Approval from China’s State Council to add four AP1000 plants

  • Thread starter Thread starter gmax137
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    China
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the recent approval by China's State Council for the addition of four AP1000 technology-based nuclear power plants. Participants explore comparisons between the AP1000 design and the Fukushima reactor site, including safety features, design differences, and geographical considerations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about how the Chinese AP1000 sites compare to the Fukushima reactor site.
  • There are claims that the AP1000 design features a more robust containment structure and fewer moving parts compared to the Fukushima reactors.
  • One participant notes that the AP1000 is a Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR), while the Fukushima units are Boiling Water Reactors (BWR), highlighting differences in cooling systems.
  • Another participant mentions that the AP1000 has passive cooling systems and describes the separation of primary and secondary coolant loops in its design.
  • There is a reference to the CAP-1000 as a derivative of the AP1000, suggesting a connection between the two designs.
  • Participants discuss the geographical locations of the new plants, noting that most Chinese nuclear power plants are situated on the coast.
  • One participant raises a point about the safety systems of the AP1000, indicating that they do not rely on AC power from diesel generators for decay heat removal.
  • Concerns are expressed regarding whether the Chinese AP1000 units comply with the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission's aircraft impact rule, which applies to US units.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying opinions on the safety and design features of the AP1000 compared to the Fukushima reactors, and there is no consensus on the overall superiority of the AP1000 design. The discussion remains unresolved regarding specific safety compliance for the Chinese units.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention various technical aspects of reactor design and safety systems, but there are unresolved questions about the siting characteristics and regulatory compliance of the new plants.

gmax137
Science Advisor
Education Advisor
Messages
3,163
Reaction score
3,749
Cranberry Township, PA, August 29, 2024 – Westinghouse Electric Company congratulates China’s State Power Investment Corporation (SPIC) and China General Nuclear Power Corporation (CGN) for receiving approval from China’s State Council to add four AP1000® technology-based plants to their growing list of newbuild projects. This brings the total number of operational and approved reactors in China based on AP1000 technology to 16.

https://info.westinghousenuclear.co...new-ap1000-technology-based-reactors-in-china
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
How do the Chinese sites compare to the Fukushima reactor site?

Is the AP1000 a better reactor design?

From what I have read, the AP1000 design has a more robust containment structure than Fukushima and fewer moving parts, such as pumps and valves, to control.
 
From the article cited, two units are located at Bailong Nuclear Power Project, which is on the south coast (near the Vietnam border) in Guangxi Province, northwest of Hainan Island, while the other two units are located at Lufeng Nuclear Power Plant, which is on the southeast coast in Guangdong Province.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guangxi_Bailong_Nuclear_Power_Project
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lufeng_Nuclear_Power_Plant
As I recall, the CAP-1000 is a derivative of the AP-1000.

jedishrfu said:
How do the Chinese sites compare to the Fukushima reactor site?

Is the AP1000 a better reactor design?

From what I have read, the AP1000 design has a more robust containment structure than Fukushima and fewer moving parts, such as pumps and valves, to control.

AP1000 is a PWR rather than the BWR designs deployed at Fukushima Daiichi. The AP1000 has a passive cooling systems. PWRs have two coolant loops, a primary loop which includes the reactor core, and a secondary loop which includes the steam turbine. The primary and secondary coolants are kept separated in the steam generator in which the primary coolant passes through and inside thin-walled Inconel-690 or Incoloy-800 (or equivalent) tubing, while the secondary loop coolant passes along the outside (shell side) of the steam geneator tubing.

Most Chinese NPPs are located on the coast.
https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/country-profiles/countries-a-f/china-nuclear-power

China's State Council has approved the construction of six nuclear power units: units 5 and 6 of the Ningde plant in Fujian Province; units 1 and 2 of the Shidaowan plant in Shandong Province; and units 1 and 2 of the Xudabao plant in Liaoning Province.
https://world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Six-reactors-approved-for-construction-in-China

China is also introducing a new domestic design, Haulong One (HPR-1000), which appears to use elements of the AP-1000 design.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hualong_One
 
I don't know about the siting characteristics.

As far as the plant design, the most damaged Fukushima units are 1960s era, the new AP1000 units were designed in this century, though the roots go back to the late 1980s. The safety systems are more robust. For example, decay heat removal does not rely on AC power from diesel generators.

The US AP1000 units in Georgia comply with the USNRC aircraft impact rule, I'm not sure if the China units do.