
NRC Image of the General Electric
Advanced BWR Plant design.
The
Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR) is a
Generation III boiling water reactor. The ABWR was
designed by
General Electric and is
currently offered by the alliance of
General Electric and
Hitachi. The ABWR generates electrical power by
using steam to power a turbine connected to a generator, the steam
is boiled from water using heat generated by fission reactions
within nuclear fuel.
Boiling water reactors (BWRs) are the second most common form of
light water reactor with a
design that is simpler, far more intuitive, and less costly to
build, but less compact and slightly less efficient than their
pressurized water reactor
(PWR) brothers. Their
supercritical water reactor
cousins are still only theoretical at this point.
The ABWR is the
present state of the art in boiling water reactors, and is the
first Generation III reactor
design to be fully built, with several reactors completed
successfully and operating, on time and under budget, in the
Japan
, with several more nearing completion in that
nation, and several other ABWRs nearing completion in Taiwan
.
Several
ABWRs are on order in the United States
, as well, with the first licensing application for
new nuclear reactors in over a decade being filed for the South Texas
Project
with two ABWRs in 2007.
The standard ABWR plant design has a net output of about 1350
MWe (3926
MWth), however
General Electric Hitachi
(GEH) also offers a design with greater electrical output. It has
also been certified as a final design in final form by the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, meaning that its performance, efficiency, output,
and safety have already been verified, and far fewer steps have to
be gone through to build it rather than a non-certified
design.
Overview of the design

Pressure vessel from the ABWR
While GE Hitachi's ESBWR represents a somewhat major departure from
the present standard BWR design with an emphasis on full passive
nuclear safety and an entirely different approach to power
regulation (natural circulation rather than circulation pumps), the
ABWR represents a more evolutionary route for the BWR family, with
numerous changes and improvements to the standard BWR design.
Major areas of improvement include:
- The addition of reactor
internal pumps (RIPs) to the bottom of the RPV (reactor pressure vessel) - 10 in total - which
achieve improved performance while eliminating large-diameter and
complex piping structures at the bottom of the RPV (e.g. the
recirculation loop found in earlier BWR models). Only the RIP motor
is located outside of the RPV in the ABWR. According to the Tier 1
Design Control Document
(which is the officially certified Nuclear Regulatory Commission
document generally describing the design of the plant), each RIP
has a capacity of 6912 m3/h at nominal capacity and
several can be turned off with the reactor at capacity.
- The control rod adjustment
capabilities have been supplemented with the addition of the
electro-hydraulic Fine Motion Control Rod Drive (FMCRD), allowing for fine position adjustment, while
not losing the reliability or redundancy of traditional hydraulic
systems which are designed to accomplish rapid
shutdown in 2.80 seconds from receipt of an initiating signal,
or ARI in a greater but still insignificant time period. The FMCRD
also improves defense-in-depth in the event of primary hydraulic
and ARI contingencies.
- A fully digital Reactor
Protection System (with redundant digital backups as well as
redundant manual backups) ensures a high level of reliability and
simplification for safety condition detection and response.
Standard BWR half plus half (2 out of 4) rapid shutdown logic
ensures that nuisance rapid shutdowns are not triggered by single
instrument failures. RPS can trigger ARI (alternate rod insertion),
FMCRD rod run-in, as well as SLCS (standby liquid control system)
actuation in the event these capabilities and systems are
necessary.
- Fully digital reactor controls (with redundant digital backup
and redundant manual backups) allow the control room to easily and
rapidly control plant operations and processes. Separate, redundant
critical and non-critical digital multiplexing buses allow for
reliability and diversity of instrumentation and control.
- In particular, the reactor can both "fly on autopilot" and also
"take off and land on autopilot" or go critical and ascend to power
using automatic systems only and do a standard shutdown using
automatic systems only. Of course, human operators remain essential
to reactor control, but much of the busy-work of bringing the
reactor to power and descending from power can be automated at
operator discretion.
- The Reactor Water Cleanup System has been enhanced to ensure
prompt and complete removal of soluble neutron absorbers injected
by the SLCS in an anticipated transient without scram (ATWS)
contingency. This decreases operator reticence to utilize the SLCS
prior to using other channels to mitigate an ATWS. Indeed, the SLCS
is now able to be automatically actuated by the RPS if necessary in
the ABWR, as prompt cleanup of soluble neutron absorbers can be
achieved.
- The Emergency Core
Cooling System (ECCS) has been improved in many areas,
providing a very high level of defense-in-depth against accidents,
contingencies, and incidents.
- The overall system has been divided up into 3 divisions; each
division is capable - by itself - of reacting to the maximally
contingent Limiting Fault/Design Basis Accident (DBA) and
terminating the accident prior to core uncovery, even in the event
of loss of offsite power and loss of proper feedwater. Previous
BWRs had 2 divisions, and uncovery (but no core damage) was
predicted to occur for a short time in the event of a severe
accident, prior to ECCS response.
- Eighteen SORVs (safety overpressure relief valves), ten of
which are part of the ADS (automatic depressurization system),
ensure that RPV overpressure events are quickly mitigated, and that
if necessary, that the reactor can be depressurized rapidly to a
level where low pressure core flooder (LPCF, the high-capacity mode
of the residual heat removal system, which replaces the LPCI and
LPCS in previous BWR models) can be used.
- Further, LPCF can inject against much higher RPV pressures,
providing an increased level of safety in the event of
intermediate-sized breaks, which could be small enough to result in
slow natural depressurization but could be large enough to result
in high pressure corespray/coolant injection systems' capacities
for response being overwhelmed by the size of the break.
- Though the Class 1E (life safety critical) power bus is still
powered by 3 highly-reliable emergency diesel generators that are
safety rated, an additional Plant Investment Protection power bus
using a combustion gas turbine is located on-site to generate
electricity to provide defense in depth against station blackout
contingencies as well as to power important but non-safety critical
systems in the event of a loss of offsite power, as well as to
start the plant in the event grid black start is needed. Additional
diesel firewater pumps may be tied into the plant's service water
system too, to enhance cooling capabilities.
- Though one division of the ECCS does not have high pressure
flood (HPCF) capacities, there exists a steam-driven, safety-rated
reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) turbopump outside of the 3
primary ECCS divisions, that is high-pressure rated and has
extensive battery backup for its instrumentation and control
systems, ensuring cooling is maintained even in the event of a full
station blackout with failure of all 3 emergency diesel generators,
the combustion gas turbine, primary battery backup, and the diesel
firewater pumps.
- There exists an extremely thick basalt
fiber reinforced concrete
(BiMAC) pad under the RPV that will both catch
and hold any heated fluids that might fall on that pad in
extraordinarily contingent situations. In addition, there are
several valves within the weir wall (the
wall separating the wetwell from the drywell) that are squib-actuated and can perform an orderly
flood of the BiMAC pad using the wetwell's water supply, ensuring
cooling of that area even with the failure of standard mitigatory
systems (e.g. overhead flood capabilities).
- The containment has been significantly improved over old BWR
types. Like the old types, it is of the pressure suppression type,
designed to handle evolved steam in the event of a transient,
incident, or accident by routing the steam using pipes that go into
a pool of water, called the wetwell (or torus), the low temperature
of which will condense the steam back into liquid water. This will
keep pressure low. Notably, the typical ABWR containment has
numerous hardened layers between the interior of the primary
containment and the outer shield wall, and is cubical in shape. One
major enhancement is that the reactor has a standard safe shutdown
earthquake acceleration of .2 G (slightly less than 2
m/s2); further, it is designed to withstand a tornado of
Old Fujita Scale 6, with > 320 mph
wind). Seismic hardening is
possible in earthquake-prone areas and has been done at the Lungmen
facility in Taiwan which has been hardened up .3 G (slightly less
than 3 m/s2) in any direction.
- The ABWR is designed for a lifetime of at least 60 years,
though operation beyond that 60 year point will certainly be
possible unless safety limits within the expensive to replace
reactor pressure vessel is reached. The comparatively simple design
of the ABWR also means that no expensive steam generators need to
be replaced, either, decreasing total cost of operation.
- According to GE, only after at least 30 million years does the
CDP of the ABWR reach 50% (e.g. 3E-7), better than both the AP1000
and the EPR.
The RPV and NS
3 have significant improvements, such as
the substitution of Internal recirculation pumps improve
reliability and performance, eliminating complex Internal
recirculation pumps inside of the
reactor pressure vessel (RPV) are a
major improvement over previous GE reactor plant designs (
BWR/6 and prior). These pumps are powered by
wet-rotor motors with the housings connected
to the bottom of the RPV and eliminating large diameter external
recirculation pipes that are possible leakage paths. Construction
costs are also reduced. The 10 internal
recirculation pumps are located at the bottom
of the annulus downcomer region (i.e., between the core shroud and
the inside surface of the RPV).
Even though BWRs can operate using only the available natural
recirculation thermal pumping
head without
forced recirculation flow, forced flow is desirable in order to
increase the available output from the reactor and as a convenient
method to change the reactor output by changing the flow.
Prior to the ABWR, all large commercial nuclear steam supply
systems provided by GE from the
BWR/3 through
the BWR/6 designs used
jet pump
recirculation systems. These systems have two large recirculation
pumps (each up to 9000 Hp) located outside of the reactor pressure
vessel (RPV). Each external recirculation pump takes a suction from
the bottom of the annulus downcomer region through a large diameter
nozzle and discharges through multiple jet pumps inside of the RPV
in the annulus downcomer region. There is one nozzle per jet pump
for the discharge back into the RPV and the external headers
supplying these nozzles. Isolation valves are provided for each of
the two external recirculation pumps. In the event of a pipe
rupture close to the RPV, those isolation valves will be
ineffective and the top region of the reactor may not be covered
with water. With all of the jet pumps intact after this design
basis accident (DBA)a minimum of two thirds (2/3) of the core will
remain covered in water. Calculations indicate that fuel failure
would be averted by "steam cooling" wherein the boiling of water in
the lower core region will produce mixed quality steam that will
absorb heat from the upper core region.
Consequently, internal recirculation pumps eliminate all of the jet
pumps (typically 10), all of the external piping, the isolation
valves and the large diameter nozzles that penetrated the RPV and
needed to suction water from and return it to the RPV. This design
therefore reduces the worst leak below the core region to
effectively equivalent to a 2 inch diameter leak. The conventional
BWR3-BWR6 product line has an analogous potential leak of 24 or
more inches in diameter. A major benefit of this design is that it
greatly reduces the flow capacity required of the emergency core
cooling systems (ECCS). In the event of a fuel failure, a specially
constructed basaltic floor with passive cooling features with
terminate the flow of corrium before it breaches primary
containment.
The first
reactors to use internal recirculation pumps were designed by
ASEA-Atom (now Westinghouse Electric Company
by way of mergers and buyouts, which is owned by Toshiba) and built in Sweden
.
These plants have operated very successfully for many years.
The internal pumps reduce the required pumping power for the same
flow to about half that required with the jet pump system with
external recirculation loops. Thus, in addition to the safety and
cost improvements due to eliminating the piping, the overall plant
thermal efficiency is increased. Eliminating the external
recirculation piping also reduces occupational radiation exposure
to personnel during maintenance.
A nice operational feature in the ABWR design is electric fine
motion
control rod drives, first used in
the BWRs of AEG (later Kraftwerk Union AG, now
AREVA). Older BWRs use a hydraulic locking piston
system to move the control rods in six-inch increments.
Additionally the fine motion control rod design greatly enhances
positive actual control rod position and similarly reduces the risk
of a control rod drive accident to the point that no velocity
limiter is required at the base of the cruciform control rod
blades.
The ABWR is fully automated in response to a
loss-of-coolant accident (
LOCA), and operator action is not
required for 3 days. After 3 days the operators must replenish ECCS
water supplies. These and other improvements make the plant
significantly safer than previous reactors.
, four ABWRs were in operation in Japan
: Kashiwazaki-Kariwa
units 6 and 7, which opened in 1996 and 1997, Hamaoka
unit 5, opened 2004 having started construction in 2000, and Shika 2 commenced commercial operations on March 15, 2006. Another two, identical to the Kashiwazaki-Kariwa reactors, were nearing completion at Lungmen
in Taiwan
, and one more (Shimane Nuclear Power Plant
3) had just commenced construction in Japan, with major siteworks to start in 2008 and completion in 2011. Plans for at least six other ABWRs in Japan have been postponed, cancelled, or converted to other reactor types, but three of these (HigashidÅri
1 and 2 and Ohma) were still listed as on order by the utilities, with completion dates of 2012 or later.
Several
ABWRs are proposed for construction in the United States
under the Nuclear Power 2010
Program. However these proposals face fierce competition
from more recent designs such as the
ESBWR
(Economic Simplified BWR, a generation III+ reactor also from GE)
and the
AP1000 (Advanced, Passive, 1000MWe,
from
Westinghouse).
These designs take
passive safety
features even further than the ABWR does, as do more revolutionary
designs such as the
pebble
bed modular reactor. However, the US market incentive for
construction of an ABWR is that the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) approved the ABWR design in 1997 and construction would have
a smaller regulatory burden for approval; hence ABWRs could be
constructed faster than other designs pending approval. There are
no ESBWR design reactors in service world wide and the ESBWR design
is pending approval by the NRC. The ESBWR is a natural circulation
plant with features to be resolved such as the power oscillations
expected to the local power induced thermal hydraulic instabilities
during initial startup.
On
June 19, 2006 NRG Energy filed a Letter Of Intent with the
Nuclear Regulatory
Commission to build two 1358 MWe ABWRs at the South Texas
Project
site. [159572] On September 25, 2007,
NRG Energy and CPS Energy submitted a
Construction and Operations
License (COL) request for these plants with the NRC. NRG Energy
is a merchant generator and CPS Energy is the nation's largest
municipally owned utility.
References and Notes
See also
External links