation in the Netherlands is a good example. The two largest utilities in the Netherlands were sold in a short time to foreign companies, and became part of multinational corporations. Both the two buyers ran into severe financial problems due to these acquisitions, and both have subsequently taken large depreciations related to these deals. Soon thereafter, the situation changed dramatically, not because of a new decision on European level, but by uncorrelated actions by several member states. A number of European countries decided to introduce various support systems or subsidies to promote a preferred production technology. In Germany, Spain and some other countries, solar and wind power were supported, whereas UK instead introduced financial guarantees for nuclear power. The member states are free to do so according to the EU rules, but nevertheless did this undermine the whole idea of a free and joint market. The quick introduction of production with very low running costs (solar and wind) rapidly put pressure on baseload production (coal and nuclear power, and to some extent gas). On a sunny and windy day, a large fraction of the electricity in some European countries is produced with low marginal costs. This pushes baseload power out of the market during that day. However, the volatile nature of solar and wind means they produce only a modest fraction of the time, say around 25% or so. The rest of the time traditional baseload production is needed. However, the baseload production needs operation in the 70-80% availability range to be profitable. Hence, the new and heavily subsidized volatile technologies have reduced the profitability of reliable baseload electricity production. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ â&#x20AC;&#x153;Contemporary Energy â&#x20AC;&#x201C; The Art of The Impossibleâ&#x20AC;?

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

As a result, the electricity prices have dropped to such a low level that essentially no production is profitable. For instance in Sweden, only hydro power is on safe ground financially. Nuclear power is more or less breaking even, and wind power cannot even cover its maintenance costs, even less the construction (in spite of being supported by tax money). One could imagine that consumers would rejoice, but the consumer prices are not particularly low; after all, the production cost is only a minor fraction of the consumer bill in most European countries. Taxes constitute in many countries a larger fraction than the electricity production. This situation is troublesome already for existing baseload production, but it is even worse when it comes to newbuild. Existing old plants whose production cost has already been paid off have difficulties to make profit. Construction of new production capability, where the construction cost is added to the budget, is out of question. Hence, the support to varying production has undermined the possibilities to replace existing baseload capacity. To summarize: the subsidies have created a situation in which essentially all electricity production is un-profitable or at least displays very modest margins, and no new-build is financially sound. I realize various proponents of subsidies will protest and tell that these support schemes are fair and needed to change the production portfolio. I will not debate on that – but I claim that we now do not have a free and joint European market. I can see the merits of subsidizing as a tool to make political changes, and I can see the point of a joint market. The problem is that too many politicians did not realize you cannot get both. You have to choose, and you have to explain to the general public why you choose one instead of the other, and the consequences of that decision. Recently, there has been a discussion in Germany about creating some type of capacity market. In short, this means you get some payment for production you can deliver on demand. In other words, first you subsidize wind and solar to get into the market at the expense of coal (and to some less extent nuclear) and when this is successful enough to jeopardize the profit for coal, you subsidize coal not to drop out of the game. Who claims this is a market economy? The contribution by Elspas and Mützelburg in this issue takes an in-depth look into some of these questions, in particular from a legal perspective. Examples are presented from Germany and UK. As if this were not enough, we still have not even mentioned the situation with the grid. Most of the grid in Europe was built 1950-80 and has worked with low maintenance costs since then. However, we now begin to reach the point when major maintenance and modernizations are required. Just as an example, in my country (Sweden) the public operator of the national grid has increased its maintenance budget by a factor 20 (!) during the last decade. This comes at about the same time as the electric power technology education at our universities has more or less dried up. For a long period of time, the need for newbuild and maintenance has been limited in the electric power sector, and many university programs have been re-directed to electronics. Now when the needs are rapidly increasing, we face a severe shortage of competence. Leon Cizelj present a contribution in this issue on the importance of education as part of the overall energy infrastructure. Although the starting point of his paper and his examples are from nuclear power, to my opinion most of the reasoning can be extended far beyond the nuclear sector. The paper stresses that education is an inseparable building block of the energy industry, a statement I endorse no matter what exact technology we discuss. In addition, he argues that education and scientific research is important for public acceptance, because scientists have higher credibility in society at large than industrial, governmental and political representatives. Although this second statement is of particular importance for nuclear power, with its long-time politically controversial status in many countries, it should not be underestimated also for other technologies. Issues like the ”not-in-mybackyard” phenomenon we have seen for a long time in nuclear power does now also begin to appear in a non-negligible scale for other electricity production. Public resistance to wind farms is increasing in many European countries, and new-build of hydro power has virtually stopped, not only because the most favourable sites have been used already, but also because of the large consequences in forcing people to move permanently when dams are constructed. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible”

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We can even see that installation of power lines meet strong resistance. When there was a European initiative to establish a joint and common electricity market, one pre-requisite for success was increased capacity to transfer power in general, and through Germany in particular. Germany has among the weakest national grids in Europe. With a slight exaggeration, it can be claimed that Germany consists of a number of regional grids, but with relatively limited connection between them. When wind farms in Northern Germany produce at peak capacity, there are difficulties to transfer the power to the electrically intensive industry in Southern Germany. I cannot resist the temptation to tell my favourite illustration on how weak the German national grid is in some regions. There is a pumped-storage facility on the limit between two regional grids. This facility is there to balance production-versus-consumption, i.e., when electricity prices/consumption are low, water is pumped up, and when prices/consumption are high, power is being produced by dropping the water down again. It has happened that one of the regional grids adjacent to this facility has requested water to be pumped up at the same time as the other adjacent regional grid has requested production (!). A cable between these two grids would be a far cheaper and efficient solution. After all, pumping water up and then release it again destroys roughly half the useful energy content. So what happened to the German project on increased national grid capacity? Only a small fraction was ever built, less than 10% according to my most recent sources. The rest got stuck in court – a landowner somewhere did not want the power line over his or her fields. As a consequence, we have recently witnessed turbulence in the grids in surrounding countries. For instance, power is re-directed through the Czech Republic to get from Germany to Austria. This has resulted in large swings in the Czech grid, threatening the stability of it, and potentially increasing the maintenance costs for the future, or even reducing its lifetime. Another grid challenge arises from increased local production (read solar and wind, but also small-scale hydro and smallscale electric production as by-product from district heating). Until now, most electricity production has been in central large-scale units (coal-fired plants, nuclear power and in some countries hydro power). The grid has looked a bit like the human blood vessel system, with a few large highways for electrons that gradually splits up in increasing numbers of gradually smaller power lines the closer you get to the consumers. With increased local production, i.e., a large number of small production units, you might naively think this would reduce the need for large grids. A recent OECD report comes to exactly the opposite conclusion. The total cost for grid installation increases dramatically with dispersed production. Moreover, this also creates a demand for power to flow both ways simultaneously in local and regional grids, whereas the traditional grids essentially have one-way traffic. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible”

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If this has awakened your appetite for learning more about grid challenges, I refer to the contribution by Mikac, Kirinčić and Skok. They discuss the grid challenges of the Istra region. Although the paper is on a specific example, much of its content is applicable in a more general context. Returning to the contricution by Cizelj on the importance of education for acceptance, I believe we can get a healthier public discussion on energy issues if we reduce our promotions of a single aspect (often the production technology we work with ourselves, I am afraid…) and increase the emphasis on energy as a pre-requisite for a dignified life. We have seen both in UK and Sweden that national information campaigns on the importance of energy as engine for the entire modern society, resulting in for instance better health and increased life expectancy, has changed the perception of energy in general, and has increased the influx of students to energy engineering education. As an example, the Swedish Centre for Nuclear Technology issued a campaign in media, both in major newspapers and on internet, telling about how energy converted Sweden from being among the poorest countries in Europe only a few generations back in time, with large infancy mortality, to its present prosperity. The year after, we saw an increase in applications to all kinds of energy-related education. Actually, the largest increase was on general electric power technology, which now is a blessing in our grid maintenance and reconstruction projects. When dropping the advocacy for a single technology, we all benefitted from it. I personally believe also nuclear power gained more from this approach than messages only supporting nuclear power would have resulted in. I repeat, energy is the foundation of a modern civilization. As a consequence, energy is also a matter of national and international security. If you really want a country to develop, make sure you have safe and stable energy access. The other side of the same coin is that is you really want to hurt a nation, attack its energy supply. This has become annoyingly clear recently with the ongoing war in Ukraine.

Just one week after the disguised attacks on the Krim peninsula, the government of Ukraine signed a contract with the Westinghouse fuel plant in Sweden to deliver fuel to its nuclear power plants. This was a step in diminishing the almost complete dominance of Russia in the energy supply of Ukraine. Not long thereafter, a decision-in-principle was taken to build new nuclear power capacity, with non-Russian technology. In parallel, Lithuania revived its plans to build nuclear power to reduce its importance on electricity import from Russia. Moreover, a terminal for import of liquid natural gas is under construction to be functional in a near future. Last but not ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible”

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

least, a grid connection to the Nordic power system and introduction in the NordPool electricity market has been established. All this illustrates the political and national security aspects of energy supply. The paper by Grosso and Gerboni presents a deeper analysis of supply security issues, although with a slightly different case. Over 40% of the gas used in Italy originates from Russia. However, almost all passes Ukranine on its way to Italy. The present war in Ukraine obviously is a threat to stable supplies to Italy. In their paper, Grosso and Gerboni also points out that Europe is the largest energy-import region in the World, with over 90% of its oil and over 60% of its gas being imported. It is my opinion that the security of supply question has been given insufficient attention in European politics. The debate has been intense about which technologies to use (and even more about which not to use), some attention has been given to economic issues, whereas the supply itself seems to have been more or less taken for granted. We have recently seen Germany, the largest economy in the EU massively closing down safe, reliable electricity production with stable fuel supply and minimal foreign dependence, replacing this situation with large dependence on gas from a single supplier (Russia). I cannot free myself from the thought that the very lame actions by German politicians concerning the war in Ukraine are dictated by the strong dependence on Russia for gas. To my opinion, the people of Ukraine pays a high price of German lukewarm neglectance because satisfying the domestic anti-nuclear opinion is given higher priority than having a firm response to violations of human rights. One reason energy politics are often so confused is the very systemic nature of energy supply. It is hardly ever a matter of one-dimensional questions, where you can define one single parameter to assess the performance. This brings us to another one of my favourite stories along this line of thinking. In a city in Northern Sweden there is a district heating plant fuelled with bioenergy. Heat is needed during November to March, and the plant is more or less idle the rest of the year. Recently, the demand for air conditioning has increased during the summer months. It was concluded that building a separate plant for district cooling would be expensive, but the alternative of each house having its own electricity-powered air conditioning would increase the electricity bill significantly too. The solution was a brilliant example of thinking outside the box. Next to the heating plant, a large field was prepared with cooling tubes digged down near the surface. In the winter, all snow ploughed away from streets and roads in the county is put at this field. In the end of the winter, the huge pile of snow is covered by a layer of tree bark, acting as

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ â&#x20AC;&#x153;Contemporary Energy â&#x20AC;&#x201C; The Art of The Impossibleâ&#x20AC;?

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

insulation. This delays the melting of the snow to last during the entire summer, and the cooling provided by the melting is used for district cooling, using the same local grid that is used during the winter months for heating. In September, all snow is gone, and only a pile of bark remains. This bark is now used as fuel for heating. Hence, by not studying the merits by each product separately (heat and cooling, respectively) but looking at combined use of existing infrastructure, a more optimized solution was achieved. Narodoslawsky et al. presents an extensive overview of merits and challenges of bioenergy in this issue. They describe a number of cases in which one-dimensional analysis would not result in a business case for bioenergy, but with a systemic approach where bioenergy can be part of a system to produce more than one commodity, the possibilites are enhanced. Their paper is a challenge to all of us to use this kind of thinking also in other areas. The realm of energy is full of paradoxes and contradictions – real or apparent – and nuclear power is certainly no exception. In nuclear power, you should always follow the instructions – and know when not to. You should never make mistakes – and learn from your errors. Moreover, nuclear power has a fantastic safety record, but is still controversial for the percieved risks. The paper by Grgić et al. testifies about the relentless efforts to continuously upgrade the safety standards in nuclear power, in the form of a case study of the Krsko nuclear power plant in Slovenia. One of the most public concerns about nuclear safety is the handling of radioactive waste. If you want to initiate a public turmoil as efficiently as possible, I propose you suggest to build a repository for radioactive waste, and invite other countries to export their waste to you. In many countries, even the idea that we can transport waste from one country to another seems close to impossible to discuss. Nevertheless, shared facilities is an idea worth further consideration for a number of reasons. First, the cost for construction, licensing and operation of repositories is very high, but the volumes are small. For instance, the total volume of the spent nuclear fuel that produced 50% of the electricity of Sweden during 30 years corresponds to 2-3 houses for a family each (that is, if you would compact it, which you should not for other reasons). ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible”

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Even after spreading this out in bedrock, it is not a very large volume; in fact far smaller than a typical small scale mine. Sharing such a repository instead of having one per country makes sense from fiscal realities. This is even more true for countries without nuclear power. There are a number of countries with small volumes of highly radioactive waste from research reactors. Norway, Finland and Poland are examples of countries having operated research reactors without ever establishing nuclear power. In addition, all European countries use radioactivity in medicine. Over 30% of all EU citizens get cancer sometime in their life, and two thirds of these get radiation treatment. Hence, 20% of all EU citizens are treated with radiation. Shared facilities for the waste from hospitals has advantages not only for economic reasons, but also for performance optimization. Larger regional facilities can be expected to have better competence than smaller national facilities, with reduced risk for accidents and radiation release. Borut Stražišar presents a contribution on international shared facilities in general, and the legal aspects in particular. This sums up the contributions in this issue of the International Journal of Contemporary Energy, in which the papers were all presented at the 5th International Conference & Workshop REMOO held November 12-13, 2014 in Ljubljana, Slovenia. You can look forward to most interesting reading. (All images reprinted with permission from Vattenfall) Jan Blomgren Associate Editor

Jan Blomgren is CEO and founder of INBEx (Institute of Nuclear Business Excellence), providing independent nuclear executive advice and business leadership training globally. The INBEx team comprises over 20 former CEOs, Director Generals and similar. He was the youngest professor ever in Sweden in nuclear physics, holding the chair in applied nuclear physics at Uppsala University. His research was focused on neutron-induced nuclear reactions, an area in which he has published over 200 papers in refereed international journals and conference proceedings. When plans to build new nuclear power in Sweden were initiated, he was recruited to Vattenfall, one of the largest nuclear power operators in Europe. At Vattenfall, he was responsible for planning the competence development needed for nuclear new-build, as well as coordinating training for nuclear power plant personnel. In addition, he was Director of the Swedish Nuclear Technology Centre, which is the coordination organization for nuclear research and education involving universities, industry and the regulator. He was involved in the creation of ENEN, the European Nuclear Education Network, in which essentially all European universities in nuclear engineering collaborate. Moreover, he has recently established a large collaboration with France on research and education. Finally, he is the father of several industry-sponsored university programs, as well as having started a number of nuclear business training programs in industry. Jan Blomgren is alone in Europe to have upheld high-ranked positions both at university and nuclear industry. He is frequently invited speaker at conferences, and was recently invited as expert advisor to the French Senate.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “Contemporary Energy – The Art of The Impossible”

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

REMOO–2014

OVERVIEW OF THE 4TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE & WORKSHOP The fourth International Conference & Workshop REMOO–2014 with the theme of “Energy Infrastructure Development” was organised by RENECON International from Germany on 12–13 November 2015 in Ljubljana, Slovenia. Because the conference is source of most of the papers published in the first issue of the International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY a short overview behind idea of REMOO activity could be useful in understanding of paper selection. First of all REMOO is acronym for Regional Energy Mix and Outlook Options. REMOO is addressing all aspects of energy production, transportation and usage at regional level. The region could be to some extent localized to countries appeared after disintegration of Yugoslavia, but spreading to neighbouring countries and including in different ways other countries not so close to initial “region”. REMOO–2014 was the continuation of successful events hold 2010 in Belgrade, 2012 in Zagreb and in Ljubljana, and 2013 in Belgrade. Each conference had some kind of topic in addition to rather broad area behind original idea. The topic of the forerunner conference EMO was “Energy Mix and Outlook Options for Serbia and the Region”, then the first REMOO as follower was dealing with “Regional Co-Operation with Focus on CO2–Free Energy Options”, the second addressed “Nuclear Energy Development and New Build Prospects”, and the third covered “Modern Management and Safety Culture for the Sustainable Energy Mix”. The objective of REMOO–2014 Conference & Workshop was to provide an international platform and forum for the discussion of issues affecting the sustainable energy infrastructure development in the region, with a focus on enhancing the technical, economic and regulatory competitiveness of different technologies. Very important aspect of each REMOO conference was selection of invited lectures. This time through invited keynote lectures, the leading experts provided up-to-date information and the newest insights that helped successfully navigating through the complex and changing workplace of energy infrastructure and its further development.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “REMOO-2014: Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop”

e10

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

LEITMOTIF FOR THE CONFERENCE THEME Couple of words about the conference topic. Principally, the word infrastructure covers physical and organizational structures needed for the operation of any production facilities or services and basically is the set of interconnected structural elements providing commodities and services essential to enable, sustain, and/or enhance societal living conditions. Energy Infrastructure may be defined as the large-scale enabling technologies to: 1. Transport energy from producer to consumer, and 2. Direct and manage energy flow. As such, Energy Infrastructure naturally includes the traditional utilities associated with energy transport and management (coal transport trains, natural gas pipelines, electric transmission lines, etc.). However, the field also covers large-scale energy management technology such as advanced electricity metering and distribution systems, smart building technologies, and modern power plant control systems. To some extent, we can think about energy production facilities as a part of energy infrastructure in broad sense. With distributed power production, it is more and more difficult to see the border between energy production and usual meaning of infrastructure. The European energy infrastructure for electricity, gas, and oil is ageing and is not suited to meet the future energy demand, to ensure secure supply, and to connect and take up the rapidly increasing energy amount needed to lower greenhouse gas emissions. An optimised energy network and infrastructure is needed. The European Commission adopted the proposal for a Regulation on "Guidelines for Trans-European Energy Infrastructure" aiming to ensure that strategic energy networks and storage facilities are completed by 2020. Priority corridors and areas covering electricity, gas, oil and CO2 transport networks are identified. Problems related to energy infrastructure (especially in case of electrical energy) are not only influencing supply of energy to the final consumers but it is starting to be limiting factor, in case of renewables, for further production development. To supply more than 9 billion people worldwide in 2050 with secure energy needs infrastructure development — provided huge investments, totalling 1.4% of global GDP/year by 2030 — to be made on time and on budget. Need for new capacities is unmovable to meet growing energy demand multiplied by 2 and 80% increase in global electricity consumption by 2040 (latest by 2050). In order to implement energy infrastructure projects, even if we have required amount of money, we need time and we are facing problems related to environmental protection, both real ones and the ones associated with public opinion and green movements. Energy mix diversification is highly required to ensure independency and security of supply. Fossil resources are terminable, uncertain and volatile in prices and although 50% of world electricity today is generated from coal, the climate change remains a priority and greenhouse gas emissions have to be cut by half by 2050. Unfortunately, global climate actions will remain uncertain until 2020. With aging of the existing capacities and nuclear phase-out and cancellation of nuclear programmes in some countries the world will soon face serious problem of energy supply. In European power generation some 30% of generating capacity is more than 30 years old and renovation of more than 50% of the current electricity installations must be addressed practically from now. Recent political movements and instabilities in many parts of the world, and in our case, especially in Ukraine, had direct and indirect influence on usage of existing energy infrastructure and will influence introduction of new one. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “REMOO-2014: Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop”

e11

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

With introduction of renewables, storage of electricity is starting to be more and more important and should be addressed together with rest of energy infrastructure development. Since storage capacities are not sufficient in the long term, the load following capacity of conventional thermal power plants is gaining in importance in order to compensate for fluctuating feed of renewables. The degree of flexibility in terms of start-up, shutdown and load change has to be further increased in fossil– and biomass–fired power plants. However, more part-load operation of thermal power plants will lead to efficiency and economy penalties.

TOPICS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED The topics that have been discussed during the conference and that somehow describe structure of papers and presentations submitted for the conference are listed below. T1 – ELECTRIC POWER network, including generation plants, electrical grid, substations, transmission and distribution T2 – ENERGY SAVINGS and STORAGE T3 – Networks for charging ELECTRIC VEHICLES T4 – NATURAL GAS pipelines, storage as well as distribution terminals and network (including the gas wells, the fleets of ships and trucks transporting liquefied gas) T5 – PETROLEUM pipelines, with associated storage and distribution terminals (including the oil wells, refineries, the fleets of tanker ships and trucks) T6 – Specialized COAL HANDLING facilities for washing, storing, and transporting coal, as well as COAL MINES T7 – STEAM AND HOT WATER production and distribution networks for DISTRICT HEATING systems T8 – REGULATIONS / LEGISLATIONS to ensure sustainable development of energy networks and storage facilities T9 – EDUCATION / knowledge transfer platform T10 – INVESTMENT / ECONOMIC aspects and INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION As usual, some submissions were not strictly related to the topics, but were well within original REMOO idea, by addressing energy production too. Even though it is not directly clean just from the name, historically, REMOO was strongly devoted to covering problems related to use of nuclear energy. That is so due to background of REMOO initiators and because the nuclear energy is important part of energy mix and it is influencing both energy production and energy infrastructure development by introduction of possible new capacities and by removal of existing ones through phase-out promoted by some countries.

PARTICIPATION AND SUBMISSIONS Finally, when discussing any conference it is important to address number and structure of the submissions. The REMOO–2014 described in numbers is as follows: • 5 speakers at the opening, • 18 lecturers from 10 countries around Europe, • 16 authors’ posters from 6 countries around Europe, • 50–55 participants in total. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “REMOO-2014: Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop”

e12

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The number and the importance of speakers at the opening is usually measure of support provided to the conference by government, industry and/or academy. In this case, the support was significant. The speakers at the REMOO-2014 opening were Zoran Stošić (Director of RENECON International and the Founder and the Chairman of the conference), Dr. Peter Gašperšič (Minister of Infrastructure of the Republic of Slovenia), Her Excellency Dr. Anna Elisabeth Pinz (German Ambassador to Slovenia), Janez Kopač (Director of the Energy Community Secretariat in Vienna, Austria) and Jože Špiler (Head of Technical Services and Investments at GEN–energija, Slovenia).

Gašperšič

Stošić

Prinz

Proctor

Čavlina

Bataklieva

Špiler

Kopač

Mützelburg

Blake

Narodoslawsky

Ran

Dušić

Cizelj

The number of invited lectures shows additional characteristics of the REMOO conference and it is why it is called workshop, too. The lecturers are selected so to provide important information to the conference and to expose their important knowledge and experience in the subject to rest of the participants. Still, information are presented more as sharing important facts and views on energy infrastructure with others, with idea rather to get some feedback from other experts and participants, than just to educate them. It is so because another characteristic of REMOO is that average participant of the conference is knowledgeable too, at least in some part of the topics, and they were there not due to academic interest, but to solve or anticipate some problems in their field of interest. I would like to stress outcomes from some invited lectures. The presentation describing technologies and modelling related to different

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “REMOO-2014: Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop”

e13

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

aspects of network transition (heat, gas, power) in UK, prepared by Mr Proctor from Energy Technologies Institute (UK), covered all possible challenges faced during the work they performed and possible reflections on situation in other countries. Important was insight (from the point of view of administrative and legislative aspects) to EU guidelines on Environmental and Energy Aid until 2020 presented by Ms Mützelburg from Beiten Burkhardt Law (Germany). Financial aspects of energy infrastructure development as seen by international investors, presented by Mr. Blake from Poyry Capital (UK), were another important and interesting contribution. The possibility to address dependency of costs associated with different electricity generation options, using probabilistic calculation of LCOE, was presented by Mr. Čavlina from University of Zagreb (Croatia). My personal favourite was original approach to addressing challenges in utilising bio-resources presented by Mr. Narodoslawsky from TU Graz (Austria). Important, more from technical point of view, was contribution from AREVA on development of technologies to support integration of electrical energy storage facilities in power grid. Again one interesting technical presentation done by Mr. Ran from University of Warwick (UK) addressed important and often overlooked problem of reliability and operation of power electronics in renewable power sources. Comprehensive overview of present challenges in energy generation systems was given by Ms. Bataklieva from WorleyParsons (Bulgaria). Status of new NPP build from two points of view (user and vendor) was given in presentations from Slovenia and Russia. The benfits of national nuclear energy infrastructure development supported by real life examples from Slovenia were shown by Mr. Spiler from GEN-energija (Slovenia). The Importance of international collaboration in analysing accidents in energy production systems was given by Mr. Dusic from nuccon (Austria), and very fresh and original view, supported by examples, of role of research in precluding industrial and nuclear accident is elaborated by Mr. Cizelj from IJS (Slovenia). I just wanted to mention some of the presentations based on my personal feeling without sending the message that other were less important or less interesting. Poster part of the conference was another important place for exchange of views and information. As usual posters were little bit more focused on specific problems with more technical details provided and were of high graphics quality. Significant number of the papers in the first issue of the International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY is based on expanded versions of contributed works presented during the conference in a poster session.

(All images reprinted with permission from RENECON International) Davor Grgić Associate Editor

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “REMOO-2014: Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop”

e14

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Davor Grgic (BS, 1981, MS, 1989, nuclear engineering, University of Zagreb, Croatia, PhD, electrical engineering, University of Zagreb, Croatia, 2001) is an associate professor at the University of Zagreb (Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing), Croatia. His areas of research are thermal-hydraulic and neutronic core calculations and coupled codes. PhD, electrical engineering, Faculty of electrical engineering and computing, University of Zagreb, Croatia. 2001. MS, nuclear engineering, Faculty of electrical engineering and computing, University of Zagreb, Croatia. 1989. BSc, nuclear engineering, Faculty of electrical engineering and computing, University of Zagreb, Croatia. 1981. The main objectives of work is in the field of nuclear safety, i.e. preparing the model inputs for nuclear power plants for use with system codes (e.g. RELAP5, TRACE). Analyses of transients and SAR accidents. Preparation of the environmental conditions for the Equipment Qualification (EQ) project for NPP Krško. Containment DB and BDBA calculations. Neutron cross section generation. Coupled thermal-hydraulics and 3D neutronics calculations. Emergency planning. NPP Krsko licensing safety reviews.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ “REMOO-2014: Overview of the 4th International Conference & Workshop”

e15

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Authors’ Papers

Maximilian Emanuel Elspas, Alexandra Mützelburg

EU Guidelines on Environmental and Energy Aid for 2014–2020 and its Impact on the National Promotion Schemes for Renewable Energy 5

Leon Cizelj

Research and Higher Education: A Disposable Part of Fundamental National Infrastructure 13

Elvis Mikac, Vedran Kirinčić, Srdjan Skok

Smart Protection Scheme for the Power Subsystem of Istria Region 24

Daniele Grosso, Raffaella Gerboni

Geopolitical Instability in Ukraine and Security of Energy Supply. The Effects on Natural Gas Supply to Italy under Different Scenarios 32

Michael Narodoslawsky, Michael Eder, Stephan Maier, René Kollmann

The Challenge of Utilising Bio–Resources: A Regional Perspective 41

Davor Grgić, Vesna Benčik, Siniša Šadek, Ivica Bašić

Independent Review of NPP Modifications and Safety Upgrades 52

Borut Stražišar

Shared Radwaste Repository – Do we need Update in International Law?

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DOI: 10.14621/ce.20150101

EU Guidelines on Environmental and Energy Aid for 2014–2020 and its Impact on the National Promotion Schemes for Renewable Energy Maximilian Emanuel Elspas, Alexandra Mützelburg Beiten Burkhardt Rechtsanwaltsgesellschaft mbH Ganghoferstraße 33, 80339 Munich, Germany, maximilian.elspas@bblaw.com

Abstract The development and promotion of renewable energies same as the promotion of conventional energy – in Germany and in other Member States of the European Union – are often in tension with the objectives of the European Union to create a common internal electricity market and to reduce restrictions of competition. Concerning the granting of State aids, the following abstract shall give an overview of the European legal framework as well as the notification procedure before the European Commission and offers a brief insight into the impact of European guidelines on energy promotion schemes, e.g. in Germany and in the United Kingdom.

1. The European understanding of a measure as State aid and the general notification requirement Aiming at the before mentioned European goal to create a common internal electricity market on the one hand and to reduce restrictions of competition on the other hand, the European Union created State aid rules, as part of the European competition law, which intend to protect competition within the internal market from any distortion. The principles on State aids, laid down in Articles 107 to 109 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) are designed to resolve or reduce such frictions arising between actions of the Member States and the European internal market. Following to the definition of State aid in Article 107 TFEU, "…any aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods shall, in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be incompatible with the internal market". This broad description of the term State aid offered by Article 107 TFEU gives a comprehensive understanding of the general prohibition of State aids. This as a consequence leads to the fact that supportive State measures generally are subject to the revision of the European Commission and the general notification requirement.

Keywords:

Renewable and conventional energy, National promotion schemes, State aids, Impact of European Guidelines

Article history:

Received: 09 January 2015 Revised: 26 February 2015 Accepted: 27 February 2015

In order to execute the general prohibition of State aids, the Commission has the exclusive authorization and duty to initiate a State aid procedure for every public measure, which supports certain undertakings or the production of certain goods. In this respect the commission has to approve every measure which is qualified as State aid as compatible or incompatible with the TFEU. The Member State concerned shall not put its proposed measures into effect until the

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ M. E. Elspas, A. Mützelburg: “EU Guidelines on Environmental and Energy Aid for 2014 – 2020 and its Impact on …”, pp. 1–4

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

procedure has resulted in a final decision. In case of incompatibility the Commission can request a full refund. Following to that the broad understanding of the term „State aid“ and the qualification of a State measure as State aid is key to the applicability of the State aid provisions and the formal procedure before the European Commission.

2. Exemptions from the general notification requirement Since the consequences of the qualification of a measure as State aid is a formal procedure before the Commission, which causes a remarkable uncertainty for the Member State and its economy concerning a feared refund, there are exemptions made in the European law to the general notification requirement. Under Article 109 TFEU the council may determine categories of aid that are exempted from the general notification requirement. In accordance to Article 108(4) TFEU the Commission may adopt regulations relating to those categories. The Commission therefore adopted "Regulation EU No. 1407/2013 in December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the TREATY on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid". The council hereby decided that de minimis aid could constitute such category and de minimis aid is deemed not to meet all criteria laid down in Article 107 TFEU and therefore is not subject to the notification procedure. Secondly the Commission adopted the so called "General Block Exemption Regulation EU No. 651/2014". in June 2014 This regulation is declaring certain categories of aid as compatible with the internal market. By the new regulation, the scope of exemptions has been extended from prior notification of State aid. One of the exempted aids were aids for environmental protection, which the Commission decided were less likely to lead to undue distortions of competition in the Single Market.

3. State aid in the energy sector Especially when the General Block Exemption Regulation is not applicable, other regulations and communications of the Commission are applicable in execution of Article 107(3) TFEU. For the purpose of interpreting the exception of Article 107(3) lit. c) TFEU, the Commission adopted the „Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy 2014-2020“ in July 2014 and thereby changed the promotion of renewable energy in Europe.

In some Member States the power generation with Renewable energy sources is supported with fixed Feed-in tariffs what encouraged the growth of renewables in the energy mix and led to market distortions because renewable installations have generated electricity irrespective of an actual demand. In order to make renewable energy production react more to market signals the new guidelines aim to better integrate renewable energy into the internal electricity market, limiting its support. Feed-in tariffs therefore are progressively replaced by competitive bidding processes that shall increase cost effectiveness and limit distortions of competition. As consequence, Member States as Germany start implementing competitive bidding procedures for a certain share of their capacity of renewables. Moreover, from 2016 on, electricity producers need to sell their electricity on the market and be subject to the market reactions same as other energy sources are. Member States are also obliged to use as support instruments market premiums – as top-up on the market price – or certificates. Under the European Guidelines on State aids in the energy sector, the support for energy intensive sectors such as manufacturing of chemicals, paper, ceramics or metals is still provided for them, because they are heavy intensive users of electricity and should not have disadvantages against competitors from outside the European Union, where electricity prices are lower. In order to preserve the competitiveness of these sectors and activities, the new guidelines still allow granting them reductions in the charges levied to support renewable energies, even if the requirements have been modified.

4. Impact of European Regulations on the German Renewable Energy Act The European legislation and the European Commission both gain of importance and of influence on the national promotion schemes in the energy sector. Since the European Commission declared several provisions in the German Renewable Energy Act 2012 as State aid, the German Renewable Energy Act 2012 has been subject to the State aid procedure before the European Commission. The whole promotion system for renewables, in particular the green electricity privilege and the special equalization scheme for electricity-intensive enterprises have been supervised by the Commission. Since the Member State concerned with a State aid procedure shall not put its proposed

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

measures into effect until the procedure has resulted in a final decision, the German State had to fear a recovery process for all the aids granted. The European Commission meanwhile declared the German Renewable Energy Act 2012 as incompatible with European Law and now being deciding about the amount of aid to be refund. As second consequence of the declaration that the German Renewable Energy Act 2012 is incompatible with European law, was that Germany was obliged to quickly modify its national promotion scheme for renewable energy. In order to prevent the future support of renewable energy in Germany from any complications, the German Federal Ministry of Economics drafted the new Renewable Energy Act 2014 in close consultation with the European Commission to design it fully in accordance with the new guidelines. The alterations made in the new German Renewable Energy Act 2014 are mainly the abolishment of the green energy privileges, mandatory direct marketing of energy, the alignments of the special equalization scheme for electricity-intensive enterprises and the introduction of the EEG-levy for self-generated electricity, too.

5. Impact of European Regulations on energy promotion in the United Kingdom Under the EU Treaty, all Member States are free to determine their energy mix, so the United Kingdom, unlike Germany, decided to promote nuclear energy. The UK will need about 60 GW of new electricity generation capacity due to the closure of existing nuclear and coal power plants. The new Hinkley Point C nuclear power station will produce 3.3 GW representing 7% of UK electricity generation. The power station will require a depth financing of GBP 17 billion. The UK planned to establish a price support system, the so called "contract for difference", which should guarantee stable revenues for the operator of Hinkley Point C for a period of 35 years. The operator should also benefit from a State guarantee covering any debt, which the operator will seek to obtain on financial markets. If member states decide to fund projects in certain areas such as the promotion of nuclear power plants, they have to notify the Commission of such intention, who will then case-by-case assess its compatibility with the Treaty. Public interventions in favour of companies can be considered free of state aid within the meaning

of EU rules when they are made on terms that a private operator would have accepted under market conditions. If this so-called market economy investor principle is not respected, the supportive measure is regarded as State aid within the meaning of EU rules (article 107 TFEU) because it confers an economic advantage on the beneficiary that its competitors do not have. The Commission then proceeds to assess whether such aid can be found compatible with the EU rules. Against this background the promotion of the nuclear power plant Hinkley Point C was involved in a State aid procedure and the United Kingdom had to agree to significantly modify the terms of the project financing following the in-depth investigation of the Commission. In order to minimise distortive effects of the support measures, the UK authorities agreed to the following modifications. With respect to the State guarantee, the Commission found that the guarantee fee was too low for a project with such risk profile, so the fee was significantly raised. Due to this, the subsidy is reduced by more than GBP 1 billion. In addition, the gains generated by the project will be shared with the UK consumers. As soon as the operator´s over-all-profits exceed the rate estimated at the time of decision, any gain will be shared with the public entity granting the public support. Moreover, the decision defines a second, higher threshold above which the public entity will obtain more than half of the gains. This gain-share mechanism will remain in place not only for the 35-year support duration as initially envisaged, but upon request of the Commission for the entire lifetime of the power plant, namely 60 years.

6. Comparison of the German and the British promotion scheme The German efforts to promote and develop renewable energy on the one hand and the English efforts to promote and develop conventional energy on the other hand were both subject to the revision of the European Commission. The German promotion scheme supports renewable energies with a legally guaranteed fixed feed-in tariff under the rules of the German Energy Act. The nuclear power generation in the UK, at least in the individual case of Hinkley Point C, is supported by a contractual price support, which guarantees stable revenues and a secure State guarantee for debts needed to realize the power plant. Besides these structural differences of the two promotion measures, both were found incompatible with European law, so the European Commission asked the Member States to

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

modify the promotion, so it will remain balanced to the object pursued, avoiding any undue distortions of competition in the Single Market as shown above. Both examples show clearly the impact of the before mentioned comprehensive understanding of State aid. The European Commission has a strong influence on the national promotion schemes and is authorized to severely modify the member states' political and economic decisions in the energy sector.

7. Conclusion Considering that European State aid rules are (only) made to resolve and reduce frictions arising between the objective of the Member State to develop and to promote energy and the objective of the European Union to create a common internal electricity market, it is somehow doubtable whether a free energy market is still existing in Europe or not, due to the comprehensive understanding of State aid.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DOI: 10.14621/ce.20150102

Research and Higher Education: A Disposable Part of Fundamental National Infrastructure Leon Cizelj Reactor Engineering Division, Jožef Stefan Institute Jamova cesta 39, 1000 Lubljana, Slovenia, leon.cizelj@ijs.si

Abstract

1. Introduction

The electricity from the nuclear fission is abundant and competitive low carbon energy having one of the lowest impacts to the public health and environment. As such, the nuclear energy could immediately provide significant contributions towards the neutralization of the threats caused by the climate changes. This has been made possible through the substantial and long term efforts of the nuclear industry to sustain and improve the safety of the nuclear power plants. These efforts were systematically supported and sometimes also lead by the competent regulatory authorities and academia worldwide, and over the years resulted in unparalleled levels of stability and maturity.

Access to sufficient, environmentally acceptable and affordable power sources might well be one of the most important challenges that the humankind will have to solve within a few decades.

Unfortunately, the dwindling public acceptance has recently become one of the major challenges that face the nuclear industry. On one hand, the very low impact of the nuclear energy to the public health and environment is undoubtedly and thoroughly supported by the available scientific and technical knowledge. On the other hand, the public – especially in the postindustrial societies – tends to disagree, more so with the information provided by the regulators and industry. A recent public opinion poll in the EU indicated that in the questions of nuclear safety people trust scientists much more that the regulators, government, media and industry. Yet, both the regulatory authorities and the industry in some countries seem to be progressively losing interest for intense cooperation with the higher education and research establishments. Indeed, the already achieved and unquestionable high maturity and stability of the industry and regulators might give rise to a perception that further research cannot bring much added value to the safe operation of the plants and that higher education might be fully substituted by professional training. Such perception may be easily augmented by the economic recession. Ultimately, it might lead to a severe deterioration of the independent nuclear safety related research and higher education, which is considered a fundamental national infrastructure for nuclear safety. The paper argues that the nuclear energy may improve the public trust significantly and at the same time improve the safety record by a much stronger commitment towards the science based decision making in the industry and the regulatory organizations.

Keywords:

Higher education, Research, Nuclear safety, Nuclear energy, Critical infrastructure

Article history:

Received: 11 February 2015 Revised: Accepted: 20 February 2015

The electricity from the nuclear fission may contribute significantly to the solution of this challenge. It is considered to be abundant and competitive low carbon energy having one of the lowest impacts to the public health and environment [1]. This has been made possible through the large and long term efforts of the nuclear industry to sustain and improve the safety of the nuclear power plants. These efforts were systematically supported and sometimes also lead by the competent regulatory authorities and academia worldwide. It is therefore not surprising that the nuclear energy, nuclear industry and nuclear regulators have over the years reached unparalleled levels of stability and maturity. One of the key remaining challenges for the long-term success of the nuclear energy (and industry in particular) is the dwindling public acceptance. The very low impact of the nuclear energy to the public health and environment, and maturity and stability of the industry, is thoroughly supported by the available scientific and technical knowledge [1]. The public opinion, especially in the postindustrial societies, does not seem to acknowledge this. This may have fundamental consequences for the future of the nuclear energy, as shown for example by the accelerated phase out of nuclear power in Germany following the accident in Fukushima Dai-ichi in 2011 [2]. It should nevertheless be mentioned here, that as far the questions of nuclear safety are concerned, the European public opinion trusts scientists and researchers much more than governments, media, regulators or industry [3]. Research and education have been in the forefront of the development and implementation of the commercial nuclear power and are recognized as

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ L. Cizelj: “Research and Higher Education: A Disposable Part of Fundamental National Infrastructure”, pp. 5–12

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

fundamental and necessary national infrastructure for nuclear safety [4-6]. The interest for intense cooperation with the higher education and research establishments may be however dwindling due to a fact that the maturity of the technologies available, industry and the regulatory organizations, is nowadays increasing through accumulated operational experience much more that through new research findings. Examples of cases, where the dwindling independent nuclear safety related research and higher education has been noted, include [7-10]. Examples describing actions being taken to strengthen and intensify the dwindling research and education include [11-14]. Indeed, the indisputable maturity and stability of the industry and regulatory organizations might give rise to the possibly detrimental perception that further research cannot bring much added value to the safe operation of the existing plants, and could be, for example, fully substituted by the operational experience. Another harmful perception might be that the higher education can be fully substituted by professional training. Such hazardous perceptions may be easily augmented by the decision makers, being overwhelmed with more urgent problems, such as for example economic recession. Ultimately, such developments might lead to a severe deterioration and termination of the independent nuclear safety related research and higher education, and therefore to the disappearance of the fundamental (critical) national infrastructure. Fortunately, we are not yet aware of any incidents which would be directly caused by the deterioration of research and education. The paper therefore revisits some examples of industrial incidents caused by the deteriorating infrastructures, including hardware, safety culture and design bases, and develops some parallels between theses infrastructures. The main aim of the paper is to consolidate possible concerns that might be caused by the deteriorating infrastructures and to explore the potential of nuclear energy to improve the public trust significantly and at the same time improve the safety record by a much stronger commitment towards the science based decision making in the industry and the regulatory organizations.

2. Examples of deteriorated infrastructures The basic facts in the examples below are taken from the official reports or published literature. The deterioration of various infrastructures was undoubtedly at the core

of the causal relationships leading to incidents and accidents discussed hereafter. Some degree of interpretation beyond the data given in the reports, or perhaps limited use of anecdotic evidence, have been used for better illustration of the possible causes, consequences and missed potential for avoiding of the infrastructure deterioration.

2.1. The Ontario Hydro meltdown in 1997 Let us start with the well-known example from the nuclear industry. In 1997, the top management of the Ontario Hydro Nuclear (Canada), one of the largest nuclear power plant operators on the planet with 19 nuclear units at the time, ordered an internal investigation. The team of external auditors recruited mainly from the US utilities was asked to provide “brutally honest” insight in the overall performance of the company. The set of issues under scrutiny included managerial leadership, culture and standards, people and performance, processes and procedures, plant hardware and design, organization and resources and labor relations. The findings declared the status of the reactor operated by the Ontario Hydro Nuclear as minimally acceptable. The fundamental problems detected included for example “lack of authoritative and accountable managerial leadership”, “the ability to take corrective actions is inhibited by an insufficiently detailed understanding of the standards and practices required to achieve excellence in nuclear operations” and “There is no real independent evaluation of proposed operations by people not directly involved in formulating the planned actions”. The proposed solutions involved for example “a new approach to the culture, structure, and management” and “a rethinking of employee skill mixes and the regulatory process”. As a consequence, seven out of nineteen units were shut down immediately, some of them permanently. The remainder underwent up to two decades of painstaking improvements in hardware and in the culture. More details are available in the report [15]. One could safely say that such events could only be result of a deteriorating safety culture, mainly within the middle management, the softest form of the essential infrastructure for safe nuclear power. Some almost randomly selected citations from the report [15] in Table 1 and remarks from the persons involved [16] in Table 2 clearly confirm the severe deterioration of the safety culture. Fortunately, this has been recognized and acted upon by the senior management before the development of any serious incidents.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1: Some remarks from the report Employees lack a questioning attitude. Decisions are dominated by a production mentality and managers feel excessive pressure to continue planned evolutions. At times, personnel cannot comply with the established processes or procedures. Serious shortages of key management, supervisory and some technical skills exist… Design basis documentation is not accurately maintained. The practice of offering critical services, such as training and engineering, on a "fee for service" basis has created an attitude that the groups providing the service are not a part of the team.

Table 2: Some remarks from the persons involved in the process [16] "The issue of culture is that nuclear tries to keep everything confined within it. [They] won't tell anybody anything. That's not just the Canadian culture, it's the nuclear culture.” Carl Andognini "Good teams can turn bad over 10 years if they're not self-checking and probing.” John Zwolinski "We've been telling you that for a number of years. Over and over again, sir.” Maurice Brenner "There's people in management that shouldn't be in management and they don't want to be in management, but it's the only way they can get more money.” Carl Andognini

2.2. Broken rail causing train derailment 2000 We should avoid the “nuclear culture to keep everything confined in nuclear”, identified in the preceding section, and look into experience from the non-nuclear industries. On 17 October 2000 the train traveling from London Kings Cross to Leeds derailed south of Hatfield Station. At the time of derailment, the train was traveling with the velocity between 185 and 188km/h. There were 170 passengers and 12 staff on the train. As a result of the derailment, four passengers were killed and over seventy were injured, four among them seriously. The immediate cause of failure was the fracture and subsequent fragmentation of the rail. The rail failure was due to the presence of multiple and pre-existing fatigue cracks in the rail (rolling contact fatigue). The investigations showed that the company in the role of the “infrastructure controller” did not manage properly the maintenance of the tracks. To some extent, the

inability to manage the maintenance was caused by the fixed price contracts, which were part of the privatization process in 1994 and could not be influenced by the senior employees of the “infrastructure controller”. Changes in the regulation have been introduced after the investigation to clarify the duties of the “infrastructure controller” and to facilitate the faster investment in the deteriorated infrastructure. More details on the accident investigation and follow-up measures are available in [17]. We should note here that the privatization of the railway system in the UK in the beginning of the 1990’s included the splitting of the railway system into infrastructure (tracks, signalization) managed by the “infrastructure controller” and multiple train operators (wheels). Before the incident, the tracks and the wheels were part of the same business unit, and the management of ageing of both wheels and tracks was coordinated within this business unit. Privatization and splitting the wheels and

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

tracks into different business units also disentangled the responsibility for the safety of tracks and wheels into different business units. In addition, the function of the top management of the railway system was dissolved into a set of now competing middle managers (infrastructure, traffic, …) and the regulator should have taken over the efficient management of the competing middle managers. After some incidents and accidents, the one at Hatfield being among the most serious, an efficient regulatory action brought the management of wheels and tracks again under a single control.

2.3. The closure of San Onofre nuclear units in 2013 The steam generators in two nuclear units operated by Southern California Edison were replaced in 2009 and 2010, respectively. Serious vibrations of the steam generator tubes, also resulting in a premature leak after one year of operation, prevented both units from reaching full power after the replacement and finally, through economic analysis, led to permanent shutdown of both units in 2013. In a recent report by World Nuclear News [18], the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) blames the tube vibrations to the faulty design of the replacement steam generators. The faulty design was a consequence of poor documentation of the design changes made in the original steam generators, which were not properly reflected in the plant’s documentation, especially final safety analysis reports. The neglected duty of the operator was to timely reflect the changes of the plant in the final safety report. This resulted in (1) faulted design bases for the replacement steam generators and (2) in the fact that the design of the new steam generators did not pass the review and approval of the regulator prior to replacement. The regulator on the other hand neglected the duty to oversee if the plant is keeping the design bases in the final safety analysis report up to date. Also, the regulator acknowledged a regulatory oversight leading to the replacement of steam generator without the review and approval from the regulator. The appropriate regulatory oversight and properly managed design bases can be safely considered a part of essential infrastructures. In the example above, both regulatory oversight and the design bases degraded over time, resulting in a much premature closure of two nuclear power plants and huge economic loss for the operator. It shall be reiterated here that both infrastructures (design bases, regulator) had to fail at the same time to arrive at the closure of the both plants in this case. Proper and systematic oversight would most probably stimulate the operators to keep the design bases up to

date. And, accurately updated design bases would certainly enable proper design regardless of the subsequent review and approval by the regulator. The immediate responsibility probably again goes to the middle management with the operator and regulator for the daily mismanagement of the infrastructural activities. The top management (again with both the operator and regulator) could have prevented the incident by paying proper attention to the management of the infrastructural activities.

2.4. Summary At least four parallels can be found in all three examples discussed in the preceding section: • Severely deteriorated infrastructures caused rather severe consequences (rails, safety culture, design bases and regulatory system). • Middle management responsible for the infrastructure did not recognize the initiation and progress of the deterioration of the infrastructure. • Supervisors (either top management or regulators) did not provide access to sufficient resources, knowledge and/or adequate supervision. • The deterioration of the infrastructures, if detected on time, could have been preventable with the knowledge existing before the incidents, e.g. without further research. It is fair to say that much of the above boils down to the ways of management at different levels, to the interactions between different organizational levels inside and between different stakeholders, and finally, to the access to the already available knowledge residing elsewhere. These are, in general, interplay of different corporate cultures. This is further discussed in the subsequent section. More detailed investigation of these examples and the parallels - especially in the view of the management theory - is clearly beyond the scope of this paper.

3. Interplay of (corporate) cultures The interplay of different (corporate) cultures is discussed in this section. To this end, the basic concepts of culture, safety culture, and corporate cultures are briefly introduced. A short discussion of the concept of safety research is followed by a summary of a recent study outlining possible obstacles in communicating the scientific facts. The section is closed by a summary identifying the basic elements of (corporate) cultures

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

that could contribute to the development of incidents discussed in the preceding section.

3.1. Culture, Corporate Culture, Safety Culture The notion of nuclear safety culture emerged after the accident in Chernobil and has received huge attention in the literature. Indeed, concept of culture usually includes (nearly) every aspect of the life of an individual in a group and, among others, gives the individuals the sense of stability and predictability. We will rely here on the fairly recent and refreshing discussion on Ethics, risk and safety culture by Kastenberg [19]. He assumes that: (1) Culture can be defined as the integrated pattern of human behavior that includes thought, speech, action and artifacts on human capacity for learning and transmitting knowledge to succeeding generations. (2) Culture gives rise to a society’s values, assumptions and beliefs. Hence culture is concerned with the act of developing the intellectual and moral facilities, especially by education. (3) Culture itself, arises out of a context or paradigm that defines an individual’s or a society’s cultural conditioning. Hence an individual’s or a society’s values, ethics and morality are contextually or paradigmatically dependent. (4) For the most part, societal conditioning and the context or paradigm from which it arises is implicit, i.e. cultural conditioning resides in the unconscious (emotive) and sub-conscious (mental). The conscious aspects of cultural conditioning that are cognitive, resides in the mental. (5) Safety culture is “designed” within the larger societal cultural context that is “developed organically”. Hence safety culture is affected by the larger culture, usually in an implicit way, as an overlay to achieve a specific goal. (6) When the societal culture runs counter to the demands of safety culture, and is left implicit, it can shift from underlying to undermining. (7) Approaches to quantifying and managing the risk of (…) accidents before they occur, as well as approaches for emergency preparedness and response should an accident occur, are based on the “safety culture” of the individuals and the organizations/institutions that comprise the nuclear establishment. (8) In order to explore the safety culture of a host nation with respect to nuclear power, it is

essential to understand the context or paradigm out of which cultural conditioning, and hence its ethics and technology arise. It is clear from above that the safety culture of every individual is of paramount importance for the timely detection and neutralization of the known and potential threats. At the same time, the safety culture of every individual is deeply influenced by his/her assumptions, beliefs, education, ability for critical thinking, obedience, etc. Let us reiterate here that individual’s assumptions, beliefs, education, ability for critical thinking, obedience, etc., may be also be most heavily influenced by the culture of the society at large. This seems to be consistent with the words of the Chairman of the Independent Commission reporting to the Diet of Japan after the Fukushima Dai-chi accident, who has put a significant part of the blame for the accident on the Japanese cultural features such as “reflexive obedience, reluctance to question authority, devotion to ‘sticking with the program’, groupism (collectivism) and insularity” [20]. The interference between the safety culture and the culture of the society may well be illustrated by the concepts of experience and education. The culture of the society has developed mostly on the experience of numerous preceding generations and only slowly takes on influences from research and education. Safety culture on the other hand has been designed through research and education and progresses rather fast with influences from experience and also further research and education. As a consequence, there could be many successful safety cultures within a single culture of a society. Different organizations also developed different corporate cultures. Again, many successful safety cultures might reside within a single corporate culture. It is safe to conclude that excellent safety culture requires active participation of all individuals and organizations involved in the safe utilization of nuclear energy. Learning from one’s own mistakes shall be systematically accompanied with learning from best available scientific knowledge and operational experience.

3.2. Culture research Perhaps, former United States Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld said it best [19]: “Reports that say something hasn’t happened are always interesting to me, as we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say, we know there are some things we do not know. But there

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don’t know, we don’t know.” Technically, a safety philosophy (e.g., defense in depth) can account for two types of uncertainty: aleatory (random variations and chance outcomes in the physical world) and epistemic (lack of knowledge about the physical world). More research can reduce epistemic uncertainty, however, aleatory uncertainty can only be estimated better, but not reduced with more research [19]. Safety research is also needed to put additional light on indeterminacy (e.g. a unique initiating event leading to accident sequences that may take many paths) and a high level of ambiguity (i.e., non-unique, alternative or multiple legitimate interpretations based on identical observation or data assessments). Ambiguity may come from differences in interpreting factual statements about the world or from differences in applying normative rules to evaluate the state of the world. Finally, the science and research provide the only available tool to investigate the realm of the unknownunknown [19].

3.3. Communicating and accepting scientific facts Not all facts accepted by the scientific community are accepted as facts by the society at large. Examples include the nuclear power having the lowest impacts to the public health and environment and the threats posed by the climate change on the planet. A very recent study attempted to shed light more light on “The failure of widely accessible, compelling science to quiet persistent cultural controversy over the basic facts of climate change is the most spectacular science communication failure of our day“ [21]. The main conclusion seems to be “The source of the climate-change controversy and like disputes over societal risks is the contamination of the science communication environment with forms of cultural status competition that make it impossible for diverse citizens to express their reason as both collectiveknowledge acquirers and cultural-identity protectors at the same time.” [21] Kahan [21] argues that this is caused by »the dual nature of human reasons as collective-knowledge acquirers and cultural-identity protectors. Just as individual photons in the double-slit experiment pass through “both slits at once” when unobserved, so each individual person uses her reason to simultaneously apprehend what is collectively known and to be a member of a particular cultural community defined by a set of highly distinctive set of commitments…

…Moreover, in the science of science communication as in quantum physics, assessment perturbs this dualism. The antagonistic cultural meanings that pervade the social interactions in which we engage citizens on contested science issues forces them to be only one of their reasoning selves. We can through these interactions measure what they know, or measure who they are, but we cannot do both at once. …Without question, this style of reasoning is collectively disastrous: the more proficiently it is exercised by the citizens of a culturally diverse democratic society, the less likely they are to converge on scientific evidence essential to protecting them from harm. But the predictable tragedy of this outcome does not counteract the incentive individuals face to use their reason for identity protection. Only changing what that question measures—and what answers to it express about people—can.” Now, for an individual member of the society, it seems quite natural to give clear priority to the reasoning within his or her social group than to the knowledge he or her acquired from science (and education). In simple terms, the communication between “nuclear” and “nonnuclear” may be easily dominated by the affiliation over the scientific facts. A possible way out, as suggested by Kahan, is to disentangle the affiliations and the scientific facts. Would this also apply for the communication between different nuclear stakeholders?

3.4. Summary The accident and incidents discussed in the preceding section were in general caused by the interplay of different corporate and safety cultures. As a consequence, certain approaches of the management were implicitly or explicitly accepted, regardless of the fact that the risks involved were or could be classified as unacceptable. In particular, the communication of the knowledge available did no work beyond the groups of peers, e.g., between different levels of management within the company or between different organizations. For example, the management of the “infrastructure controller” involved in the rail accident was aware of the insufficient resources available, but most probably failed to efficiently communicate this to the regulator. It is noted here that every communication is a two way process, in which both sender and receiver share the responsibility for the success. It is further noted that the successful communication between members of different cultures or groups may depend much stronger on the affiliations of

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

communicators than on the scientific relevance of the information. A culture or group, which is more open and transparent to the “nonmembers”, may therefore improve the probability of successfully conveying the message to the members of the cultures, which have not yet assimilate this particular message. Occasional failures to communicate relevant facts between different nuclear stakeholders is at the forefront of nuclear incidents discussed above [16, 18] and also much more studied Fukushima Dai-ichi accident [20]. It is even more natural to expect that such communication failure exists also between nuclear stakeholders and the general public. Appropriate changes needed to improve internal and external communication might also cause the redesign of the existing safety cultures and affiliations with them. A good starting point would be to embrace the science and higher education organizations in the corporate safety cultures through strong partnerships and exchange of staff. This may at the same time improve the communication with public and at the safety records through a much stronger commitment towards the science based decision making in the industry and the regulatory organizations.

communication might also cause the redesign of the existing safety cultures and affiliations with them. A good starting point would be to embrace the science and higher education organizations in the corporate safety cultures through strong partnerships and exchange of staff. This may at the same time improve the communication with public and at the safety records through a much stronger commitment towards the science based decision making in the industry and the regulatory organizations.

Acknowledgement Grant P2-0026 by the Slovenian Research Agency is gratefully acknowledged.

References [1] B. W. Brook and C. J. A. Bradshaw, "Key role for nuclear energy in global biodiversity conservation," in Conservation Biology, ed, 2014. [2]

4. Conclusion The electricity from the nuclear fission may contribute significantly to the solution of the challenge of global warming. It is namely considered to be abundant and competitive low carbon energy having one of the lowest impacts to the public health and environment. This is thoroughly supported by the available scientific and technical knowledge. Unfortunately, the public opinion, especially in the postindustrial societies, does not seem to acknowledge these scientific and technical facts. A significant part of the technical success of the nuclear energy was to develop specific corporate cultures, sometimes also called safety cultures. Examples of incidents revisited in the paper indicate, that within these safety cultures there is a potential for poor communications of technical and scientific facts even between different corporate groups or between different nuclear stakeholders. Recent research in the science of science communication indicated that the affiliation with cultures and/or groups may significantly impair or annihilate the communication of scientific facts. This certainly gives additional rise to the potential risk that affiliations with different cultures of nuclear stakeholders might bring to the safety record of the industry and public perception. Appropriate changes needed to improve internal and external

K. Töpfer, M. Kleiner, U. Beck, J. Hacker, V. Hauff, R. Hüttl, et al., "Deutschlands Energiewende – Ein Gemeinschaftswerk für die Zukunft," EthikKommission Sichere Energieversorgung im Auftrag der Bundeskanzlerin Dr. Angela Merkel, Berlin, Germany2011.

[3] European Commission, "Europeans and Nuclear Safety, Special Eurobarometer 324," Special Eurobarometer 324, 2010. [4] The treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Cpmmunity (E.A.E.C.-EURATOM), 1975. [5] IAEA, "Convention on Nuclear Safety," ed: IAEA, 1994. [6] Council Directive 2014/87/Euratom of 8 July 2014 amending Directive 2009/71/Euratom establishing a Community framework for the nuclear safety of nuclear installations, E. Council 2014/87/Euratom, 2014. [7]

OECD/NEA, "Nuclear education and training: cause for concern?," 2000.

[8] M. L. Corradini, M. L. Adams, D. E. Dei, T. Isaacs, G. Knoll, W. F. Miller, et al., "The future of univeristy nuclear engineering programs and university research and training reactors," U.S. DOE NERAC Committee Report 2000. [9] CCE Fission, "How to maintain nuclear competence in Europe: A reflection paper prepared by the CCEFission working gropu on nuclear education, training and competence," European Commission 2001.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[10] INSAG, "Maintaining knowledge, training and infrastrucutre for research and development in nuclear safety", IAEA2001.

[16] Ontario Hydro Meltdown. Available: http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/articl e/ontario-hydro-meltdown/

[11] OECD/NEA, Nuclear competence building: summary report: Organisation for economic cooperation and development, 2004.

[17] "Train Derailment at Hatfield: A Final Report by the Independent Investigation Board," Office of Rail Regulation, http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/HS E_HatfieldFinal2006.pdf2006.

[12] F. Moons, J. Safieh, M. Giot, B. Mavko, B. R. Sehgal, A. Schäfer, et al., "European Master of Science in Nuclear Engineering," Nuclear Engineering and Design, vol. 235, pp. 165-172, 2005. [13] OECD/NEA, "Nuclear Education and Training: From Concern to Capability," Nuclear Energy Agency, Organisation fro the Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris, France2012. [14] "Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) Opinion n°2012AV-0147 of 10 April 2012 on the importance of research to ASN and on identifying the first research topics to be further investigated in the fields of nuclear safety and radiation protection," ed: Autorité de s^ureté nucléaire, 2012. [15] G. C. Andognini and A. Kupcis, Report to Management IIPA/SSFI: Evaluation Findings and Recommendations: http://www.ccnr.org/hydro_report.html, 1997.

[18] "NRC overlooked San Onofre steam generator problem," ed. http://www.world-nuclearnews.org/RS-NRC-overlooked-San-Onofre-steamgenerator-problem-09101401.html: World Nuclear News, 2014. [19] W. E. Kastenberg, "Ethics, Risk and Safety Culture," in Reflections on the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Accident, J. Ahn, C. Carson, M. Jensen, K. Juraku, S. Nagasaki, and S. Tanaka, Eds., ed: Springer International Publishing, 2015, pp. 165-187. [20] The National Diet of Japan, "The official report of the Fukushima nuclear accident independent investigation commission NAIIC (Executive summary)," 2012. [21] D. M. Kahan, "Climate science communication and the measurement problem," Advances in Political Psychology, vol. (in print), 2014.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DOI: 10.14621/ce.20150103

Smart Protection Scheme for the Power Subsystem of Istria Region Elvis Mikac, Vedran Kirinčić*, Srdjan Skok Faculty of Engineering, University of Rijeka Vukovarska 58, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia, vedran.kirincic@riteh.hr

Abstract

1. Introduction

The transmission power subsystem of the Istria region in Croatia is characterized by the disproportion between production and consumption. The excess of electric energy is expressed during low consumption night periods in spring. Another critical period is daytime during summer touristic seasons characterised by high consumption. The traditional protection system based on SCADA measurements considers N-1 criteria only, with a focus on secure energy supply to the western coast of Istria region using the load shedding scheme in the city of Pula. There are recorded cases with simultaneous outages of two power system elements and for those scenarios the simulation reveals that the N-2 criterion is not satisfied. Due to relatively weak 110 kV links (3x150 mm2, transmission power of 90 MVA) of the Istria region towards its surrounding network, the outage of the 220 kV double circuit transmission lines Plomin - Pehlin - Melina, which is the main supply and evacuation route, would probably lead to the blackout of the entire Istria region.

The paper analyzes conditions in the electric power subsystem of Istria which is the most western part of the Croatian power system, and for which there are several recorded disturbances [1]–[4]. The subsystem of Istria is characterized by several factors, out of which the most important are the double circuit 220 kV transmission line (TL) Plomin - Pehlin – Melina, which is the main supply and evacuation route, the TL Plomin - Lovran Matulji with limited transmission power of 90 MVA, the TL Buje – Koper, which is a cross border link between Croatia and Slovenia with set overcurrent protection on both sides limiting transmission power to 90 MVA. Under certain operating conditions the outage of the double circuit 220 kV TL Plomin – Pehlin – Melina causes the overloads of the 110 kV TL Buje – Koper and the 110 kV TL Plomin – Lovran – Matulji. Since these transmission lines are the links with the rest of the power system, such a scenario can result in the total loss of consumption and generation in the subsystem of Istria. The electric power subsystem of Istria is shown in Figure 1.

The paper presents the results of the power flow analysis for different scenarios in order for the better understanding of the subsystem operation. The smart protection scheme based on the synchronized measurement technology is proposed in order to mitigate a partial or total power system blackout and to minimise the impact of disturbances to the power system operation.

Keywords:

Phasor Measurement Unit (PMU). Power system stability and control, Synchronised phasor measurements, Smart protection scheme

Article history:

Received: 06 February 2015 Revised: 18 February 2015 Accepted: 20 February 2015

The traditional control system is based on the conventional Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) measurements and depends on dispatcher’s reaction and experience [5]–[6]. Since in the recent years power utilities worldwide started to populate their transmission systems with Phasor Measurement Units (PMUs), the availability of the synchrophasors provides the power system operator an overview in real time conditions [7]–[8]. Furthermore, the precise time tags obtained from the GPS system and the high frequency of sampling make the synchrophasors superior in comparison with the SCADA measurements. Therefore, the proposed smart control and protection scheme for the subsystem of Istria is based on the synchronized measurement technology, which has already been

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ E. Mikac, V. Kirinčić, S. Skok: “Smart Protection Scheme for the Power Subsystem of Istria Region”, pp. 13–23

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Power flow analysis The power flow analysis was performed for two cases: the largest consumption of 240 MW in the subsystem of Istria (the high consumption scenario – HC) and the lowest consumption of 85 MW (the low consumption scenario – LC). Although the N-1 criterion is satisfied for the both scenarios, the N-2 criterion and the N-3 criterion are not satisfied for the LC scenario and the HC scenario, respectively. When modelling the subsystem for the power flow analysis in the simulation package Siemens Power System Simulator for Engineering PSS®E [13], the subsystem was connected to the surrounding system with three active networks. Two active networks, located in Slovenia, were connected to the buses Koper and Ilirska Bistrica, while the third one was located in Croatia and it was connected to the substation Pehlin in Rijeka. The monitored elements during the power flow analysis were the 220 kV TL Plomin – Melina, 220 kV TL Plomin – Pehlin, 110 kV TL Buje – Koper, 110 kV TL Plomin – Lovran – Matulji and the generators Plomin 1 and Plomin 2. Table 1 provides the input parameters for the simulation. Figure 1: The electric power subsystem of Istria

2.1. High consumption scenario recognized as one of the key drivers of building Smart Grids [9]–[12]. The given solution assumes a certain level of automation, which refers to blocking some of local protections, the monitoring of the complete subsystem in real time and advisory assistance to the power system operator, with the parallel operation of the existing SCADA system. In Section 2, the simulated scenarios are described and the results are presented. Section 3 gives the proposed solution of the smart protection scheme, while Section 4 concludes the paper.

The high consumption of up to 240 MW occurs during the summer touristic season, mainly because of the consumption on the western coast of Istria. The outage of the main supply energy route, Plomin – Pehlin – Melina, with the outage of the generator in Plomin 2, would result in the blackout of the subsystem. The simulated scenario starts with the outage of the TL Pehlin – Melina. Because of the lack of energy in the subsystem, the TL Buje – Koper is overloaded (125%) and the TL Lovran – Matulji is loaded 46%, as shown in Figure 2 and Table 2. The overcurrent protection on the

Table 1: The input parameters for the simulation Element

High consumption scenario

Low consumption scenario

TL Plomin – Melina

In service

TL PLomin – Pehlin

Out of service

TL Buje – Koper

In service

TL Plomin – Lovran

In service

TPP Plomin 1

In service

TPP Plomin 2

Out of service

In service

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

TL 110 kV Buje-Kopar

TL 110 kV Plomin-Lovran-Matulji

Figure 2: The high consumption scenario

Table 2: Loading levels of transmission lines in the high consumption scenario Element

Rating (MVA)

Loading (MVA)

Percent (%)

TL Plomin – Melina

366

TL Plomin – Pehlin

366

TL Buje – Koper

112.5

125

TL Plomin – Lovran - Matulji

21.3

Figure 3: The block diagram of the system blackout in the high consumption scenario ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ E. Mikac, V. Kirinčić, S. Skok: “Smart Protection Scheme for the Power Subsystem of Istria Region”, pp. 13–23

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

below the nominal value. The sequence of events is shown in Figure 5.

both sides of the TL Buje – Koper limits the transferred power to 90 MVA, which leads to the outage. The sequence of events is shown in Figure 3.

2.3. Low consumption scenario 2.2. High consumption scenario after the action of the proposed protection scheme modification

The low consumption of 85 MW causes the excess of electric energy due to disproportion between the production and the consumption which happens during the night periods in spring. The outage of the main double circuit evacuation energy route, Plomin – Pehlin – Melina, would result in the blackout of the subsystem since the N-2 criterion is not satisfied. The simulated scenario starts with the outage of the TL Pehlin – Melina. Because of the excess of energy in the subsystem, the TL Plomin – Lovran – Matulji is overloaded (140%) which leads to the outage of the TL Plomin – Lovran – Matulji, as given in Figure 6 and Table 4. The sequence of events is shown in Figure 7.

For the case when the problem is in the supply of electric energy, the proposed solution is the outage of the TL Buje – Katoro from the system. The load of network elements after the reaction of the protection is shown in Figure 4 and Table 3. The protection scheme must be such to block the overcurrent protection of the TL Buje Koper and instantly cause an outage of TL Buje – Katoro. The outage leads to a change of power flows in the network and reduce the load of the TL Buje – Koper

TL 110 kV Buje-Kopar TL 110 kV Buje - Katoro TL 110 kV Plomin-Lovran-Matulji

Figure 4: The high consumption scenario of network state after applying the proposed protection scheme

Table 3: Loading levels of transmission lines in the high consumption scenario with applied the proposed scheme Element

Rating (MVA)

Loading (MVA)

Percent (%)

TL Plomin – Melina

366

TL Plomin – Pehlin

366

TL Buje – Koper

88.2

TL Plomin – Lovran - Matulji

83.7

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ INITIAL STATE Element out of service: -TL 220 Plomin-Pehlin -Generator Plomin 2 – 210 MW

Overload of TL 110 kV Buje-Koper (125%)

Outage of TL 110 kV Buje-Katoro

Disturbance

Overcurrent protection

Outage of TL 220 kV Plomin-Melina

Protection scheme

System stability maintained

Block protection TL 110 kV Buje-Koper

Figure 5: The block diagram in the high consumption scenario with the proposed protection scheme

TL 110 kV Buje-Kopar

TL 110 kV Plomin-Lovran-Matulji

Figure 6: The low consumption scenario

2.4. Low consumption scenario after the action of the proposed protection scheme For the case when the problem is in the evacuation of electric energy, the proposed solution is the outage of generator Plomin 1 from the system. The load of

network elements after the reaction of the protection is shown in Figure 8 and Table 5. The rotection scheme must be such to block the overcurrent protection of the TL Plomin – Lovran - Matulji and instantly cause an outage of generator Plomin 1. The sequence of events is shown in Figure 9.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 4: Loading levels of transmission lines in the low consumption scenario Element

Rating (MVA)

Loading (MVA)

Percent (%)

TL Plomin – Melina

366

TL Plomin – Pehlin

366

TL Buje – Koper

83.7

TL Plomin – Lovran – Matulji

126

140

Figure 7: The block diagram of the system blackout in the low consumption scenario

TL 110 kV Buje-Kopar

TL 110 kV Plomin-Lovran-Matulji

Figure 8: The low consumption scenario of network state after applying the proposed protection scheme ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ E. Mikac, V. Kirinčić, S. Skok: “Smart Protection Scheme for the Power Subsystem of Istria Region”, pp. 13–23

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 5: Loading levels of transmission lines in the low consumption scenario with applied the proposed scheme Element

Rating (MVA)

Loading (MVA)

Percent (%)

TL Plomin – Melina

366

TL Plomin – Pehlin

366

TL Buje – Koper

42.3

TL Plomin – Lovran – Matulji

INITIAL STATE Element out of service: -TL 220 Plomin-Pehlin

Overload of TL 110 kV Plomin-LovranMatulji (140%)

Outage of generator Plomin 1

Disturbance

Overcurrent protection

Outage of TL 220 kV PlominMelina

Protection scheme

System stability maintained

Block protection TL 110 kV Plomin-LovranMatulji

Figure 9: The block diagram in the low consumption scenario with the proposed protection scheme

3. The proposal smart control and protection scheme The literature review reveals that the majority of advanced control and protection solutions are designed to mitigate congestions in power systems [14]–[18]. The reason for such an approach is the operation of power systems close to their stability limits which comes as the consequence of reduced investments in the main infrastructure to maximise profits. Therefore, the development and deployment of control and protection tools that use existing power system resources and enable the power system operation with reduced security limits is suggested. The developed advanced control and protection scheme would assist the system operator to act timely. The

advanced system consists of a part of the equipment deployed in the control centre and a part of the equipment deployed in the substations. The central part of the system is the central controller that performs necessary calculations and provides the support to operator’s decisions. The architecture of the smart control and protection scheme that is given in Figure 10 is based on the synchronized phasor measurements. The voltage and current phasors are provided by Intelligent Electronic Devices (IEDs) that are deployed in characteristic substations. The IEDs send the measured phasors towards the central controller. The central controller uses the measurements to monitor the system in real time (refresh rate of 20 ms) and runs algorithms to preserve the power system stability. The control signals from the central controller are forwarded to the IEDs in order to act as mitigation relays.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 10: The architecture of the control and protection scheme

The efficiency of the proposed scheme highly depends on the software package that runs on the central controller. The software package comprises the real time monitoring functionality, the modules for the detection of disturbances and the modules for the mitigation of the detected disturbances. The routines could be either pre-calculated (event based) or based on processing measurements in real time (response based). The suggested scheme uses the synchronized measurement technology, in order to provide monitoring and protection. Since the operations should be performed in real time, fast and reliable communication links should be used. Via the telecommunication infrastructure the measurements from the PMUs are sent to the central controller and vice versa, the control actions are sent in opposite direction.

3.1. The algorithm for detection and mitigation of disturbances Using the mathematical model of the subsystem of Istria, the variety of possible disturbances and mitigation

activities were analyzed. It is concluded that the following measurements are needed: • Real time monitoring (current phasors, loading levels) of the 110 kV TL Buje - Koper, 110 kV TL Plomin - Lovran, 110 kV TL Lovran - Matulji, 110 kV TL Matulji – Pehlin; • The positions of the circuit breakers in the substation Plomin on the 220 kV transmission lines towards Pehlin and Melina; • The outputs of the generating units in the TPPs Plomin 1 and Plomin 2; • The voltage phasors at the substations Plomin (110 kV and 220 kV), Lovran, Pehlin and Buje. Table 6 provides the locations of measurement units and Fig. 11 shows the map view of the proposed deployment locations. The proposed mitigation measures are grouped into two groups depending on the type of disturbances (overloading / congestion of a transmission line). The first group of measures refers to the evacuation of electric energy from the subsystem of Istria during the

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 6: The locations of measurement units

Substation

Voltage level

Measurement 1 towards

Measurement 2 towards

Plomin 1

110 kV

Lovran

Plomin 1

220 kV

Plomin 2

Lovran

110 kV

Plomin 1

Matulji

Pehlin

110 kV

Matulji

Buje

220 kV

Koper

Figure 11: The map view of the proposed deployment locations

LC scenario, while the second group refers to supplying the subsystem of Istria during the HC scenario. The initial mitigation step is the same for the both cases and refers to the blocking of the local overcurrent protection on the 110 kV TL Plomin – Lovran in order to give the system operator additional time to take adequate control actions. Since the 110 kV TL Buje – Koper is an interconnecting line, its overcurrent protection cannot be blocked.

If the overloading of the monitored transmission lines is 140%, with the referent surrounding temperature of 20°C, the blocking of the local overcurrent protections on both ends of the line must occur within 4 seconds. The overall blocking of the overcurrent protection is necessary due to the non symmetric loading of transmission lines, as the outage of a single transmission line would result in the cascaded outage of another transmission line and finally the blackout of the entire subsystem of Istria.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The LC scenario is characterized by the opened 220 kV double circuit transmission lines Plomin - Pehlin – Melina; the high generation in the TPPs Plomin 1 / Plomin 2 and the direction of energy from the subsystem of Istria towards the substations Koper, Lovran and Matulji. Therefore, together with the blocking of local overcurrent protections on the selected transmission lines, as an additional mitigation measure, the shedding of generating units in the TPPs is suggested. The proposed protection scheme reduces the risk of outage of the subsystem. Automation systems in real time enable uninterrupted power supply of consumers as main objective to maintain system reliability. In one case, intentionally caused outage of the TL 110 kV Buje – Katoro changes power flows in the network, while in the second case, intentionally caused outage of the generating unit Plomin 1 reduces network load. That way dispatchers have enough time to find the initial cause of the disturbance and return the electric power subsystem to normal operation.

4. Conclusion Modern power systems are undergoing substantial changes due to renewable energy sources integration and the development of electric energy market. Since the investments into the main transmission infrastructure are reduced, the power systems operate closer to their stability limits and contingencies often occur. In order to mitigate congestions and prevent blackouts, new solutions should be implemented and deployed, since the solutions based on the conventional SCADA measurements do not provide the overview of system conditions in real time. The analysed subsystem of Istria is characterised by the high consumption scenario with the lack of electric energy and the low consumption scenario with the excess of electric energy. Since there were several recorded disturbances in the given subsystem, the power flow analysis included the variety of different cases. The obtained results indicate that under certain operating conditions the N-2 and N-3 criteria are not satisfied, which could lead towards the partial or total blackout of the subsystem of Istria. Therefore, the smart control and protection scheme is proposed. The architecture of the scheme is given and the algorithm for detection and mitigation of disturbances is described.

References [1] Radmilovic, B., Majstrovic, G., Prijenosna mreža Istre napona 110, 220 i 400 kV u razdoblju 2000 2030. godine, (Power transmission grid of Subsystem of Istria 110, 220, 400 kV in period

between 2000-2030), Energy institute Hrvoje Pozar, Zagreb, Croatia, 2000. [2] Bobetko, M., Grujić, V., Plavšić, T., Horvat, M., Problematika napajanja Istre električnom energijom, (Power supply problem of subsystem of Istria), HEP, Zagreb, Croatia, 2004. [3] Sokolic, L., Kotorac D., Valentic, V., Bartula D., Princip, M., Sigurnost napajanja i evakuacija snage iz Istre za vrijeme radova na dvostrukom dalekovodu potez 220 kV Plomin – Melina – Pehlin, (Security of supply and power evacuation from Istria during simultaneous disconnection of 220 kV lines Plomin-Pehlin-Melina, 10th Symposium on Power System Management, Opatija, Croatia, 2012, 1-42. [4] Kotorac D., Sumberac, B., Rubesa B., Valentic V., Analiza mogućnosti povećanja sigurnosti napajanja Istre sekcioniranjem glavnih sabirnica rasklopišta 110 kV u TE Plomin, (Analysis of the electroenergetic grid realiability increment in Istria region by sectioning main bus at TPP Plomin), grupa C2 – Pogon i vođenje EES-a, 9th HRO Cigre Session, Cavtat, Croatia, 2009, C2-20. [5] Gomez-Exposito, A., Conejo, A. J., Canizares, C., Electric Energy Systems: Analysis and Operation, CRC Press, London, 2009. [6] Kundur, P., Power System Stability and Control, McGraw-Hill, SAD, 1994. [7] Phadke, A.G., Thorp, J.S., Synchronized phasor measurements and their applications. Springer, 2008. [8] Phadke, A.G., Thorp, J.S., History and applications of phasor measurements, Power Systems Conference and Exposition, PSCE 2006, pp. 331335, 2006. [9] Bialek, J.W, Why has it happened again? Comparison between the UCTE blackout in 2006 and the blackouts of 2003, IEEE Power Tech, July 2007. [10] Andersson, G., Donalek, P., Farmer, R., Hatziargyriou, N., Kamwa, I., Kundur, P., Martins, N., Paserba, J., Pourbeik, P., Sanchez-Gasca, J., Schulz, R., Stankovic, A., Taylor, C., Vittal, V., Causes of the 2003 major grid blackouts in North America and Europe, and recommended means to improve system dynamic performance, IEEE Transactions on Power Systems, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1922- 1928, November 2005. [11] Thorp, J. S., Abur, A., Begovic, M., Giri, J., AvilaRosales, R., Gaining a Wider Perspective, IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 4351, September – October 2008.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[12] Chakrabarti, S., Kyriakides, E., Tianshu, Bi, Cai, D., Terzija, V., Measurements get together, IEEE Power and Energy Magazine, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 4149, January-February 2009. [13] Siemens PTI, “PSS/E 32.0 Online Documentation”, June 2009. [14] Idejni projekt automatskog vođenja dijela Prijenosnog područja Rijeka, (Conceptual design in automatic control of electrical power transmission in the region of Rijeka), Faculty of engineering Rijeka, Rijeka, Croatia, 2010. [15] Energoidea d.o.o., Projekt centralnog kontrolera za nadzor i automatsko vođenje dijela prijenosnog elektroenergetskog sustava PrP Rijeka zasnovanog na sinkroniziranim mjerenjima fazora, Zagreb (The project of central controller for monitoring and automatic control of the part of the transmission electric power system in the transmission area Rijeka based on synchronized phasor measurements), Croatia, 2012.

[16] Skok, S., Frlan K., Zbunjak Z., Nadzor i vođenje rada vjetroelektrane s okolnim elektroenergetskim sustavom na osnovi sinkroniziranih mjerenja fazora, (Intelligent monitoring and control of power transmission grid with integrated renewable energy sources), 10th HRO CIGRE Session, Cavtat, Croatia, 2011. [17] Skok, S., Rubesa R., Kirincic, V., Frlan, K., Zbunjak, Z., Dinamička analiza pogona dijela elektroenergetskog sustava prijenosnog područja Rijeka obzirom na rad VE Vrataruša, (Dynamic analysis of the part of power transmission system of transmission area Rijeka regarding operation of wind farm „Vrataruša”), 9th Symposium on Power System Management, Zadar, Croatia, 2010. [18] Skok, S., Ivankovic, I., Frlan, K., Zbunjak, Z., Monitoring and Control of Smart Transmission Grid Based on Synchronized Measurements, The International Conference on Advanced Power System Automation and Protection, APAP2011, Bejing, China, 2011.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DOI: 10.14621/ce.20150104

Geopolitical Instability in Ukraine and Security of Energy Supply. The Effects on Natural Gas Supply to Italy under Different Scenarios Daniele Grosso*, Raffaella Gerboni DENERG – Politecnico di Torino Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 12084 Torino, Italy, daniele.grosso@polito.it

Abstract

1. Introduction

The Italian energy system is characterised by a high level of import dependency, especially regarding natural gas supply. A dominant role in the NG imports is played by Russia, that in 2013 accounted for 43.6% of the total. As a consequence, the political and institutional crisis between Russia and Ukraine could have significant effects on the energy supply to Italy. In order to analyse these effects, a forecasting scenario analysis was performed by using the TIMES-based optimisation model developed under the 7th Framework Programme REACCESS, able to fully represent the energy corridors (both captive and open sea) supplying the European Union and to evaluate, in a quantitative manner, the risk related to each supply. The analysis was focused on the consequences of a disruption in the supply through the Dolina physical natural gas hub (located in Ukraine) by means of two scenarios: one considering the closure of the hub from 2015 and the other describing a 50% NG flow reduction through it in 2015. The assumed time horizon was 2010-2040, and the effects on the supply composition, on the total system costs, on the marginal costs of natural gas and on the CO2 emissions level were investigated. The results show that the unavailability of the Dolina physical hub causes more significant effects on the mid-long term supply composition than the reduction of the NG flows through it in 2015. In particular, a strong reduction of the Russian contribution in comparison with the baseline one, a simultaneous increase of the import of LNG from Qatar and a decrease in the total amount of the NG supply by corridors, due to a fuel shift phenomenon, can be noticed. In the same way, the Dolina closure scenario leads to major negative effects also from the economical and environmental point of view. This study highlights the main problems of a high import dependency from a major supplier (as in the case of natural gas imports from Russia to Italy, but the modelling tool allows for the assessment of any EU country security of supply) and underlines the need of a strong diversification in the supply composition.

The high import dependency in the energy field is one of the major issues affecting the European Union and having large effects on the level of its security of supply. According to Eurostat data [1], in 2012 more than half (54.8%) of the Gross Inland Consumption of energy commodities was satisfied by imports, with significantly high values of dependency for oil products (93.4%) and natural gas (65.8%).

Keywords:

Energy modelling. Infrastructures, Supply security, Natural gas

Article history:

Received: 24 October 2014 Revised: Accepted: 04 February 2015

Focusing in particular on Italy, the import dependency results higher than the average value for the EU28, and this fact is particularly relevant in the case of natural gas supply, as it can be noticed in Figure 1, where the historical trends for the total supply and the gas supply from 1990 to 2012 are shown. Generally speaking, the diversification in the supply sources is important in order to increase the security of the receiving country. Referring to natural gas import composition in Italy, it can be observed that a dominant role is played by Russia, which accounted for 43.6% of the total gas supply in 2013 (Figure 2). As a consequence of such a dependency, geopolitical instabilities like those that are affecting the relationships between Russia and Ukraine can have several negative influences on the security and the affordability of natural gas supply, with possible effects on the availability and/or on the price of this commodity. The assessment of the implications of different energy import policies and strategies thus becomes increasingly important, also taking into account the mismatch between an energy market that is progressively more dynamic and global and the inertia of policy makers, that are often strongly influenced by the geopolitical criticalities among different countries or areas in the world (like those involving Russia, European Union and United States on the Ukrainian situation) [3].

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ D. Grosso, R. Gerboni: “Geopolitical Instability in Ukraine and Security of Energy Supply. The Effects on Natural Gas …”, pp. 24–31

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 1: Import dependency in Italy – Historical trend 1990-2012 [1]

Figure 2: NG supply composition in Italy – 2013 [2]

In order to compare in a quantitative and objective manner different options for the supply, a modelling framework is necessary. Especially during last year, some scenario analyses focusing on the natural gas supply from Russia to the EU28 have been performed, trying to compare the role of the countries crossed by the energy infrastructures and the possible alternative routes. Among these, the one proposed by Nagayama and Horita [4] involves an application of the Network Game Model, in which the pipelines linking Russia and Europe are treated like graphs. The implementation of the Link-based Flexible Network Allocation Rule allows to evaluate the way in which the considered players (Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and Western Europe, which in turn is mainly composed by Italy and Germany) are connected. The results obtained under the assumed scenarios underline the different relative power of Russia before and after the construction of the Nord Stream pipeline, showing that the availability of this pipeline causes a strong increase in Russian role at the cost of Ukraine [4].

import and the effects of different scenarios on the level of energy supply security in European high dependent countries like Italy, but only to evaluate the relative weight of the considered countries. For this reason, in the present study the optimization TIMES model [5] developed during the REACCESS project has been adopted to compare the consequences on the Italian supply of two scenarios involving the Ukrainian physical natural gas hub in Dolina.

This kind of analysis, however, does not allow to directly estimate in a numerical way the risk related to each

One of the main features of this model is to link three different optimization models, two existing (the Pan

2. Methodological approach The model used to perform the analysis mentioned in the Introduction was developed under the 7th Framework Programme REACCESS, focused on the detailed description and technical-economical characterisation of the energy corridors (both open sea and captive) supplying the European Union and on the assessment – by using numerical indexes related to the geopolitical risk – of the security of the related supply.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

European TIMES model, describing the energy system of 36 European countries, and the KanORS TIMES Integrated Assessment Model, modelling the energy system of 15 world macro-areas) and one – the REACCESS CORridor (RECOR) model – newly implemented during the project and including the whole description of the energy infrastructures and the risk parameters [6].

ranges between 0 (safe country) and 100 (unsafe country) [8]. Assuming that each ORI could represent the probability that a corridor fails crossing the related country, the Risk Indicator associated to each corridor has been defined in accordance with the following relationship (1): = 100 ∙ 1 − ∏

1−

(1)

where:

2.1. The RECOR model and the risk implementation The RECOR model transfers the information on all the analysed corridor (for the main energy commodities: natural gas, crude oil, refined petroleum products, hard coal, biomass, nuclear material, hydrogen, electricity from CSP), collected into a set of wide Excel-based databases, into a TIMES-based model structure. In particular, each corridor is described as a chain of branches (modelled as processes), each one of them linking two significant points (f.i., the extraction field and the border of the production country, two borders of a crossed country, a border between two countries and an internal hub, etc.). Each branch is characterised by a series of technical and economical parameters, including investment costs, fixed and variable operating and maintenance costs, fuel in input and related consumption, start year of the infrastructure, capacity, activity carried in the model Base Year. The specific code system adopted and the introduction of two kind of processes – in the case of commodity delivered by means of the same infrastructure but having different origins – ensure the full traceability of the energy fluxes from the extraction to the supply point. Each model run allows to find the optimal configuration of the energy system for all the model regions (i.e. the configuration of technologies, local production, trade and use of commodities that satisfies the energy demands minimising the total system cost) under different constraints and scenarios. It also lets to quantify environmental indicators (like CO2 emissions) and economical parameters (like the marginal costs of energy commodities, that are endogenously evaluated). A relevant feature of the RECOR model is the implementation of a risk parameter related to each supply branch (the last process of a corridor chain), based on the composition of the Overall Risk Indexes of the countries crossed by the corridor; in this study the methodological approach for the risk evaluation developed during the follow-up phase of the project has been adopted [7]. The Overall Risk Index (ORI) is a geopolitical risk indicator evaluated by means of a factor analysis procedure starting from a set of 101 variables. This methodology allows to define four risk vectors (Social, Energetic, Political and Economic): the average of the corresponding values gives the ORI value, that

RIC defines the Risk Indicator for the energy corridor C r

identifies the crossed country

is the number of crossed countries

ORIr is the Overall Risk Index for the country r In this approach, the risk is treated like a CO2 emission, and so it is implemented into the model by means of a commodity in output from each supply process. The value of this commodity is calculated by multiplying the Risk Indicator by the total activity delivered by the analysed corridor, as shown in Eq. (2). =

∙

(2)

Furthermore, in order to estimate the risk related to the single PJ/y supplied by corridors in a certain country, the Specific Risk parameter – defined by Eq. 3 as the ratio between the total risk and the total supply – has been introduced.

=∑

∑

(3)

where: Cr

identifies the corridors supplying the country r

2.2. Scenarios The analysis was focused on the effects on the Italian natural gas imports of a disruption in the supply through the natural gas physical hub of Dolina, located in Ukraine (Figure 3), over a mid-long term time horizon (from 2015 to 2040). In particular, this hub involves the Trans Austria Gas (TAG) pipeline, that allows natural gas import to Italy through the Tarvisio interconnection. Table 1 lists all the possible present/future alternative supply routes via pipeline implemented into the RECOR model. Two scenarios on the availability of the Dolina hub were defined, one assuming a complete closure of the hub starting from 2015 and the other hypothesising a 50% reduction of the natural gas flowing through it in 2015 in comparison with the Baseline value. In both the scenarios the time horizon was 2010-2040. The main assumptions of the performed runs are summarised in Table 2.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 3: Representation of the corridors converging in Dolina physical hub (Source: Digital Web GIS Application – REACCESS project)

Table 1: NG pipelines supplying Italy implemented into the RECOR model Corridor Galsi Greenstream IGI TAG TAP Transitgas Transmed South Stream

Status 2019 Operational 2015 Operational 2019 Operational Operational 2015

Capacity at Base/Start Year (bcm) 8.0 8.8 8.0 33.1 10.0 19.9 27.9 15.0

Entry Point Porto Botte Gela Otranto Arnoldstein San Foca Passo Gries Mazara del Vallo Tarvisio

Table 2: Main hypotheses of the performed runs Scenario Baseline Close Dolina Dolina Reduction

Dolina Physical Hub No constraints Closed (from 2015) 50% NG Flow Reduction (2015)

3. Results First of all, the effects of the assumed scenarios on the composition of the NG supply to Italy were investigated; Figures 4, 5 and 6 show the results for each run. As it can be noticed, in the Baseline run (i.e. without specific constraints; Figure 4) the forecast highlights a strong increase in the role played by Russia, which in the mid-long term will become the dominant supplier (also taking into account the reduction in the imports from

Risk No constraints No constraints No constraints

GHG Emissions No constraints No constraints No constraints

Algeria), accounting for about 80% of the total in 2040. This situation is negative from the point of view of the security of supply, because it does not allow the diversification of sources, which is one of the key elements for the achievement of a sufficient level of security. Furthermore, at the end of the time horizon, a large part of the supply from Russia (corresponding to 73.1% of the total) is planned to be delivered via the TAG pipeline and only 26.9% of the natural gas exported to Italy is flowing through the South Stream pipeline, so bypassing Ukraine.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 4: Composition of the natural gas supply in Italy – Baseline scenario

Figure 5: Composition of the natural gas supply in Italy – Close Dolina scenario

Figure 6: Composition of the natural gas supply in Italy – Dolina Reduction scenario ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ D. Grosso, R. Gerboni: “Geopolitical Instability in Ukraine and Security of Energy Supply. The Effects on Natural Gas …”, pp. 24–31

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

In the Close Dolina scenario, the future evolution of the NG supply is instead quite different from the Baseline one. As it can be seen in Figure 5, the closure of the Dolina natural gas hub causes a strong reduction in imports from Russia (coupled to an increase in the supply of LNG from Qatar) and – more in general – a reduction in the global import of natural gas, due to fuel shift phenomenon. This trend underlines the importance of the TAG pipeline, as the model prefers to modify the import composition rather than to increase the capacity and the use of the South Stream corridor. In the case of a 50% reduction in the NG flow through Dolina, a little reduction in the supply from Russia is observable (Figure 6) in comparison with the Baseline value, but the composition trend remains quite similar to the Baseline one. Referring to the Specific Risk (SR) evaluation, Figure 7 shows that both the Dolina scenarios cause a decrease in the SR value, which is more relevant in the Close Dolina run. In the Dolina Reduction scenario it is possible to notice a value lower than the Baseline one in 2015, while in the next milestone years the SR remains more or less the same. This means that the effects of the NG flow reduction in 2015 are a local perturbation and are rapidly absorbed by the system, thus not spreading over the whole time horizon. Analysing the consequences in terms of environmental aspects, it can be seen (Figure 8) that both the assumed scenarios cause an increase in CO2 emission in comparison with the Baseline value in 2015. After this milestone year, a reduction in the percentage difference is observable; from 2025 the level of emissions tends to became similar to the Baseline one. Eventually, taking into account the economical effects and focusing, in particular, on the marginal cost of

natural gas (Figure 9), a strong increase (higher than 100% in the case of Dolina closed) in 2015 with respect to the Baseline run can be noticed in both the scenarios. As for the Specific Risk, also in this case there is a rapid absorption of effects deriving from the 50% flow reduction in 2015: in fact, from 2020 the marginal cost is quite equal to the Baseline value. Instead, in the case of complete unavailability of the Dolina hub, major consequences in the mid-long term can be observed. Furthermore, both the scenarios cause an increase in the total system cost of Italy, which is higher in the case of a closure of the Dolina hub (+0.31% in comparison with the Baseline value versus +0.02% calculated in the Dolina Reduction scenario).

4. Conclusions This study highlights the role played by the natural gas infrastructures crossing Ukraine and supplying Italy, showing in particular the issues related to the high import dependency from a major supplier like Russia. If a disruption in the Dolina physical hub happens, a significant variation in the composition of the Italian NG imports can be noticed, with corresponding higher system costs, gas marginal cost and CO2 emissions in the mid-long term. On the contrary, the unavailability of the Dolina hub has positive consequences on the risk related to the energy supply by corridors, with a reduction in the specific risk related to each PJ/y imported in Italy in comparison with the Baseline value. This fact is mostly due to the higher diversification in the NG supply, with a greater contribution related to “safer” countries like Qatar.

Figure 7: Specific Risk for the total supply by corridors in Italy ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ D. Grosso, R. Gerboni: “Geopolitical Instability in Ukraine and Security of Energy Supply. The Effects on Natural Gas …”, pp. 24–31

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 8: Percentage variation in CO2 emissions in comparison with the Baseline values

Figure 9: Percentage variation in NG marginal cost in comparison with the Baseline values

Instead, the reduction of the NG flowing through Dolina only in 2015 causes less effects on the natural gas supply and on the energy system; moreover, these effects – in general – affect only the period between 2015 and 2020 and do not spread over the whole time horizon. These results put in evidence the need for policies (at National or European scale) focused on the diversification of the supply, in order to avoid criticalities that can derive from geopolitical instabilities like those related to the present crisis between Russia and Ukraine.

References [1] Eurostat statistical database http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/

energy,

[2] BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2014, http://www.bp.com/ [3] Goldthau Andreas, Boersma Tim, The 2014 Ukraine-Russia crisis: Implications for energy markets, Energy Research & Social Science, 3, (2014), pp. 13-15, 10.1016/j.erss.2014.05.001. [4] Nagayama Daisuke, Horita Masahide, A network game analysis of strategic interactions in the international trade of Russian natural gas through Ukraine and Belarus, Energy Economics, 43, (2014), pp. 89-101, 10.1016/j.eneco.2014.02.010. [5] Loulou Richard, Remme Uwe, Kanudia Amit, Lehtila Antti, Goldstein Gary, Documentation for the TIMES model – Part I, II, III, 2005, http://www.ieaetsap.org/web/Documentation.asp

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[6] Biberacher Markus, De Miglio Rocco, Gargiulo Maurizio, Gerboni Raffaella, Lavagno Evasio, Schranz Laura, Tosato GianCarlo, Risk of Energy Availability Common Corridors for Europe Supply Security - Summary Report, REACCESS Final Workshop, Brussels, Belgium, 2011. [7] Gerboni Raffaella, Grosso Daniele, Lavagno Evasio, Modeling reliability and security of supply: a revised methodological approach and its possible application to the Chinese system, Proceedings of

the 65th Semi-annual ETSAP meeting, IEA-ETSAP Workshop, Beijing, China, 2014. [8] García-Verdugo Javier, San-Martín Enrique, Muñoz Beatriz, Quantifying Geopolitical Energy Risks: The Socioeconomic Energy Risk Index, in Energy Security for the EU in the 21st Century: Markets, Geopolitics and Corridors, (Marín-Quemada José María, García-Verdugo Javier, Escribano Gonzalo), Routledge, Oxon and New York, USA, 2011, pp. 144-169.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DOI: 10.14621/ce.20150105

The Challenge of Utilising Bio–Resources: A Regional Perspective Michael Narodoslawsky*, Michael Eder1, Stephan Maier1, René Kollmann1 European Sustainable Energy Innovation Alliance (eseia), narodoslawsky@tugraz.at 1 Institute of Process and Particle Engineering, Graz University of Technology Inffeldgasse 13/3, 8010 Graz, Austria

Abstract

1. Introduction

Although it is still not warranted to speak about the end of the fossil age, we certainly witness a trend towards renewable sources for energy and material. Properties of bio-resources however differ vastly from fossil as well as other renewable resources. They are storable, mainly de-central in their provision, have usually weak logistic properties and face severe competition from various sectors, in particular from the vital food sector. A stronger reliance on bio-resources to support the European energy system as well as to provide raw materials for conversion to material products therefore raises technical, societal and environmental issues that have to be resolved if a bio-economy is to become a viable development pathway.

The current discourse about ecological sustainability is heavily influenced by the concurrent discussions about the ecological threat global warming and the economic impact of diminishing fossil resources [2]. As a consequence an energy turn-around towards renewable resource based energy provision (as well as increased energy efficiency) is seen as a win-win-win option, at once relieving the burden on limited fossil resources, working against climate change and bringing society closer to sustainability. Besides this there are numerous voices such as Daniel Yergin (2011) [3] linking development and implementation of renewable energies to technological innovation and economic growth, adding to the sustainability credentials of an energy turn-around. This has led to the formulation of political goals (e.g. the European Union 20-20-20 Goals (2007a) [4] and plans (e.g. the European Union SET Plan (2007b) [5] to lay the foundation for a change to renewable energies within the 21st century.

One major challenge is that regional technology networks become important as transport becomes a considerable concern for bio-resources. On top of that, the necessary high resource efficiency calls for strong interlinks between technologies. Particularly interesting will be the implementation of grid-overarching technologies that exploit the one big advantage of bio-resources, namely their storability, in order to stabilise energy grids. Another important question concerns the support of energy demands from industries. This paper is based on the “discourse book” of the European Sustainable Energy Innovation Alliance on the rational utilisation of bio-resources (2014) [1]. It will in particular address the regional challenges of a sustainable European BioEconomy.

Keywords:

Bio–economy, Bio–resource utilisation, Strong sustainability

Article history:

Received: 04 February 2015 Revised: 19 February 2015 Accepted: 20 February 2015

Although this increase in renewable energy provision will be shouldered by technologies drawing on different renewable resources such as hydro power, wind, direct solar energy, geothermal energy, wave and tidal energy, bioenergy will play an important role in the future energy mix. This increased demand however meets an already contested resource. By 2050 the world population will increase to more than 9 billion people (from its current 7,2 billion), requiring over 1016 kcal of food per year, an increase of over 40% from a current value of 7*1015 kcal/y (see e.g. Taste of Sustainability, FAO (2014) [6]). Besides, well entrenched industrial sectors, most notable pulp and paper production and construction, already use large amounts of biomass. According to the FAO (2014) [7] the world consumption for industrial round wood will reach 2.436 * 109 m³/y wood raw

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ M. Narodoslawsky, M. Eder, S. Maier, R. Kollmann: “The Challenge of Utilising Bio–Resources: A Regional Perspective”, pp. 32–40

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

material equivalent (WRME), 45% up from the 2005 consumption of 1.682 * 109 m³/y WRME. This paper will discuss why a stronger reliance on bioresources will fundamentally change the structure of industry as well as energy provision, making the regional context more important. It will also provide guidelines on how regional utilisation of bio-resources should be organised in order to exploit maximum benefit from these resources while maintaining sustainability of their use. This will be specifically explored from the viewpoint of energy systems.

2. Bio–resources — versatile, contested and demanding base for human society There seems to be no other group of resources that can fulfil such a wide variety of demands as bio-resources. There is however no other group of resources that entail so direct and large scale impact on society and the environment for its provision and that so clearly highlight the general conundrum of sustainable development, namely living within “limited infinity”. Bio-resources require as a basic production factor area, which is limited as our planet has a limited surface. Besides that it requires other ingredients, namely fertile environmental compartments, be they soil or water bodies. Seen from the vantage point of converting solar energy into energy embodied in materials, the generation of bio-resources by the process of photosynthesis is not a particularly efficient process. Maximum theoretical conversion rates of solar radiation into bio-resources are between 4.6 for C-3 plants and 6 % for C-4 plants [8]. Practical conversion rates are around 50 % of these theoretical values. It is this low efficiency of converting solar radiation into useful energy from bio-resources (regardless if used for nutrition or technical purposes) that makes “living in limited infinity” particularly obvious: bio-resource generation rate is limited by the limitation of the production factors, most notably arable land and forest area. This rate may however be sustained over (practically) infinite time if human society learns to manage these production factors cleverly. Human society is already a strong contender for this limited form of natural income. Beer et al. (2007) [9] estimate Global Net Primary Production (NPP, the rate at which sunlight is converted into useful chemical energy, measured in t of carbon fixed by photosynthesis per year) to roughly 105 Gt/y, of which 53.8% are allotted to terrestrial systems. Haberl et al. (2007) [10] show that from the terrestrial NPP 23.8% are already appropriated by man, be it by harvesting (53% of this appropriation) or land use change (amounting to 40% of

the appropriation) or human-induced fires. They also point out that the overall impact of human activities reduces the NPP by almost 10%. According to these authors it is far from certain that the current rate of appropriation is sustainable. Limited generation rates are one aspect that makes bioresources inherently contested commodities. Their versatility is another. From the vantage point of the energy sector and the chemical industry as well, bioresources can fulfil every demand currently covered by various fossil (and nuclear) technologies: they may be converted in heat or electricity, fuel or any chemical compound demanded by the market. In a time when fossil oil, the key resource for synthetic materials and transport fuels faces its production maximum and, together with all other fossil resources, comes under increasing environmental scrutiny as a culprit of global climate change, the versatility of bio-resources translates into increased demand from various sectors. This adds to the already strong competition for bioresources between traditional users, in particular the food sector, firewood use and pulp and paper industry, to name the most important ones. This means that any competition for bio-resources will inherently end up as a competition for land. As a consequence there is a direct competition between sectors, such as the food sector and bio-fuel industry, for particular crops. On top that there is however an indirect competition between different forms of land use as forests providing resources for energy provision or pulp&paper industry may compete with fields that provide crops for food or bio-fuel. Following this argumentation the growing demand for food and energy will end up in exceeding the limits of fertile land. This influences the eco-chains interrelated to these land conversions which can lead to further climate change ending up in less productivity and volatility of bio resources production [11].

3. Differences between bio–resources and fossil resources One of the major differences to other (in particular fossil) resources is the wide variety of bio-resources. This does not only concern the wide variety of plants and animals that man has domesticated for his purposes. It also applies to by-products and wastes from industrial and societal processes using primary bio-resources. The intense competition for bio-resources (and hence for fertile land) applies in particular to the relative small number of primary agricultural crops and wood from forestry, leaving the oceanic fish resources mainly used for food out of consideration for a moment. There is however another kind of bio-resources that is outside the current pattern of competition: secondary bio-resources that are by-products or wastes from agricultural, industrial or societal processes. Their use

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

does in general not add to the direct competition for land although it may influence the fertility of land. In general their use is either in the form of a cascade (prolonging the value chain of a primary resource within society) or parallel to a valuable crop (using parts of plants that are usually not entering the markets such as straw and corn cobs) or additional (using land that is underutilised or otherwise not cultivated). The most obvious dissimilarities between bio-resources and fossil resources are however their different logistical parameters. If bio-resources have to play a

more prominent role in energy provision and industry, this means a radically changed economic and logistical structure of resource provision. Table 1 shows a comparison of humidity, transport density and energy content for some example resources. The table lists two kinds of bio-resources, relatively dry material for which the energy content is calculated as the calorific value generated by incineration. For wet materials the energy content is defined by the energy content of biogas if these materials are subjected to an anaerobic fermentation.

Table 1: Comparison of logistic parameters for fossil and bio-resources (adapted from Gwehenberger et al. (2008) [12]) Conversion

Incineration

Biogas production

Humidity [%w/w]

Energy content [MJ/kg]1

Density [kg/m³]1

Energy density [MJ/m³]1

Straw (grey)

100-135

1.500–2.025

Wheat (grains)

670-750

10.050–11.250

Rape seed

24.6

700

17.220

Wood chips

10.4

235

2.440

Split logs (beech)

14.7

400–450

5.880–6.615

Wood pellets

14.4

660

9.500

Grass silage

60–70

3.7

600–700

2.220–2.590

Corn silage

65–72

4.2

770

3.230

Organic municipal waste

2.4

750

1.800

Manure

0.7

1000

700

Light fuel oil

42.7

840

36.000

Anthracite

35.3

800-930

28.000–33.000

Material

All numbers related to fresh material

Table 2: Transport distance with different means of transportation, using 1% of the energy contained in the payload Resource Manure Straw Corn silage Wood chips Split logs Wood pellets Corn Crude oil

Means of transportation Tractor Tractor Tractor Truck Truck Train Train Ocean going ship

Transport distance per % of energy contained in payload [km] 5.7 12 18 40 100 475 525 7800

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Table 1 shows that bio-resources are characterised by high humidity and/or low transport density and generally lower energy content. In many practical cases therefore transport volume will become limiting for the collection logistic of these resources. The differences between fossil resources (represented here by light heating oil) and bio-resources are poignant: there is a factor of 24 between the energy density of straw and light heating oil with regard to their energy density. The disadvantage of wet resources must be put in perspective – biogas has a much broader range of applications than heat generated by incineration. The logistical challenge becomes even more visible if different means of transportations are factored in. According to their energy efficiency (and strongly influenced by their particular ratio of empty weight to load capacity) transport systems require different amounts of energy to transport a load a certain distance. If we set the limit of the energy used to transport a resource to its utilisation site arbitrarily to 1% of the contained energy, we obtain the results summarised in Table 2. This table clearly points to the increased importance of regional supply in the case of bio-resources: different resource quality conditions have different energy consumption per transported material load. For low density goods like manure, straw, corn silage and wood chips a sustainable transport is still possible within a range of 50 kilometres. Following these assumptions bio-resources with higher density can be even transported across distances over 500 kilometres per % of energy contained in payload kilometre. Whereas it is fully rational to establish a global fossil economy as transport from source to utilisation plays almost no role, the use of lower quality bio-resources must become regional and possibly even local.

4. Defining sustainable energy services for bio–resources Any attempt to balance the utilisation of bio-resources sustainably must take the social, economic and environmental services that bio-resources may provide into account. It requires to analyse which of them can or cannot be performed by other resources or what the restrictions on other resources are to provide them in a sustainable way. There is no doubt that the main societal service of bioresources is to provide food for the global population. Bio-resources currently have a monopoly on this service although there have been numerous research attempts to generate food from fossil hydrocarbons (e.g. Gosh et al. (1984) [13]) via biotechnological pathways. Providing

food from limited fossil resources, which are themselves highly contested, is however not an alternative. In contrast to food, there are plenty alternatives to bioresources to provide energy. Wind power, solar thermal energy and photovoltaic will become major suppliers of electricity and electricity will become more prominent in any sustainable energy system (see e.g. The European SET Plan Roadmap (2007b) [5]). All these technologies convert solar energy much more efficiently into electricity than technologies based on bio-resources can do. The resources for these technologies are free of any cost for material energy carriers, giving them a key economic advantage over bio-resources (as well as over fossil and other resources). This economic advantage already becomes a change factor for the electricity system in Europe: the more wind power and PV enter the electricity market, the less room there is for conventional base load technologies like nuclear and large fossil based power plants. Moreover all mentioned renewable based energy technologies are having a considerably lower ecological impact compared to fossil based as Kettl (2012) [14] shows in his life cycle analysis. All these renewable sources however are either periodically or intermittently available. This requires other approaches that stabilise the distribution grids, in particular for electricity. Besides management of power demand (by smart grids) the use of energy storage or material energy carriers (both fossil and bio-based) that pick up the gap between intermittent electricity provisions will become necessary. The challenge then is however not anymore the provision of a large amount of base load electricity but to power technologies that are nimble enough to stabilise the distribution grids, that operate only when “cheap and green” wind or PV power is in short supply. Following this argument, the cost of energy and in particular electricity storage will become crucial for a future energy system. Analysing the cost of electricity storage as Figure 1 shows bio-resources are an economically viable non-fossil way to stabilise electricity grids. They become particularly interesting when factoring in that capacity for compressed air energy storage as well as for pumped storage plants are limited and in many cases geographically distant from the generation of cheap wind power, necessitating large investment in grid infrastructure. While bio-resources may become too valuable for providing low temperature (residential) heat or even base load electricity, they may become an option with regard to stabilising the electricity grid. Providing just electricity however would run counter to the requirement of highest possible resource efficiency that is paramount when utilising limited and contested bioresources, even in the form of secondary and tertiary

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Li-Ion Batt. Methane Hydrogen CAES PSP Biogas

– – – – – –

Lithium-ion Battery Refers to methane generated by power-to-gas processes Produced by electrolysis Compressed Air Energy Storage Pump Storage of Power Produced from grass silage

Figure 1: Cost of energy storage with data from Deutsche Bank (2012) [15]

resources. As a matter of fact bio-resources can only be converted to electricity by oxidation, generating heat as a by-product. Resource efficiency requires that this heat must be utilised. It is also a fact that heat may be stored much cheaper than electricity, as low temperature heat can be stored with costs as low as 0.1 € ct/kWh [16]. This allows a de-coupling between electricity provision to stabilise the electricity grid and heat demand. Heat may however not be transported via long distance grids. This means that heat consumer and electricity generation from bio-resources have to be within short distance. This in turn results in a basic principle for energy systems that utilise bio-resources: such systems must link at least the electricity grid and local heat use and/or heat distribution grids in order to achieve the necessary resource efficiency to be sustainable: biobased energy technologies therefore should always be multivalent, meaning that they serve more than one energy form. The size of the installations is governed by transport limitations posed by resources and/or residues (like biogas manure) on the one hand and the quest for using all thermodynamically convertible energy on the other hand. In many cases this means that the size is limited by the heat demand that can be served by such an energy technology.

Resource efficiency of bio-energy systems can be even more augmented when they may serve an additional distribution system, namely the gas grid. Three-valent systems like biogas plants or Synthetic Natural Gas (SNG) plants may operate in continuous mode at optimum process conditions. Switching between different distribution systems allows them to stabilise grids while at the same time optimising economic revenue and using all energy contained in their resources up to thermodynamic limits. The argument for providing bio-based transport fuel is also based on the possibility to provide material energy carriers that may easily be stored. Currently this service is overwhelmingly provided by fossil oil, with the global share of bio-fuels currently at about 3% [17]. In addition to the arguments given above, considerations of energy density, weight of the storage system and range have to be taken into account. As more and more people concentrate in cities (the WHO expects 70% of the world population living in cities by 2050 [18]) the overall pattern of transport may change considerably, with public transport, bicycles and electric vehicles providing mobility in urban regions. Dispersed settlements like in rural areas, long distance individual mobility, air traffic as well as ships will however require stored energy with high energy density, quick charge and low emissions.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

There is no doubt that fossil fuel (oil as well as natural gas) will still provide a major share of this service for many decades to come. Besides that, synthetic fuel (hydrogen from electrolysis with surplus electricity as well as CO2 converted to methane with this hydrogen) will possibly provide a share, too. Bio-fuels from secondary and tertiary resources may become a viable alternative for this service in the long run. Still another service relevant for economic sustainability is the provision of heat. While low temperature residential heat can be provided sustainably by solar thermal units, ground heat pumps (using electricity for their operation) and off-heat from thermal electricity provision or industry (distributed via district heating grids in urban areas), the situation is however different for high temperature industrial heat. This service is currently covered by coal and natural gas, together with electricity for special applications (e.g. steel smelters). Alternatives on the base of renewable resources are however scarce. Although concentrated solar energy can reach high temperatures, this technology has considerable drawbacks. On the one hand it is only viable in places with high solar radiation and it shares periodic operation with all other direct solar technologies. On the other hand the large areas required directly at the site of energy production make this technology unwieldy for industrial applications. This opens the way for processed bio-resources like cleaned biogas and char coal that will have to contribute to the provision of high temperature industrial heat. It is obvious that bio-resource based services in general have clear advantages on the count of greenhouse gas emissions compared with fossil based services and in particular that bio-energy has a much lower ecological footprint than either fossil or nuclear energy provision technologies [19]. Following the argument given above, bio-resources are, however, no general solution for a sustainable energy system. Kettl et al. (2011) [19] show that bio-energy systems trail other renewable energy forms (e.g. wind and hydro power) in ecological performance. This means that also from an ecological point of view the application of bio-resources should be restricted to the services that cannot be provided economically and ecologically sensibly by other renewable sources, e.g. stabilising energy distribution grids and providing transport fuel and high temperature industrial heat.

5. Developing a sustainable bio–resource utilisation system Bio-resources are contextual resources. The generation of primary resources is dependent on a concrete ecosystem. Demand for resources as well as the generation of secondary resources is shaped by socio-

economic context. The decision how to sustainably balance the use of bio-resources is therefore only possible if the context is taken into account. This means that rules that guide such decisions have to be context related.

5.1. Rules for sustainable regional bio–resource utilisation Besides preserving or even improving ecological performance of land and providing nutrition, bioresources are the fundament for creation of sustainable jobs and wealth in rural regions. These are services that may not be provided by other resources and must therefore be given priority (within the framework established by the limits posed by eco-systems and the provision of food) before fulfilling other requests to bioresources. There is no general rule for providing these services. The pathway towards achieving the goal of sustainable regional development is dependent on a range of contextual parameters such as the existing economic structure (e.g. the existence of conventional sectors of bio-resource utilisation), the existence of markets for particular products and services as well as education and qualification levels in the region, to name the most prominent. Sustainable development requires that the utilisation of bio-resources becomes a major factor for spatial planning which in turn must take over a strong co-ordinating role balancing resource provision and consumption in the spatial context [20].

5.2. Heuristic guidelines The following paragraphs can be seen as heuristics guiding a regional discourse about utilising bioresources based on the properties, technological aspects and service provision priorities presented earlier in this article. They are particularly focussed on energy aspects. 5.2.1. “Refinerize” conventional sectors Bio-resources are the only possible basis for sectors that conventionally utilise wood and crops such as pulp & paper, timber or oils and fats industry but also the food sector. These sectors provide products that cannot easily be replaced by other goods or services and render decent profits along their value chain. Moreover such industries have established well organised logistical systems and provide jobs and income as well as skills and qualification for employees. Putting priority to serving these sectors is sensible and in the case of the food sector even obligatory.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• Many of these technologies separate large parts of the bio-resources that will not enter industrial life cycles (removing bark from timber, removing the press cake from silage in Green Bio-Refineries or oil presses, etc.) which may be utilised in the de-central energy systems themselves or returned to.

The sectors themselves, however, have to evolve into flexible bio-refinery systems based on their main resource but accommodating other (secondary) bioresources provided by their spatial and economic context. This strategy serves two objectives: • Employing existing logistic systems as well as skills and technological infrastructure to realising the rule of fully utilising sustainably available bioresources and • Offering a broader portfolio of goods and energy services from available bio-resources thus adding to the necessary flexibility of markets, accommodating possible shifts in preferences of consumers in a sustainable bio-based economy. This means that the function of conventional sector industrial sites in a bio-based economy will more and more resemble that of oil refineries in a fossil economy: transforming main resources into diverse products for many different markets. 5.2.2. Use intersections of distribution grids as means to fully utilise bio–resources Technologies that treat secondary and tertiary bioresources in a way that the major part of their material products are re-integrated into the ecosphere are “rear guard technologies” of societal utilisation of bioresources. Such rear guard technologies like combustion and bio-gas have a narrow product portfolio: combustion provides heat, heat and power (in case of CHP) and biogas can be up-graded to bio-methane or used in a CHP to generate heat and power. All these products may be distributed via distribution grids. The optimum location for these technologies therefore is where these grids intersect [21]. 5.2.3. Implement de-central bio–refineries The necessary proximity of heat users to two- or trivalent bio-energy providers gives raise to another type of bio-refinery: de-central bio-refineries converting secondary or under-utilised bio-resources to intermediate “platform” materials, improving quality and transport properties of these bio-resources. This approach pursues three objectives: • Technologies transforming bio-resources to platform products more often than not require large amounts of heat (for drying as well as process heat). This provides stable demand for heat as the low-end service of de-central biobased energy systems thus utilising bio-resources fully.

• These bio-refineries add considerable value to the bio-resources directly at the region of their emergence, thus providing jobs and social stability.

6. Conclusion The arguments presented in this paper are based on the assumption that future global development will be oriented according to the concept of strong sustainability. This particular development pathway is however only one of possible ways human society may structure its future. Sustainable development in itself is not a mandatory continuation of our current economic system and requires without doubt political will and profound societal change on a global scale for its implementation. The further human society moves towards sustainable development, however, the more important a bio-based economy will become. This calls for rational management of bio-resources as particularly valuable renewable resources. The approach offered in this paper proposes to balance the use of bio-resources taking their spatial, natural and economic context into account. Transport matters much more for bio-resources than for fossil resources that compete with them in many industrial or energy applications. Moreover quality and quantity of bio-resources are dependent on the natural endowment in a region. This means that decisions about utilisation of bio-resources must always be taken within a concrete regional. Given the complex technological possibilities and logistical considerations this often requires the help of planning instruments like RegiOpt (2011) [22], which software is available from Fussabdrucksrechner (2014) [23]. Utilising bio-resources may not only be a chance to reduce ecological pressures but also to improve societal and economic development in many European regions.

References [1]

European Sustainable Energy Innovation Alliance (ESEIA), 2014: www.eseia.eu/wg1/, from this web page the “discourse book” resulting from this Europe wide expert discourse may be downloaded. [accessed November 2014].

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[2] Favennec, J.-P., 2011: The Geopolitics of Energy. Éditions Technip, ISBN: 9782710809708, ifp Energies nouvelles Publications, Paris. [3] Yergin, D., 2011: The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. Penguin Press, New York. [4] EC (European Commission), 2007 a: Limiting Global Climate Change to 2 degrees Celsius- The way ahead for 2020 and beyond. COM(2007) 2 final, EC, Brussels. [5] EC (European Commission), 2007 b: A European Strategic Energy Technology Plan (SET-PLAN)Towards a Low Carbon Future. COM(2007) 723 final , EC, Brussels. [6] Taste of Sustainability, http://www.tasteofsustainability.com, based on FAO data http://faostat.fao.org/site/609/DesktopDefault.as px?PageID=609#ancor [accessed December 2014]. [7] Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0350e/i0350e0 2a.pdf for more information. [accessed December 2014]. [8] Zhu, X.-G., Long, St.P., Ort, D.R., 2008: What is the maximum efficiency with which photosynthesis can convert solar energy into biomass? Current Opinion in Biotechnology, 19, 153–159. [9] Beer, C., Reichstein, M., Tomelleri, E., Ciais, P., Jung, M., Carvalhais, N., Rödenbeck, C., Arain, M.A., Baldocchi, D., Bonan, G.B., Bondeau, A., Cescatti, A., Lasslop, G., Lindroth, A., Lomas, M., Luyssaert, S., Margolis, H., Oleson, K.W., Roupsard, O., Veenendaal, E., Viovy, N., Williams, C., Woodward, F.I. and Papale, D., 2010: Terrestrial Gross Carbon Dioxide Uptake: Global Distribution and Covariation with Climate. Science, 329 (5993), 834–838. [10] Haberl, H., Erb, K.-H., Krausmann, F., Gaube, V., Bondeau, A., Plutzar, Ch., Gingrich, S., Lucht, W., Fischer-Kowalski, M., 2007: Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in earth’s terrestrial ecosystems, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 104 (31), 12942-12947. [11] Harveya, M., Pilgrimb, S., 2011: The new competition for land: Food, energy, and climate change, Food Policy, The challenge of global food sustainability, Volume 36, Supplement 1, January 2011, Pages S40–S51, DOI: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2010.11.009.

[12] Gwehenberger, G., Narodoslawsky, M., 2008. Sustainable processes — The challenge of the 21st century for chemical engineering, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 86 (5), 321-327. [13] Gosh, B.B., Banerjee, A.K., 1984: Production of single cell protein from hydrocarbons by arthrobacter simplex 162. Folio Microbiol., 29, 222226. [14] Kettl, K. H., 2012. Evaluation of energy technology systems based on renewable resources, Ph.D. thesis, Technische Universität Graz, S. 186. [15] Deutsche Bank, 2012: State-of-the-art electricity storage systems, accessible from http://www.dbresearch.com/PROD/DBR_INTERN ET_EN-PROD/PROD0000000000286166/State-ofthe%20art+electricity+storage+systems%3A+Indis pensable+elements+of+the+energy+r%20evolutio n.pdf. [accessed December 2014]. [16] International Energy Agency’s Energy Technology Systems Analysis Programme & International Renewable Energy Agency (IEA-ETSAP & IRENA), 2013: Thermal Energy Storage – Technology Brief, accessible via http://www.irena.org/DocumentDownloads/Publi cations/IRENAETSAP%20Tech%20Brief%20E17%20Thermal%20E nergy%20Storage.pdf [accessed December 2014]. [17] International Energy Agency, data accessible from http://www.iea.org/topics/biofuels/. [accessed December 2014]. [18] World Health Organization, data accessible from http://www.who.int/gho/urban_health/situation_ trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/. [accessed December 2014]. [19] Kettl, K.-H., Niemetz, N., Sandor, N.K., Eder, M., Narodoslawsky, M., 2011: Ecological Impact of Renewable Resource-Based Energy Technologies. Journal of fundamentals of renewable energy and applications, 1, doi:10.4303/jfrea/R101101. [20] Stoeglehner, G., Niemetz, N., Kettl, K.-H., 2011: Spatial dimensions of sustainable energy systems: new visions for integrated spatial and energy planning. Energy, Sustainability and Society, 1, 1-9. [21] Stoeglehner, G., Narodoslawsky, M., 2012: Integrated optimization of spatial structures and energy systems. In: Stremke, S., Van den Dobbelsteen, A., Sustainable Energy Landscapes: Designing, Planning and Development. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[22] Kettl, K.-H., Niemetz, N., Sandor, N. K., Eder, M., Heckl, I., Narodoslawsky, M., 2011: Regional Optimizer (RegiOpt) – Sustainable energy technology network solutions for regions, Computer Aided Chemical Engineering, DOI:10.1016/B978-0-444-54298-4.50170-7.

[23] RegiOpt software, available from www.fussabdrucksrechner.at. [accessed December 2014].

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DOI: 10.14621/ce.20150106

Independent Review of NPP Modifications and Safety Upgrades Davor Grgić*, Vesna Benčik, Siniša Šadek, Ivica Bašić1 Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing, University of Zagreb Unska 3, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia, davor.grgic@fer.hr 1 APOSS d.o.o., Repovec 23B, Zabok, Croatia

Abstract

1. Introduction

In order to fulfil operational and safety requirements nuclear power plants are often subjected to modifications and safety upgrades. That is especially true for old generation plants where power uprate and replacement of obsolete equipment play important role. Overview of experience acquired during recent reviews of RTD Bypass Elimination modification and PARs and Passive Containment Filtered Vent introduction in frame of nuclear power plant Krsko safety upgrade project was presented.

In order to fulfil operational and safety requirements nuclear power plants (NPPs) are often subjected to modifications and safety upgrades. That is especially true for old generation plants where power uprate and replacement of obsolete equipment play an important role. The changes affecting safety or licensing status of the plant are usually subjected to independent review as part of licensing process or as a support in regulatory body decision making process. After Fukushima accident many plants initiated safety upgrades to improve robustness in case of extreme weather and other site specific phenomena. Such upgrades are more challenging, are based on newly established design extended conditions, require information on equipment survivability, and include severe accident analyses. All this makes independent reviews both more important and more difficult.

Keywords:

NPP safety upgrade, Modification, independent reviews and analyses

Article history:

Received: 02 February 2015 Revised: 17 February 2015 Accepted: 20 February 2015

For small countries and small organizations it is rather difficult to provide required multidisciplinary analyses and to maintain required knowledge for small number of unique requests. In such situation there are some benefits found in research institutes and universities where active research is present covering different problems related to NPP safety, and where intensive exchange of information with related foreign institutions is maintained. Another important aspect is active cooperation of different organizations sharing required knowledge in performing independent analyses and reviews. Overview of experience acquired during recent reviews of Resistance Temperature Detector Bypass Elimination (RTDBE) modification [1] and Passive Autocatalytic Recombiners (PARs) [2] and Passive Containment Filtered Vent (PCFV) [3] introduction in frame of NPP Krsko Safety Upgrade Program (SUP) was presented.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ D. Grgić, V. Benčik, S. Šadek, I. Bašić: “Independent Review of NPP Modifications and Safety Upgrades”, pp. 41–51

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Overview of modifications review process In order to show some of the problems related to review of plant modifications, as well as to highlight required type of knowledge and potential benefits of review process (beyond formal licensing support), overview of the review process for three modifications/safety upgrades implemented in NPP Krsko will be presented. First example is modification of existing system to improve plant operation and maintenance within existing licensing design base. Two additional examples are related to safety upgrade program used to improve plant safety for design extended conditions and beyond design accidents. In all three cases multidisciplinary knowledge was required ranging from reactor physics and radiation shielding, to heat transfer, safety analyses, severe accident calculation, mechanical and structural engineering and I&C. University of Zagreb Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Computing (FER) had overall responsibility for review and for integration of results of other institutions. University of Ljubljana Faculty of Civil and Geodetic Engineering (FGG) was responsible for seismic and structural analyses of PAR and PCFV modifications. Three small engineering and consulting companies (INKO Ljubljana and APOSS Zabok in case of PAR and PCFV modifications, and ENCONET Zagreb and APOSS Zabok in case of RTDBE modification) provided specific plant knowledge (knowledge of equipment, systems and plant procedures) and support during intensive walk down activity.

2.1. RTD bypass elimination modification Two concepts of Reactor Coolant System (RCS) coolant temperature measurements exist, RTD bypass concept (small auxiliary piping and manifold mounted RTDs), and thermowell mounted RTDs concept (RTDs immersed directly in hot and cold legs) [4]. Each approach has some benefits and drawbacks. Main benefits of RTD bypass elimination should be easier operation and maintenance due to elimination of small piping and related valves, and associated manipulation and adjustment during refuelling outage. From point of view of measurement accuracy and delay of measured temperature compared to real fluid temperature both concepts could achieve similar performance. In case of RTD bypass additional delay is mainly due to transport delay in small piping and to the smaller extent due to delay in RTD response. In case without bypass, transport delay is eliminated, but response of thermowell mounted RTD is slower (thermal inertia). In first case additional influence is present due to heat loss in small piping (larger surface to volume ratio) connecting hot leg and RTD manifold, making measured temperature different from RCS temperature.

RCS temperature measurement is additionally complicated due to hot leg streaming (HLS). Thermal stratification in hot leg pipe (often called hot leg streaming) of PWR plant is caused by different heating of core fluid streams in fuel assemblies having different power production. Calculated NPP Krsko reactor core exit coolant temperatures (C) are shown in Figure 1. Fluid streams having different temperature at core exit, after some mixing in outer plenum, enter hot leg pipe. Any perpendicular plane downstream hot leg nozzle will have some kind of 2D temperature distribution and temperature measured by immersed RTD will depend on circumferential position and insertion depth of RTD detector. In order to get representative average temperature of hot leg water typically 3 different measurement positions were used. Due to mixing influence of reactor coolant pumps the problem is usually not present in cold leg pipes. Hot leg streaming presence is independent of type of measurement, but in RTD bypass case sampling streams are hydraulically mixed and then average temperature is measured using multiple RTDs, and in case without bypass averaging has to be done electronically using signals obtained from different positions on circumference of the pipe. That can make second approach more sensitive to temperature oscillations. In order to have two independent channels per loop, number of sampling points was increased to six, but two obtained measurements for hot leg temperature are not taken from the same place at the circumference of the pipe and are not the same (due to HLS). Measured temperature signal is used both in control and protection system and additionally it is used in calorimetric procedure during determination and correction of measured reactor mass flow rate. Related flow uncertainties are dependent on uncertainties present in prediction of average fluid temperature and they depend on circumferential profiles of coolant temperature in hot leg pipes. NPP Krsko was changed way of RCS coolant temperature measurement from RTD bypass to thermowell mounted RTDs as part of NEK RTD Bypass Elimination project to improve operation and maintenance. The modification includes hardware changes (removal of existing RTD bypass piping and support, making new holes in hot and cold legs, modification of existing hot leg scoops, introduction of thermowell mounted RTDs, changes in process cabinets), changes in control and protection system (new narrow range RCS temperature measurement system processing, changes in rod control system constants, and redefinition of Over Temperature DeltaT (OTDT) and Over Power DeltaT (OPDT) protection set points). Modification covered additional things not directly related to RTDBE: changes in steam line pressure low set point (lead-lag controller time constants) and associated engineering safety features

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 1: Core-wide coolant exit temperatures calculated by RELAP5-PARCS coupled code

response times, and changes in steam dump system and additional optimization. As direct or indirect consequences of described changes, Safety Analyses Report (SAR) and Technical Specifications (TS) were changed too. As we can see the modification includes small change in mechanical components, introduction of rather simple changes in I&C system, and analytical part needed to verify response of control and protections systems. From point of view of analytical effort that was largest activity after power uprate of the plant and replacement of steam generators.

• Electronic averaging and way how channels are organized can cause oscillations in Thot (proposed design solution: filtered signals and changed OTDT/OPDT protection), • Initial design of the system (compensation of Tcold signal) is judged to be sensitive to overcooling transients, • Additional possible complication present in signal conditioning is need for bias constants in two channels averaging process, proposed solution was found acceptable,

Main findings of RTDBE modification review evaluation can be summarized as follows:

• Possibility for dual RTD failure is covered by analysis and additional reconfiguration of system if needed,

• Proposed solution is rather common for 3 and 4loops PWRs, additional insight is needed for 2loopers,

• RCS pressure boundary integrity is not negatively influenced by proposed RTDBE modification, and

• Conservative HLS profiles were used due to lack of experience with 2-loop plants, • Used electronic equipment and RTDs are of proven design, • Temperature recalculated,

uncertainties

were

properly

• Fluid structure interaction for directly immersed RTDs is implicitly covered (based on NPP Vandellos experience),

• New OPDT and OTDT set points provide adequate protection of the plant. In order to perform the evaluation the knowledge of the present status of the plant and related analyses performed earlier, as well as information on similar attempts in other countries were needed. Some additional independent calculations were performed to support evaluation process. We used CFD (FLUENT [5]) calculation to determine approximate HLS profiles for different plant fuel cycles and operational conditions. Initial information, coolant temperatures at the exit of

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

each fuel channel, is coming from whole core PARCS [6] calculation, Figure 1. The maximum core exit coolant temperature difference is influenced by selected fuel loading pattern (different fuel cycles were analysed), cycle burnup (usually beginning of the cycle was limiting) and assumed core coolant flow rate (best estimate and thermal design flow rate). Hot leg temperature distribution calculated for beginning of one of the plant fuel cycles is shown in Figure 2. O1 to O3 are used to label existing (old) RTD positions and N1 to N3 to label new RTD position (second channel per loop). It is clear that measured temperature depends on RTD position and insertion depth (black lines were used to show RTD positions, and black circles to show influence of insertion depth). The calculation was used to compensate for not enough information available on RTD bypass elimination in two-loop plants, and to clarify some measurement results related to temperature gradients for 18-months cycles and low leakage fuel patterns. As a consequence of this activity additional conservatism was introduced in temperature gradients used in modification design. The measurements performed during system commissioning showed that HLS gradients obtained with CFD calculation were conservatively high. In order to check applicability of new RCS temperature measurements and protection set points, independent calculations were performed as part of the review for Rod Withdrawal at Power (RWAP), rod drop, Main Steam Line Break (MSLB, spectrum of breaks), and load rejection transients. RELAP5 [7] and RELAP5 coupled to PARCS were used for calculation.

In Figure 3 calculated measured and compensated temperature differences for loops 1 and 2 (DT1 and DT2) were shown together with OPDT protection set points, for small break SLB. Labels rtdb and rtdbe were used to mark situation before and after modification, and leadlag, and lag 2 and 7 s were used to mark different Tcold compensations used after RTDBE. Small break SLB has

Figure 2: Hot leg temperature distribution and RTD positions

N E K M SL B A R -02 0.0304 m2 45 40 35 30

D T (K )

25 20

DT1 rtdb SL DT2 rtdb SL DT1 rtdb DT2 rtdb DT1 rtdbe lead-lag DT2 rtdbe lead-lag DT1 rtdbe lag 2 s DT2 rtdbe lag 2 s OPDT1 DT1 rtdbe lag 7 s OPDT2 DT2 rtdbe lag 7 s

15 10 5 0 -5 0

25 T I M E (sec)

Figure 3: Setpoint response during MSLB for different OPDT implementations ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ D. Grgić, V. Benčik, S. Šadek, I. Bašić: “Independent Review of NPP Modifications and Safety Upgrades”, pp. 41–51

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

characteristics of slow reactivity initiated accident and intervention in OPDT protection can delay plant trip (as shown in Figure 3). As we said, the runs were performed using nodalization of the plant before and after modification. That way modification impact was checked without performing licencing type of the calculation (that was done by vendor). Within review just quantitative change influenced by modification was checked. Containment response for relevant accidents was analysed using GOTHIC [8] calculations. General conclusion was that influence of the changes due to RTDBE was small. Rest of the potential problems were assessed during start-up measurements. Thot oscillations were less than expected, as well as expected streaming gradients. One of the things not properly taken into account in initial review was sensitivity of the cards in protection cabinets to ElectroMagnetic (EM) environment that exist in control room during relay manipulation in some auxiliary plant systems. The review was based on the assumption that the electronic equipment was replaced with the same components and with the same card design. Old cards were not tested from point of view of Electromagnetic Compatibility and that was not required for new cards too. The combination of small changes in card design and sensitivity of newly introduced lead-lag Tcold compensation resulted in inadvertent OPDT trip of the plant at the power close to the nominal power. Improved design using lag compensation, verified by calculation, instead of lead-lag Tcold compensation solved the problem. This was example where careful review was able to recognise weakness of the proposed initial solution, but not all aspects of the problem (design was sensitive both to overcooling events and EM noise). The final result of the modification is reliable operation of the plant with easier maintenance and decreased doses to maintenance personnel. Most of the safety analyses performed as part of the review were done by FER. The definition of relevant scenarios, review of the documentation and changes in plant procedures, and overview of hardware changes implementation were done by small engineering companies (APOSS and ENCONET) having people with required knowledge and experience. Taking into account different type of work needed to cover all aspects of this modification review, the benefit of this kind of cooperation is obvious.

2.2. Safety Upgrade Program PAR installation NPP Krsko was capable for safe operation within current licensing limits for all internal and external events. Plant had implemented hydrogen control for all Design Bases Accidents (DBAs) using redundant electrical hydrogen recombiners. They rely on availability of electrical power and are not able to provide satisfactory protection for

severe accident conditions. Beyond design bases accidents were addressed only through plant specific Emergency Operating Procedures (EOPs) and Severe Accident Management Guidelines (SAMGs). As part of post Fukushima actions, and due to additional requirements introduced by Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration (SNSA), the plant decided to introduce PARs. The installation of Passive Autocatalytic Recombiners should prevent dangerous concentration of combustible gases and mitigate the consequences of hydrogen and carbon monoxide presence inside the containment even in a case of core melt and core concrete interaction. As part of the modification NPP Krsko eliminated existing safety related electrical recombiners, and replaced them with two safety related PARs (DBA). Additional 20 non-safety related PARs were installed to ensure containment integrity for Design Extension Conditions (DEC) and for Beyond Design Basis Accident (BDBA) conditions. Independent review was performed as part of licensing process. The review was specific due to passive nature of proposed safety upgrade and due to need to address DEC conditions (the conditions that are more challenging/severe than original conditions used in plant design) for equipment design and installation. The findings that follow illustrate nature of the performed review. PARs are passive devices and their impact to existing systems and structures should be minimal. They are not introducing materials that can affect hydrogen generation or debris forming. Their impact on containment free volume and metal mass is approximately neutral taking into account removal of existing electrical recombiners. They are seismically designed and tested (as well as their supports), and probability of their drop or collapse is negligible up to and including DEC conditions. The impact of PARs to structures supporting them is evaluated for DEC conditions that include 0.6g Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) and corresponding seismic response spectra. The impact is small due to their small mass compared to mass of structures supporting them. The robustness and adequacy of PARs were tested using shaking table with appropriate excitation. The supports were evaluated using analytical tools (FEM model), and that performed calculation showed required robustness of the design. Impact of hot gases exiting PARs is limited due to selection of their location, shape of PAR outlet, and limited exhaust temperature (250 to 350 C depending on H2 concentration at time of actuation) and flow rate. Still, screening analysis was performed for cable trays above PAR at selected locations and additional protection was provided. PARs are designed for DBA and DEC environmental conditions in containment. Due to used material they are not sensitive to temperature, radiation or pressure. Catalyst surface is protected by hydrophobic polymer. The polymer is able to sustain

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

environmental conditions in containment up to the first PAR actuation and after that it is probably destroyed, but its presence is not needed anymore. There is no DBA accident being able to develop ambient temperature to damage the polymer. Taking into account PARs position they are exposed to limited radiation doses to polymer coating during normal operation and effect of selfshielding is present for all situations (streaming) except for airborne radioactivity (limited influence during normal operation and DBA accidents). The locations selected for PARs guarantee that they are not exposed to direct mechanical, high temperature or jet impact from other systems. They can’t be immersed in water and due to its high elevation only gases and aerosols are candidates to enter PAR enclosure. Top of the PAR is protected from direct spray influence that can bring boron and other chemical to active catalyst surface. The locations of two safety related PARs are shown in Figure 4 (small green boxes are PARs, PCFV

Iodine filters are light blue boxes close to fan cooler ducts). PARs of similar design with the same catalyst material are installed in other NPPs (in Germany and USA) and are supported by extensive experimental program. Representative experimental conditions are used (to the extent possible – there is no test being able to produce exact atmosphere composition as the one present during real severe accident, but most important catalyst poisons were present). The vendor of the PARs is present in that business since the beginning and has big experience in that area. Two safety related PARs are able to replace existing electrical recombiners for DBAs (LOCA). We have performed independent calculation and the requirement to keep hydrogen concentration is fulfilled with margin. Obtained recombination rate (GOTHIC code was used for calculation) is lower than the one obtained by vendor. They used experimentally based correlation dependent solely on conditions in the volume where PAR is located. In GOTHIC calculation PAR was located on flow path and recombination depends on developed flow due to natural convection. In Figure 5 H2 concentration is shown for post-LOCA hydrogen build up used in SAR Chapter 6 DBA calculation. The cases are shown for concentration with (er) and without electrical recombiner actuation (nor), and for different number of PARs (par, 2par, 22par), for actuation after one day (1d), for actuation when H2 concentration reached 3.5% (vf35) and for reduced recombination efficiency. In our calculation, contrary to vendor calculation, PARs were not so effective in H2 removal as electrical recombiners, but in all cases they were more than able to keep peek H2 concentration below required 4%.

Figure 4: PAR locations in NPP Krsko containment

Sizing calculation performed by vendor estimated required number of PARs in conservative way. The protection was based on oxygen “starvation” approach. When we did reverse calculation (GOTHIC calculation with MAAP [9] combustible gas production or standalone MELCOR [10] calculation), decreasing number of PARs (less than 20) was showing only limited decrease in reacted combustible gas (or depleted oxygen) mass. In Figure 6 H2 recombination rate for safety related PAR Station Black Out (SBO) sequence is shown, for different number of PARs (only two safety related or all 22 PARs), with and without reactor containment fan coolers (with condensation (fan coolers in operation) higher H2 concentration was experienced). The effective H2 concentration reduction was demonstrated for analysed accident sequences when all installed PARs are available.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 5: DBA post-LOCA H2 mass

Figure 6: SBO sequence H2 recombination rate for PAR01

Beside independent calculations review resulted in some suggestions for changes in PAR locations, and additional protection of PARs during regular refuelling/maintenance in containment. One of the reviewer’s suggestions was to keep and extend functionality of H2 monitors to DEC conditions even after

PARs introduction, due to possible side effects of used oxygen starvation approach. The suggestion was not completely supported by the plant. Most of the safety analyses performed as part of the review were again done by FER. FER was responsible for

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

plant walk downs too. MAAP severe accident calculations were done by APOSS as well as evaluation of modification influence to SAMG procedures. FGG did evaluation of all seismic responses and stress calculations. INKO evaluated selection of DEC conditions and influence to licensing documents and did review of project documentation. Again, different knowledge available to different members of the team was valuable advance of this kind of cooperation.

2.3. Safety Upgrade Program PCFV installation The installation of Passive Containment Filtered Vent System was another measure initiated as part of NPP Krsko safety upgrade program. It should ensure containment integrity (preclude pressures that can challenge containment integrity) during Design Extension Conditions and Beyond Design Basis Accidents. To provide depressurization of containment while minimizing releases of radioactive particles to the environment NEK installed five aerosol filters inside containment, one iodine filter in auxiliary building and associated piping equipped with rupture disc, valves, expansion orifices and instrumentation. The venting gas first passes (from right to left in Figure 7) the aerosol filter modules and leaves the containment via piping through a containment penetration, passes to the iodine

filter and discharges to the environment through the stack (top of the figure). When evaluating modifications influencing plant behaviour in DEC and BDBA conditions, clear regulatory requirements present in the case of plant licensing for DBA, are usually not available. The modification should be evaluated from point of view of interaction with existing plant licensing base and is it able to fulfil stated protection goals for plant and environment. In case of PCFV modification our findings were as follows. PCFV system is and should be passive and that to largest amount limits its interaction with other plant systems. The influence due to additional mass of heavy components and piping should be properly addressed up to and including DEC seismic event. Containment isolation function should be kept. New isolation configuration for line penetrating containment (two valves in series outside containment) is introduced in the plant and all isolation valves should be covered with leakage testing. PCFV containment penetration and redesigned PCFV plant stack are not affected by DEC seismic event due to relative AB and RB displacement. Additional source of radioactivity is introduced in AB after PCFV actuation, but its influence is small compared to potential benefits.

Figure 7: PCFV system layout ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ D. Grgić, V. Benčik, S. Šadek, I. Bašić: “Independent Review of NPP Modifications and Safety Upgrades”, pp. 41–51

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The adequacy of MAAP model used in analyses by vendor (model was not described in detail) was found acceptable when supported by reviewer’s independent calculations (MAAP and MELCOR). The analyses were based on SBO sequences and that accident was found to be acceptable as limiting sequence. If active PCFV usage is planned, it was our position that, other sequences should be covered too. A detailed radiological analysis of the offsite doses was missing, but verification of the main requirement (release to the environment shall be <0.1% of reactor core fission products inventory) was implicitly fulfilled by design of the system (cumulative decontamination factor of filters). In order to use PCFV in active mode (below rupture disc opening pressure), our position was that, explicit calculation of radiological consequences is needed. As consequence of that, the system was approved only in passive mode till fulfilment of the requirement. That is because PCFV actuation at lower pressure can influence current licensing base (currently there is no radiological effluents, except design containment leakage, if the containment is intact, and it should be below rupture disc opening pressure). It was recommended to provide radiological impact analysis for passive mode of PCFV operation, too (noble gases are always discharged), and that was done by plant after modification implementation. It was our position that the design and operation of aerosol filters (metal fibre) was supported by number of experiments. That includes retention capability and heat transfer used to cool the filters. For Iodine filter, experimental support is mainly limited to retention capabilities of active material (Zeolite). We have found that most important factors, like decontamination factors and retention capabilities were covered by performed experiments and Factory Acceptance Testing (FAT). Our position was that aerosol filters are robust enough and that Iodine filter with Zeolite is potential weak point due to requirements for specific inert conditions for active material after installation. That can question (maintenance of N2 pressure within iodine filter and related surveillance) passive nature of the system. Important part of the review was shielding review for the Iodine filter located in AB. The filter is acting as a heat source after PCFV actuation, but that is of less importance taking into account rather large volume and open connections of the room where it is located. Used aerosol metal filters and Iodine filters (and related shielding) are rather heavy. Important part of the review was need to check allowable loads of civil structures and seismic response during DEC conditions (DBA and DEC spectra with PGA of 0.6g). From point of view of PCFV integrity, most attention was paid to the locations where PCFV piping connects two buildings (RB and AB), due to their relative motion during seismic event. The seismic and environmental impact on PCFV stack

outside containment was addressed properly both in design and in review process. During review process additional requirements were stated for locations where PCFV piping penetrates roof/floor concrete slabs (sleeve and seals). As part of the review we asked for strict testing (leakage testing using appropriate pressure difference, at least up to DBA conditions) of all valves and rupture disk which are acting as containment isolation boundary. That should be taken into account both in design of the system and in the plant testing procedures. Radiological monitor and flow measurement in exhaust PCFV stack were requested as part of PCFV design. It was not possible to do that in passive way and it was not implemented initially. It was our suggestion to provide the measurement with appropriate active system. Finally it should be mentioned that implementation of such modification/system in existing plant is difficult task which need proper planning and enough time for implementation. In case of NPP Krsko rather big effort was needed to implement the modification on time and some changes in project were needed during realization due to limited available time for preparation of the modification. The review was supported by independent calculations of containment and PCFV response using MAAP, MELCOR and RELAP5 (PCFV piping). In addition some CFD (FLUENT) calculations were performed for distribution of the PCFV discharge outside ventilation duct. In Figure 8 velocity streamlines of the discharged fluid for specific wind conditions and simplified plant building arrangement were shown. Tasks distribution between organizations participating in the review was similar to the one described in the case of PAR modification review.

3. Conclusion Independent review of NPP modifications and safety upgrades can be, depending on type of modification, very challenging process. It requires multidisciplinary knowledge and at least familiarity with plant systems and procedures. There are important differences between upgrades of existing systems within current licensing basis and introduction of safety upgrades to provide protection from BDBA events. It is rather difficult to maintain expertize required for safety reviews in small countries and for small number of nuclear objects. One approach can be to join capabilities of universities, research institutes and small consulting companies having required diversity of knowledge. The safety review, if properly prepared, can be not just part of formal licensing, but can improve and optimize modification itself.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 8: PCFV duct discharge, velocity streamlines and pressure contours

Acknowledgements The authors gratefully acknowledge the work done by other members of review team, as well as the support provided by NPP Krsko and Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration, and active cooperation of Westinghouse Electric Company, vendor of the equipment, systems and services, during modifications review process.

Abbreviations AB BDBA DBA DEC EM EMC EOP

– – – – – – –

Auxiliary Building Beyond Design Basis Accident Design Basis Accident Design Extension Condition Electro-Magnetic Electro-Magnetic Compatibility Emergency Operating Procedure

FAT FER FGG HLS FEM LOCA MSLB NEK NPP OPDT OTDT PAR PCFV PGA PWR RB RCS RTD

– Factory Acceptance Testing – Fakultet Elektrotehnike i Računarstva Zagreb – Fakulteta za Gradbeništvo in Geodezijo Ljubljana – Hot Leg Streaming – Finite Element Method – Loss of Coolant Accident – Main Steam Line Break – Nuclear power plant Krško – Nuclear Power Plant – Over Power DeltaT – Over Temperature DeltaT – Passive Autocatalytic Recombiner – Passive Containment Filtered Vent – Peak Ground Acceleration – Pressurized Water Reactor – Reactor Building – Reactor Coolant System – Resistance Temperature Detector

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

RTDBE – Resistance Temperature Detector Bypass Elimination RWAP – Rod Withdrawal at Power SAMG – Severe Accident Management Guidelines – Safety Analysis Report SAR – Station BlackOut SBO SNSA – Slovenian Nuclear Safety Administration – Safety Upgrade Program SUP – Technical Specifications TS

References [1] Bajs, T., Bašić, I., Benčik, V., Grgić, D., Independent Evaluation Report of "Krško RCS Temperature Measurement Optimization", FER-ZVNE-FR01/130, Zagreb, 2013. [2] Bilić-Zabric, T., Bašić, I., Grgić, D., Independent Evaluation Report of "Severe Accident Hydrogne Control System (PAR)", FER-ZVNE-FR02/13-0, Zagreb, 2013. [3] Bilić-Zabric, T., Bašić, I., Grgić, D., Final Independent Evaluation Report of "Passive Containment Filtered Vent (PCFV) System", FERZVNE-FR03/13-0, Zagreb, 2013.

[4] Hashemian, H.M., Maintenance of Process Instrumentation in Nuclear Power Plants, SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2006. [5] ANSYS FLUENT User's Guide, ANSYS, Inc., Release 14.5, October 2012. [6] Downar, T., Lee, D., Xu, Y., Kozlowski, T., PARCS v2.6 U.S. NRC Core Neutronics Simulator User Manual, School of Nuclear Engineering, Purdue University, 2004. [7] RELAP5/mod3.3 User’s Manual, NUREG/CE5535/Rev 1, Information Systems Laboratories, Inc., Rockville-Maryland, Idaho Falls-Idaho, January 2002. [8] GOTHIC Containment Analysis Package, Technical Manual, Version 7.2b(QA), NAI 8907-06 Rev 17, March 2009. [9] MAAP4 User’s Manual, Electric Power Research Institute, 1994. [10] MELCOR Computer Code Manuals, Vol. 2: Reference Manual, NUREG/CR-6119, December 2000.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DOI: 10.14621/ce.20150107

Shared Radwaste Repository – Do we need Update in International Law? Borut Stražišar ARAO Celovška cesta 182, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia, borut.strazisar@arao.si

Abstract

1. Introduction

In construction and use of nuclear power plants we could see the cycles of ups and downs. These cycles are connected to regional political situations, financial crisis, natural disasters and accidents in power plants. Use of atomic energy is mainly an economic question but, due to consequences of involuntary radiation from this form of energy, also political question. Nuclear power plants operation post numerous problems about their safety and security. All these questions are short term questions and concern only the generation that gains from their production. And all these questions could be resolved at the time they arise and with the use of knowledge available at that time. Greater problem presents the question of radioactive waste management. Radioactive waste problem would affect not only the generation that gains from nuclear power plants production but also some next generations that wouldn’t have any gains from the power plant. The main question about radioactive waste is whether such material should be treated as a waste or a secondary raw material. Some things which from today’s technology are treated as a waste, tomorrow could be reused. One of the law-political question is the appropriate regulation of radioactive waste management and its storage or disposal. Because of high costs (including the environmental rent) of radioactive waste management, there is a tendency to promote shared radwaste repositories for several countries. This tendency is seen also in EU directives that regulate the radioactive waste. Submission is divided in four parts.

Despite some nuclear accidents (Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima) nuclear energy is still remains highly recommended option to solve energy needs of modern society. Nuclear power plants post numerous daily problems about their safety and security. All these questions are short term questions and concern only the generation that gains from their production. And all these questions could be resolved at the time they arise and with the use of knowledge available at that time. Greater problem presents radioactive waste management. Radioactive waste problem would affect not only the generation that gains from nuclear power plants production but also some next generations that wouldn’t have any gains.

First part presents the regulation of radioactive waste management within international legal system. It displays main principles and ideas of radioactive waste management within international agreements and EU regulations. Second part deals with conflict between the obligation of safe radioactive waste management and right of local population to clean and safe living environment. This part presents also court cases from European court of human rights (from here on ECHR) that deals with the right to clean environment. There are more and more court decisions in which ECHR recognizes that one of basic human rights is also a right to clean and safe environment. So these cases could mean the difficulties to find the proper location for the power plant and also the repository. Third part deals with the ideal of shared radwaste repositories. Such idea could be tempting, because the costs of building and maintaining such repository could be lower than in a cases where each county (even with small nuclear program) make its own repository. On the other hand such solutions could hide some troubles. There is a mismatch between the conventions and international agreements that regulate responsibility for environmental damage and conventions and agreements that allow the possibility for common repositories. Problem is presented also through analysis of bilateral agreement between Slovenia and Croatia in the field of responsibility for nuclear waste from Krško’s power plant. Fourth part deals with the possible legal solutions that could solve the abovementioned mismatch.

On the international level the problem of radioactive waste management is regulated by two main legal documents:

Keywords:

Radioactive waste management, Legal responsibility, Human rights, Environmental law, Repositories

Article history:

Received: 02 February 2015 Revised: 16 February 2015 Accepted: 20 February 2015

• The Joint Conventioni on the Safety of Spent Fuel Management and on the Safety of Radioactive Waste Management – the first legal instrument to directly address these issues on a global scale;ii • Council Directive 2011/70/Euratom of 19 July 2011 establishing a Community framework for the responsible and safe management of spent fuel and radioactive waste – regulation for EU member states. Both legal documents addresses the problem of radioactive waste management in same way. The main principles, regarding the subject of this article, of both international legal documents could be summarized in following statements: • The main responsibility for the radioactive waste is on licence holder – state responsibility for such waste management is secondary;

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ B. Strazisar: “Shared Radwaste Repository – Do we need Update in International Law?”, pp. 52–59

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

• Member states should implement internal legislation in such way that licence holder has enough human and financial resources for decommissioning and safe management of radioactive waste; • Declaration of nuclear cycle and of radioactive waste is internal affair of each member state; • The main difference between storage and disposal is the possibility of retrieval; • The operating licence should be granted only if the operator presents also plan of decommissioning and radioactive waste managementiii; • The main responsibility for appropriate legislation and regulation of radioactive waste management is on the state in which the radioactive waste is produced. Both international documents have notion of the shared repository. But we should not neglect the fact that shared repository is mentioned in the preamble of both documents and not in the main text of agreement or directiveiv. Talking about radioactive waste management in international context brings out two important questions. First is: “What is radioactive waste?” Second is: “How to implement the obligation not to interfere to the rights of future generations in the field of disposal of radioactive waste?” Radioactive waste, by definition, is unneeded material that contains unstable elements that decay by emitting alpha, beta or gamma emissions. The main difference among definitions is whether spent fuel is categorized as high level waste or not. Some definitions see spent fuel as an energy source [1]. So it’s on each state how to declare spent fuel. The legal definition of spent fuel has influence on the type of repository and costs of decommissioning. Different definitions of radioactive waste in different countries, brought out also a model of waste substitutionv connected with nuclear reprocessing. Nuclear reprocessing is the technical and chemical process whereby spent fuel is separated from useful fuel, the latter of which can, if necessary, be used again in nuclear reactors. Originally, the reprocessing process was a military technology used to recover plutonium for use in nuclear weapons [2]. The answer on the second question is even more complex. The level of radioactivity and half-lives of radioactive isotopes in low-level radioactive waste are relatively small. Storing the waste for a period of 10 to 50 years will allow most of the radioactive isotopes in low-level waste to decay, at which point the waste can be disposed of as normal refuse [3]. So, after the period of 50 years, most of this material could be reusedvi.

Taking into account the technical development, we could expect that, with the technology of 22nd Century, also the rest of low-level radioactive waste could be reused. So the border between storage and disposal of radioactive waste is not so clear. EU legislators answered this issue by introducing term of long-term storage as an interim solution, but not as alternative to disposalvii. Since the world's first disposal of radioactive waste in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, in 1944, considerable experience has been acquired in the field. The first disposal site — intended for "actively contaminated broken glassware or materials not sufficiently clean to be used in other work" — was a simple trench filled with unconditioned waste located on the Oak Ridge site. Similar approaches were adopted by other nuclear facilities and waste generators in the United States and other countries during the early phases of nuclear power's development [4].

2. ECHR and right to a healthy environment ECHR hadn’t dealt with environmental matters till the beginning of 1990’s. Right to a healthy environment is not a special right mentioned in European convention of human rights. The first environmental case Powell & Rayner v. UK, 1990viii started a new ECHR’s practice. For the first time in its history the ECHR showed intention to accept that environmental issues may be linked to complaints grounded on Article 8 of the Conventionix. First case that dealt with the question of healthy environment was Hatton and others v. UK, 2001x. In this case the ECHR underlined that environmental protection must be envisaged by states when they act within their margin of appreciation, but that they do not have the task to adopt a special approach as regards a „special status” of environment-related rights. ECHR stated that the horizontal effect of the Convention, the state had positive obligations to take reasonable and appropriate measures in order to protect these rights. In both contexts – whether there is an interference or a positive obligation – a fair balance must be stricken, between the conflicting interests of individuals and of the community as a whole. But the ECHR pointed out one more condition to be successful in such cases – applicants must show the illegality of state actions. The ECHR underlined that environmental protection must be envisaged by states when they act within their margin of appreciation, but that they do not have the task to adopt a special approach as regards a „special status” of environment-related rights. Lopez Ostra v. Spain, 1994xi, was the first in the ECHR’s case-law where it admitted a complaint for indirectly breaching the right to a healthy environment. The failure of the national authorities to protect the applicants

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

against serious chemical pollution was deemed as a breach of the positive obligation of the state, arising from Article 8 of Convention. In Guerra v. Italy, 1998xii, the ECHR developed another positive obligation of the authorities, related to environmental pollution that was maintained as a standard during its following case-law in this field. The ECHR uses article 10 of Convention to establish the obligation to inform the affected persons on the potential effects of dangerous industrial activities which take place in their areas of living and on the procedures to be followed in cases of emergency. In Fadeyeva v. Russia, 2005xiii, the ECHR established that the exposure of the applicant to toxic industrial waste over the accepted limit, for a long period of time and with the authorities’ knowledge, represented a violation of Article 8: such an exposure made the applicant vulnerable to more diseases and affected her quality of life in a sufficient measure as to be able to invoke Article 8 of Convention. The ECHR’s case-law did not recognise the right to a healthy environment (e.g. the right to be protected against the effects of a nuclear plant, case Athanassoglou a.o. v. Switzerland, 2000xiv, on the ground that applicants had rights under internal procedure legislation. By presented case law, we could see three main requests for the states in the field of healthy environment: • States have especially positive obligations, to take appropriate measures able to protect the individuals against the adverse effects on their rights of environmental pollution of different kinds (noise, chemical, industrial), such as: creating a comprehensive legislative and administrative framework on environmental protection, ensuring the “horizontal effect” of the Convention; • States have obligation to inform the public about the risks of serious pollution caused by industrial

or other activities, environment;

dangerous

the

• States must ensure a fair balance between the economic interests and welfare of the community as a whole and the individual rights and interests.

3. Shared repositories Siting a radioactive waste disposal facility refers to the process of selecting a suitable location that must take into account technical and other considerations. Technical factors cover a long list: geology, hydrogeology, geochemistry, tectonics and seismicity, surface processes, meteorology, human induced events, transportation of waste, land use, population distribution, and environmental protection. Another key factor today is public acceptance, particularly in industrialized countries where a locality's "not-in-mybackyard" attitude can hinder the siting of all types of industrial waste facilities, not just radioactive waste sites. This has caused planners to focus greater attention on societal factors during early phases of the siting process [4]. Figure 1. shows main factors that influence sitting an type of repository. Public conflict over siting noxious facilities is the rule rather than the exception. A major strategy often recommended by developers and other industry proponents has been to compensate those who would be affected through economic benefits or incentives. Public education is a second strategy, often used in conjunction with economic compensation [5]. Proponents point out that the strategies devised to overcome opposition to hazardous waste sites are based on genuine concerns about the potential harm that would result from failure to construct storage and/or treatment facilities. Risks and costs increase severe for all when delays in developing facilities occur [5]. To solve this questions the concept of shared facility was born.

Figure 1: Factors influencing sitting and type of repository ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________ B. Strazisar: “Shared Radwaste Repository – Do we need Update in International Law?”, pp. 52–59

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The concept of a shared facility is known under several different names: international repository, regional repository, multinational repository, all with a slightly different meaning. The latter seems to be the most universal and has lately been widely accepted [6]. The multinational repository concept assumes that the waste originating from more than one country is being disposed in a common repository. Any country regardless of geographical location - may participate in such a collaborative scheme. In contrast to this, the regional repository concept involves only countries that belong to the same geographical region [6]. In practice of multinational repositories we could find the following scenarios [7]: • Add-on scenario – the repository remains effectively a national repository, but with a part of the waste inventory coming from abroad. • Co-operation scenario – one or more other countries interested to dispose their waste in the potential hosting country or countries will be involved directly in repository development and implementation. • International scenario – the host country would effectively cede control of the necessary siting area to the international body. This scenario seems unlikely in the foreseeable future because such transfer of sovereignty is of extreme political sensitivity. Advantages of shared repositories would be [8]: • Economy: it is mainly due to economic reasons that have led countries, especially the smaller ones, favouring the idea of shared multinational repositories. It is obvious that each country participating in a common project could gain significant financial advantages due to the large economies of scale in constructing and operating repositories. • Access to safe disposal facilities: some countries may not be able to afford to implement safe disposal facilities on their own. Some countries will, for economic reasons, wait several decades before constructing repositories, using the intervening time to accumulate the necessary funds. Shared repository can provide access, or earlier access, to safe repositories for these countries. • Enhanced global nuclear security: the term security is used in connection with the prevention of misuse of nuclear materials by terrorists or potential weapons states. Safeguards control for one site is simpler than for many scattered sites and, again, may be realised sooner through cooperation.

• Lower environmental impact: the construction of a disposal facility instead of several reduces the negative conventional impacts of such a facility on the environment. • Expanded range of geological options: if several countries participate in shared repository, a larger geological area may be examined and a larger choice of geological formations is available. Simple geological environments that are particularly suitable for repositories may not be available in small countries with complex geologies. • Increased technical capacity: scientists and specialists from several countries can cooperate and share their knowledge and experience in pursuit of a common goal. Opponents to international disposal argue that the responsibility for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste must be with the State of origin having drawn an advantage out of the use of nuclear energy in the first place. However, the question is how the term ´responsibility´ is to be defined in this context. Responsibility within the framework of final disposal of high-level radioactive waste can only mean to choose the safest solution for both mankind and environment from today´s point of view. This means that under certain circumstances a national solution might be ruled out, because e.g. the respective State does not have suitable geological conditions for a safe final repository [9].

4. Open-site open problems of regional repositories This last part of submission deals with a case study of potential hared or regional repository in the case of Nuclear plant Krško. Nuclear plant was built in former Yugoslavia. By dissolution of old federal state the 1990’s plant itself became a prestigious question for all political parties in Slovenia as well in Croatia. It took 12 years before both states signed and ratified bilateral agreement solving the relations regarding the nuclear plantxv. Mentioned agreement introduced the principle of parity and equality. The main idea of agreement is similar to the idea of common ownership within the marriage. So all the obligations and rights are divided into exact half. And all the decisions about the plant and decommissioning (from the ownership point of view) should be accepted unanimously. In some way (regarding certain statutory questions – regulated by bilateral agreement) nuclear plant is treated as extraterritorial person. Slovenia has the solemnly right of administrative control over the plant.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Figure 2: Planned repository for the LILW in Krško

Decommissioning and radioactive waste management are covered in Articles 10 and 11 of mentioned treaty. Main obligations from these articles are: • Decommissioning of plant and radioactive waste management is common obligation of both states; • Both states ensure to find effective common solution for decommissioning and radioactive waste management; • Location within the plant could be used for storage of radioactive waste till the end of regular operation life; • If there would be no common solution for radioactive waste, than in two years following the year of end of regular operational life, each party will take over and take away half of waste in the storage of the plant; • Each party takes the responsibility to provide sufficient money to finance decommissioning and radioactive waste management, Both states are solidary responsible to cover all the expenses for decommissioning and radioactive waste management. At the time of ratification of bilateral agreement the nuclear plant licence was valid until 2023. So 2025 was the last date in which the radioactive waste from nuclear plant store should have been moved in one regional

depository or half of it in Slovenian depository and half of it in Croatian depository. The fact is, that radioactive waste management is also a prominent political question that could be used for internal political prestige. Till now there has been found no common political solution for decommissioning and radioactive waste management. So far both countries dealt with the problem in its own way (or in no way). So what are possible legal solutions if no common solution would be find and in case that one of the parties wouldn’t be able to accept the radioactive waste from nuclear plant? No matter of the bilateral agreement the main responsibility for decommissioning and radioactive waste management is on the licence holder. That means that nuclear plant should find the appropriate repository and hand over the ownership of all radioactive waste to chosen repository. So it’s on Slovenian supervisor authority to issue the order for mentioned radioactive waste. So the main payee for disposal will be licence holder – nuclear plant. Bilateral agreement could not override the international agreements. And licence holder obligation could not be taken over by other persons. So mentioned bilateral agreement widens the circle of the persons who are responsible to cover costs of decommissioning and radioactive waste management. The only question will be either to use court in Slovenia or arbitrage. Due to some inconsistency between concluded treaty and other EU directives that regulate the field of energy production and transmission, after

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Croatian entering into EU, both states in relation to nuclear plant are not any more states as sovereigns but states as entrepreneurs. So, if the solution wouldn’t be found under the bilateral agreement all open questions will be solved in national courts or EU court. By the end of the day licence holder will be responsible to find the solution within Republic of Slovenia and it legal system. What if Croatia in 2023 would not be ready to accept half of radioactive waste? Would be in accordance with law that the Croatian half will still be in storage within the Nuclear plant Krško? By my opinion, no. The order issued by Slovenian authority to the nuclear plant will be for all the radioactive waste and not only for half. The nuclear plant will then be in position to deal this question with its owners. Non-compliance could bring at the end also to the closing of nuclear plant and shareholder lawsuits for negligence. On the other hand also the residents from Krško would have open way to start lawsuits against Croatia in front of European court of human rights and in front of EC Court. Due to the international agreements and conventions signed by Slovenia and Croatia, the bilateral agreement could not be seen as a legal instrument to bypass the obligation of licence holder. So in the case of nuclear plant Krško the answer about regional repository is still in the magic ball. Nevertheless of bilateral political importance how to solve the “one-million USD” question on radioactive waste from nuclear plant, two critical questions for international law arises out. First question addressed would be the unique definition of radioactive waste. By my opinion the necessary changes in international law, regarding radioactive waste management, would cover the terminological questions. So there would be a common understanding, taking into consideration the development of technology, what could be defined as radioactive waste. Second question should address the essence of longterm storage of radioactive waste. We should look how long the long-term storage is acceptable from economic, environmental and technological point of view. It’s not acceptable to treat equally the short-term and longterm storage. And it should be responsible to present and future generations to set the border between longterm storage and disposal. Otherwise we’ll put the burden of radioactive waste to the future generations.

References [1]

Radoactive waste: The size of the problem. Ahearne, John F. s.l.: American Institute of Physics, 1997, Physics today, pp. 24-29.

[2] Questioning nuclear waste substitution: a case study. Marshall, Alan. 2007, Sci Eng Ethics, Vol. 13, pp. 83-98. [3] Radioactive waste: The problem and its management. Rao, K.R. 12, 2001, Current Science, Vol. 81, pp. 1534-1546. [4] Radioactive waste disposal: Global experience and challenges. Won Han, Kyong, Heinonen, Jorma and Bonne, Arnold. 1, 1997, IAEA BULLETIN, Vol. 39, pp. 33-41. [5] In Whose Backyrd?: Concern About Siting a Nuclear Waste Facility. Benford, Robert D., Moore, Helen A. and Williams, Allen J. 1, 1993, Sociological Inquiry, Vol. 63, pp. 30-48. [6] Multinational/Regional Repository – an Illusion or Solution. Mele, Irena. Portorož : DJS, 2006. Nuclear Energy for New Europe 2006. [7] Considerations on Multinational Repositories; WM’04 Conference, February 29 – March 4, 2004, Tucson, AZ. Portier, J.M. and Hossain, S. Tuscon : WM Symposia, 2004. [8] Multinational repositories: ethical, legal and political/public aspects. Boutellier, Christina, McCombie, Charles and Mele, Irena. 1, 2006, Int. J. Nuclear Law, Vol. 1, pp. 36-48. [9] Legal Issues involved in the International Disposal of High Level Radioactive Waste; WM’04 Conference, February 29 - March 4, 2004, Tucson, AZ. Dietze, W. Tuscon: Waste Managment Symposia, 2004. [10] Financing for Eternity the Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel: A Crisis of Law and Policy Precipitated by Electric Deregulation Will Face New President. Mullett, Michael A. 2, 2001, Pace Environmental Law Review, Vol. 18, pp. 384-457.

Disclaimer

[11] Nuclear Waste Disposal: An International Legal Perspective. Spector, Leonard S. and Shields, Geoffrey B. 2, 1979, Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business, Vol. 1, pp. 559-656.

This submission was prepared or accomplished by author in his personal capacity. The opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not reflect the view of the ARAO.

[12] Hard and Soft Law in International Governance. Abbott, Kenneth W. and Snidal, Duncan. 3, 2000, International Organization, Vol. 54, pp. 421–456.

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

[13] Siskind, Barry, Dougherty, David R. and Mackenzie, Donald R. Extended stoorage of low-level radioactve waste: Potential problem areas. Department of Nuclear Energy, Brookhaven National Laboratory. Upton: s.n., 1986.

[14] Council of Europe. Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. [Online] [Cited: October 24, 2014.] http://conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/ht ml/005.htm

We should bear in mind that states enter into ‘‘contracts’’ to further interests; they enter into ‘‘covenants’’ to manifest normative commitments [12].

Convention was opened for signature on 29 September 1997. It entered into force on 18 June 2001. It has 69 parties and 42 signatories.

iii

Austria's first nuclear power plant at Zwetendorf, for example, has never operated. It stands idle as a result of a referendum in November 1978 in which voters acted to prevent the plant's operation because no clear method for the disposal of its waste was in hand. In Sweden, a 1977 law prohibiting construction or operation of any new reactors unless plans are provided for the absolutely safe disposal of their wastes has prevented operation of two fully-constructed facilities for nearly a year and delayed construction plans for a number of other plants. West Germany has also suffered a reactor construction moratorium because of the lack of an acceptable nuclear waste disposal program [11].

A few international institutions and issue areas approach the theoretical ideal of hard legalization, but most international law is ‘‘soft’’ in distinctive ways. The term hard law as used in this special issue refers to legally binding obligations that are precise (or can be made precise through adjudication or the issuance of detailed regulations) and that delegate authority for interpreting and implementing the law. The realm of ‘‘soft law’’ begins once legal arrangements are weakened along one or more of the dimensions of obligation, precision, and delegation. This softening can occur in varying degrees along each dimension and in different combinations across dimensions [12].

By agreement between the UK and Japan, the spent fuel to be reprocessed and the waste produced by reprocessing is still the property of the customer, i.e. the Japanese nuclear companies such as JNFL (Japan Nuclear Fuel Limited) and Tokyo Electric and Kansai Electric. However, many reprocessing customer nations, in agreement with the operator nations, have pushed for terms of operation whereby the latter will accept a certain specified substituted waste for the actual waste that they own. For example, in the case that this article addresses, Japan is a customer nation that has sent spent fuel to the UK to be reprocessed. Instead of sending back the intermediate level waste that reprocessing has produced, the UK, in cooperation with the Japanese nuclear authorities and companies, wants to send back smaller amounts of high level waste as a substitute [2].

To begin with, the radioactive waste management approach is to consider the nature of radioactive elements involved in terms of their half-lives and then choose the appropriate method of handling. If the concentrations of radioactive elements are largely short lived, then one would resort to what is referred to as ‘delay and decay’ approach; that is, to hold on to such a waste for a sufficiently long time that the radioactivity will die in the meanwhile. A second approach is to ‘dilute and disperse’ so that the hazard in the environment is minimized. But when the radioactivity is long-lived, the only approach that is possible is to ‘concentrate and contain’ the activity. In order to carry out concentrating the waste (generally the sludge), chemical precipitation, ion exchange, reverse osmosis and natural or steam evaporation, centrifuging, etc. are resorted to. The resulting solids are highly concentrated in radioactivity [3].

vii

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has considered two types of storage for LLRW at a nuclear power plant: • Interim contingency storage, for up to five years, and • Long-term storage, for over five years. Due to current uncertainties regarding the availability of LLRW disposal capacity, the NRC is aware that extended storage of LLRW may be pursued by nuclear power plants and by other NRC licensees which generate LLRW [13].

viii

The applicants, whose homes were situated nearby London Heathrow Airport, right underneath the flight routes, claimed that their right to respect of private life, more precisely their quality of life as well as the right to enjoy their own home, were affected by the noise caused by planes. The Court admitted the major economic importance of Heathrow airport, arguing that the existence of international airports in very populated urban areas became a necessity for the country’s economic welfare.

Article 8 – Right to respect for private and family life. 1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. 2. There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others [14].

The applicants referred to the WHO guidelines on noise levels values, established to avoid sleep disturbance during the night, which would have had to be of max. 60 decibels and they claimed that the Government did not do enough research as to support

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

its opinion that the actual levels of 80 decibels were tolerable. In the applicants’ view, this amounted to an interference with their right to respect of private and family life and of their homes. xi

The applicants’ home was situated in the immediate vicinity of a plant treating leather industrial waste, which produced toxic gas. The continuous situation (over five years) determined the applicants to leave their home and move to an apartment, at the expense of local authorities.

xii

The chemical plant in the case had been open in the 1970s, and a law of 1988 imposed this obligation to inform; however, the applicants haven’t been offered any information until 1995, their health and homes being seriously affected by arsenic pollution.

xiii

The case concerns an application brought by a Russian national, Nadezhda Mikhai Fadeyeva, who was born in 1949 and lives in Cherepovets, a major steel-producing centre situated around 300 km north-east of Moscow. In order to delimit the areas in which pollution caused by steel production could be excessive, the authorities established a buffer zone around the Severstal premises - "the sanitary security zone". This zone was first delimited in 1965. It covered a 5,000 metre-wide area around the territory of the plant. Pollution levels are officially monitored within the security zone. The applicant submitted that, from 1990-1999 the average concentration of dust in the air was 1.6 to 1.9 times higher than the "maximum permitted limit" (MPL); the concentration of carbon disulphide, 1.4 to 4 times higher; and, the concentration of formaldehyde, 2 to 4.7 times higher. Atmospheric pollution from 1997-2001 was rated as "high" or "very high". In particular, an excessive concentration of hazardous substances (such as hydrogen sulphide, ammonia and carbolic acid) was registered.

xiv

The applicants live in the villages of Villigen, Würenlingen, Böttstein and Kleindöttingen, situated in zone 1 in the vicinity of unit II of a nuclear power plant in Beznau (Canton of Aargau). They either own or rent property. The Beznau II nuclear power plant consists of a dual-loop pressurised water reactor. The site is situated five kilometres from the German border. They opposed the application for an extension of the operating licence because of the risks which they maintained such an extension entailed for their rights to life, to physical integrity and of property. According to them, the nuclear power plant did not meet current safety standards on account of serious and irremediable construction defects and, owing to its condition, the risk of an accident occurring was greater than usual. They also requested that in the meantime certain provisional measures be taken. The complainants also disputed the impartiality of the administrative bodies involved in the proceedings.

Act Rati fying the Treaty between the Government of the Republic of Slovenia and the government of the Republic of Croatia on the regulation of the status and other legal relations regarding investment, exploitation and decommissioning of the Krško Nuclear Plant and Joint Declaration at the time of signature of the Treaty between the Government of the Republic of Slovenia and the government of the Republic of Croatia on the regulation of the status and other legal relations regarding investment, exploitation and decommissioning of the Krško Nuclear Plant (OJ RS, no 5/03-MP).

International Journal of Contemporary ENERGY, Vol. 1, No. 1 (2015)

ISSN 2363-6440

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Journal

.e16

About the Journal

.e17

Instructions for Authors

.e19