1 / 35

April 2006

Romania-Korea. Nuclear Power Cooperation. April 2006. PART I : Status of nuclear industry in Korea PART II : Romania-Korea Cooperation status PART III : Cooperation with Korea . PART I. STATUS OF NUCLEAR INDUSTRY IN KOREA. Status of Electric Power.

maille
Download Presentation

April 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Romania-Korea Nuclear Power Cooperation April 2006

  2. PART I : Status of nuclear industry in Korea PART II : Romania-Korea Cooperation status PART III : Cooperation with Korea

  3. PART I STATUS OF NUCLEAR INDUSTRY IN KOREA

  4. Status of Electric Power (As of the end of 2005) Installed Capacity Electricity Generation 1.4% (5,153) 6.2% (3,885) 4.8% (17,883) 28.5% (17,716) 7.4% (4,605) 40.3% (146,779) 16.0% (58,250) 26.6% (16,552) 28.9% (17,965) 36.6% (133,657) Nuclear Coal Gas Oil Hydro *The others : 1,537 MW(2.5%) *The others : 3,349 GWh(0.9%) Total : 62,260MW Total : 364,571GWh

  5. Nuclear Coal Oil Gas Hydro 62,260 MW 50,858 MW 28.5% 27.0% 28.9% 30.5% 7.4% 9.6% 26.6% 25.3% 6.2% 7.6% Installed Capacity X 1,000 MW 50 40 Capacity 21,111MW 30 20 9,835MW 2,628MW 10 367MW 0 1971 1981 1961 1991 2001 2005

  6. Hydro Oil Gas Coal Nuclear Long-term Power Development Plan X 1,000 MW 88,040MW 90 86,340MW 78,630MW 80 (7.3%) (7.1%) (3.8%) (8.0%) (2.7%) 70 62,260MW (6.2%) (6.2%) (26.8%) (26.3%) 60 (7.4%) (26.1%) Capacity 50 (26.6%) 40 (25.7%) (25.3%) (30.9%) 30 (28.9%) 20 26,640 (30.9%) 26,640 (30.3%) 17,716 (28.5%) 18,716 (23.8%) 10 0 2005 2010 2015 2017

  7. Status of Nuclear Power Plants (Unit: MW) Site In Operation Under Const. Total Kori 4 (3,137) 2 (2,000) 6 (5,137) Wolsong 4 (2,779) 2 (2,000) 6 (4,779) Yonggwang 6 (5,900) - 6 (5,900) Ulchin 6 (5,900) - 6 (5,900) Seoul • Ulchin #1∼6 Total 20 (17,716) 4 (4,000) 24 (21,716) (As of the end of 2005) • Wolsong #1∼4 • Shin Wolsong #1,2 • Kori #1∼4 • Shin Kori #1~2 • Yonggwang #1∼6

  8. In Operation Korea has accumulated experience in various type of reactors • 20 units (17,716 MW) Capacity (MW) Plant A/E Reactor Type NSSS Supplier Commercial Operation Plant #1 #2 #3 #4 PWR PWR PWR PWR 650 587 950 950 W/H W/H W/H W/H Gilbert Gilbert Bechtel/KOPEC Bechtel/KOPEC Apr. ’78 July ’83 Sep. ’85 Apr. ’86 Kori #1 #2 #3 #4 PHWR PHWR PHWR PHWR 679 700 700 700 AECL AECL/DOOSAN AECL/DOOSAN AECL/DOOSAN AECL AECL/KOPEC AECL/KOPEC AECL/KOPEC Apr. ’83 Jun ’97 Jun. ’98 Sep. ’99 Wolsong #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 PWR PWR PWR PWR PWR PWR 950 950 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 W/H W/H DOOSAN DOOSAN DOOSAN DOOSAN Bechtel/KOPEC Bechtel/KOPEC KOPEC KOPEC KOPEC KOPEC Aug. ’86 Jun ’87 Mar. ’95 Jan. ’96 May. ’02 Dec. ’02 Yonggwang #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 PWR PWR PWR PWR PWR PWR 950 950 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Framatome Framatome DOOSAN DOOSAN DOOSAN DOOSAN Framatome Framatome KOPEC KOPEC KOPEC KPPEC Sep. ’88 Sep ’89 Aug. ’98 Dec. ’99 July. ’04 Apr. ’05 Ulchin NSSS: Nuclear Steam Supply System, A/E: Architectural Engineering

  9. Under Construction/Planning Today, Korean companies are taking the leading role in NPP Projects • 8 units 9,600 MW Project Reactor Type Plant Type Capacity (MW) Commercial Operation Remark #1 #2 PWR PWR 1000 1000 OPR1000 OPR1000 Dec. 2010 Dec. 2011 Construction Shin-Kori #3 #4 PWR PWR 1400 1400 APR1400 APR1400 Sep. 2013 Sep. 2014 Planning #1 #2 PWR PWR 1000 1000 OPR1000 OPR1000 Oct. 2011 Oct. 2012 Construction Shin-Wolsong #1 #2 PWR PWR 1400 1400 APR1400 APR1400 Dec. 2014 Dec. 2015 Planning Shin-Ulchin * OPR : Optimized Power Reactor, APR : Advanced Power Reactor

  10. Nuclear Power Development Plan • 1990 • 1995 • 2000 • 2005 • 2010 • 2015 1995 / 1996 Yonggwang 3&4 1998 / 1999 OPR 1000 (Operation) Ulchin 3&4 2002 Yonggwang 5&6 2004/2005 Ulchin 5&6 2010 / 2011 Shin-Kori 1& 2 OPR 1000 (Construction) 2011 / 2012 Shin-Wolsong 1& 2 2013 / 2014 Shin-Kori 3&4 APR 1400 Development 2014 / 2015 APR 1400 Shin-Ulchin 1&2 APR 1400 Nth 2006. 4

  11. Site View of Kori

  12. Site View of Wolsong

  13. Site View of Yonggwang

  14. Site View of Ulchin

  15. Site View of Shin-Kori RCB Unit 2 Unit 1

  16. Site View of Shin-Wolsong

  17. Operational Performance Capacity Factor(%) Unplanned shut down / Unit 95.5 100 Capacity Factor (Korea) 80 79.3 Capacity Factor (World Average) 60 0.5 Unplanned shut down/ Unit 40 `05 `92 `93 `94 `95 `96 `97 `98 `99 `00 `01 `02 `03 `04 C.F.(%) 84.5 87.2 87.4 87.3 87.5 87.6 90.3 88.3 90.4 93.2 92.7 94.2 91.4 95.5 shutdown 1.7 1.6 0.9 1.1 0.9 1.1 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.5

  18. Outstanding Performance in 2005 World Generation in 2005 (Nucleonics Week, ’06.2.9) • KHNP’s 5 units take all the top five spots on the list of 50 best capacity factors • World Generation Ranking : • No. 1 : Kori #4 (104.85%) • No. 2 : Younggwang #3 (104.14%) • No. 3 : Ulchin #1, YGN #1 (103.80%) (* two units in third ) • No. 5 : Wolsong #3 (102.29%)

  19. Outlines of Wolsong CANDU NPPs Unit Capacity (MWe) Manufacturer Contract Type Construction Period Reactor T/G Excavation COD Months NEI- Parsons AECL 1 679 Turnkey May ’77 Apr ’83 71 AECL / Doosan Doosan / GE Non- Turnkey 2 700 Oct ’91 Jun ’97 68 3 700 〃 〃 〃 Aug ’93 Jun ’98 58 4 700 〃 〃 〃 Aug ’93 Sep ’99 73

  20. Performance of Wolsong CANDU NPPs Unit Period Capacity Factor (%) World Rank (*) #1 Apr 1, ’85 ~ Mar 31, ’86 98.40 1(277) #1 Apr 1, ’89 ~ Mar 31, ’90 99.13 2(341) #1 Jul 1, ’91 ~ Jun 30, ’92 98.30 2(356) #1 Oct 1, ’91 ~ Sep 30, ’92 98.00 1(360) #1 Jan 1, ’93 ~ Dec 31, ’93 100.81 1(421) #1 Jan 1, ’97 ~ Dec 31, ’97 102.12 2(427) #3 Jul 1, ’98 ~ Jun 30, ’99 100.70 1(376) #4 Oct 1, ’99 ~ Sep 30, ’00 102.90 1(417) ( *) : The number of NPPs in the world

  21. PART II ROMANIA-KOREA COOPERATION STATUS

  22. History for Cooperation MOU was signed between MOIR-Romania and KHNP for cooperation in Nuclear Power Projects 2001. 3 Romanian key persons visited Korea to discuss to enhance mutual cooperation in Cernavoda Projects, including Minister of Foreign Affairs, President of Senate, etc. 2001. 3 ~2005. 12 2001. 10 RAAN supplied 16 tons of heavy water to KHNP Technical Cooperation Agreement was signed between SNN and KHNP 2002. 3 MOU was signed between MOIR-Romania and MOCIE-Korea for cooperation in Cernavoda nuclear projects 2003. 7

  23. History for Cooperation (Con’d) 2003. 7 2003. 11 Romanian high level and working level delegations visited Korean nuclear industry, including State Secretary of MOEC 2004.2 Nuclear Cooperation Agreement was signed by both gov’ts MOU was signed at 1st Romania-Korea Industrial Cooperation Committee(ICC) in Bucharest 2004. 5 2004. 8 RAAN supplied 16 tons of heavy water to KHNP 2005. 6 2nd Korea-Romania ICC was held in Seoul Romanian President, Mr. Traian Basescu visited Korea (10.18~ 10.19) and talked with KHNP CEO, Mr. Lee Joong-Jae. 2005. 10

  24. Technical Assistance for Units 1,2 Technical Assistance Agreement (TAA) for Units 1, 2 was signed between SNN & KHNP in March ’02 • Owner consulting services for schedule control for Unit 2 • 2 KHNP experts were dispatched to Cernavoda in May ’02 • Contributed to significant reduction of construction schedule • PSA Services for Part 1 (Fuelling related Systems) for Unit 2 • Contract award to KHNP in November ’05 • To expand technical cooperation areas • Greatly contribute to enhance economy and safety of Unit 1 operation and Unit 2 construction • PSR, design modifications, training, commissioning, etc.

  25. Joint Development of Units 3,4 Project Phases 1 and 2 Joint Feasibility Study • Joint Study Team • SNN (Leader), KHNP, AECL & Ansaldo • Financial Advisor (Phase 2 only) • Phase 1 Study from March to September ’03 • Technical, economic advantages of the Project were proven • Results were approved by Inter-Ministerial Committee in December ’03 • Phase 2 Study in progress from October ’03 • To establish appropriate financing model and to draw project ownership • 7 potential investors in equity of Project Company, including KHNP, were selected (November ’04)

  26. Joint Development of Units 3,4 Project (Con’d) KHNP's Indication of Interest under JVPC※ Model (March '06) • As a major shareholder of PCO and the major participants in EPC/O&M, provided that the appropriate securities are established - Reliable long term PPA - Licensing, Public Acceptance and Political Risk - Nuclear Liability and Radwaste Disposal - Protection of Investors against bad financial situation of PCO, etc. ※ JVPC : Joint Venture Project Company

  27. Joint Development of Units 3,4 Project (Con’d) Cooperation with Korea in Units 3,4 Project • Korea’s involvement in Unit 3,4 will certainly contribute to constructing the most successful plant with the highest economy and safety in the world

  28. Joint Development of Units 3,4 Project (Con’d) Cooperation with Korea in Units3,4 Project (Cont’d) • Korea is the best partner to Romania for Cernavoda Project • Benefiting from its world-top class technologies and experience gained through continuous implementation of 20 NPP projects, including 4 CANDU units, for more than 30 years • Korean nuclear industry with systematically established infrastructure is willing to share its technologies with Romania in every field of nuclear power project implementation

  29. PART III COOPERATION WITH KOREA

  30. Rapid increase of energy price Environmental regulation (Kyoto Protocol) Instability of energy supplies Circumstances of Energy in the World Global Renaissance of Nuclear Power Increased Necessity of Nuclear Power Securing of stable energy source in the medium and long terms Introduction of NPPs considering each country’s own energy circumstances

  31. Continuous and intensive implementation of NPP Projects since introduction of first NPP in the 1970’s Strength of Korean Nuclear Industry • Systematically established nuclear power infrastructure Steady and definite policy in Nuclear Power Projects • Steady and definite policy in nuclear power project

  32. NPP Technology Self-reliance & Localization Sharing Korean Experience & Resources Near-term Cooperation Long-term Cooperation Joint Venture T/T & T/A Training Program F/S for OPR1000 Technical Assistance Cooperation with KHNP APR 1400 Joint Construction OPR1000 Joint Construction

  33. Benefits of Cooperation with Korea Latest and Proven Technology Korean Experience of Localization Favorable Financing

  34. Romania Korea

More Related