Baltic NPP Project Specifics and Current Status 2 June 2011 By courtesy of SC Rosatom.
-
Upload
nickolas-boyd -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of Baltic NPP Project Specifics and Current Status 2 June 2011 By courtesy of SC Rosatom.
Baltic NPP ProjectSpecifics and Current Status2 June 2011
By courtesy of SC Rosatom
Baltic NPP Project
2 x 1194 MW Units (AES-2006 series)
Location in Kaliningrad region of the Russian Federation
Operation dates Unit 1 – Oct 2016
Unit 2 – Apr 2018
Site preparatory works ongoing
Unique Project First NPP project in the Russian Federation
providing opportunity for participation of foreign investors
Foreign investors may acquire up to 49% share
Cross-border transmission lines developed under separate project with participation of foreign investors
Project Overview
Baltic NPP Project
State Corporation “Rosatom” – PRINCIPAL
OJSC “Concern Rosenergoatom” – DEVELOPER
OJSC “SPbAEP” – GENERAL DESIGNER
OJSC “Inter RAO UES” – ORGANIZATION OF FINANCING AND ENERGY
SALES
WorleyParsons – TECHNICAL CONSULTANT
Societe Generale – INVESTMENT CONSULTANT
Norton Rose – LEGAL CONSULTANT
Major Stakeholders and Participants
Baltic NPP Project
Acting as the Agent of OJSC “Concern Rosenergoatom”, OJSC “Inter RAO UES” have assigned professional consultants for the development of Bankable Feasibility Study
Technical Consultant – WorleyParsons Analysis of Baltic NPP technical aspects
Analysis of Baltic NPP design compliance to IAEA and EUR requirements
CAPEX, OPEX, Basic Financial Model
Power Output Scheme
Investment Consultant - Societe Generale DCF model preparation
Financing sources and structure development
Marketing activities
Due diligence
Legal Consultant - Norton Rose Analysis of the current legal status of the project
Integrated legal assessment of the project
Risks identification and mitigation strategy development
Consultant’s Roles
Baltic NPP Project
The project has started in 2008 when a cooperation agreement was signed
between State Corporation “Rosatom” and the local government of the
Kaliningrad region
A site permit for the project was issued in February 2010
At present site preparatory works are ongoing
The design documentation have been developed, and a positive opinion of
state review body (Glavgosexpertiza) was obtained on 30 Mar 2011
Application for construction license for Unit 1 was submitted
Bankable Feasibility Study is under development
Current Status
Baltic NPP Project
Construction and rehabilitation of auto roads
Construction of concrete batch plant
Construction of reinforcing factory
Construction of water intake facilities
Construction of temporary electricity supply networks
Development of the pit of the main building (soil removal and management, vertical leveling)
Arrangement of drainage systems, concrete basement and waterproofing
Construction of housing for the construction workforce
Current Main Activities on Site
7
Project Implementation Schedule
Baltic NPP Project
Construction Unit 2
BankableFeasibility Study
Negotiation and Execution of Agreements with Investors
Power PurchaseAgreements (PPA)
Trade Negotiations
Construction Unit 1
Design and construction of Power Output Scheme Facilities
2011 2012 2013 20152014 2016 2017 20182010
CommissioningUnit 1 Commissioning
Unit 2
8
Negotiations with Potential Investors’ Schedule
Baltic NPP Project
Selection of investors for final negotiations
Jun 2011 Jul 2011 Aug 2011 Oct 2011Sep 2011 Nov 2011 Dec 2011May 2011
Management presentations and negotiations
Data room opening and conducting due diligence
Potential investors’ shortlist preparation
Receiving first signs of the potential investors’ interest
BFS submission
Preliminary negotiations with potential investors and conclusion of confidentiality agreements
Sending a teaser
According to the Russian legislation and other statutory documents, the process of NPP construction is divided into two main phases: preparation phase and construction phase
The Operating organization “Concern Rosenergoatom” has established a structural subdivision to perform the functions of Owner/Developer – a branch of «Concern Rosenergoatom», Baltic NPP Construction Directorate.
Strategy of Project Implementation
Baltic NPP Project
State CustomerSC “Rosatom”
Owner-DeveloperOJSC “Concern
Rosenergoatom”
General Designer“SPBAEP” JSC
Preliminary Works Contractor OJSC “Northern Construction Management”
Project Organization Structure during Preparation Phase
In order to attract foreign investments, “Concern Rosenergoatom” is the founder and sole shareholder (at present) of OJSC “Baltic NPP”
A principle decision was made on the readiness to give the foreign investors a stake in the plant up to 49%
OJSC “Baltic NPP” shall be Owner/Developer during the construction and commissioning phase
Strategy of Project Implementation
Baltic NPP Project
Planned Organization Structure during construction and commissioning phase
Owner/DeveloperOJSC”Baltic NPP”
(Joint stock company with participation of
foreign capital)
General Contractor(selected by tender)
General Designer Equipment suppliersConstruction &
Installation Contractors
Start-up & Commissioning
Contractors
Baltic NPP Project
Support the development of BFS substantiating the Project feasibility for potential investors and financial institutions
Present Baltic NPP Project Technical aspects and solutions Socio-economical aspects Environmental aspects Organization and implementation strategy Financial and economical aspects Grid infrastructure
Independent analysis for compliance with Russian standards and regulations IAEA Safety Standards EUR, Part II requirements
Financial and economic evaluation Risks Identification Development of possible power output schemes
Technical Consultant Feasibility Study Objectives and Content
Baltic NPP Project
Feasibility Study Phase 1 Outcomes
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Baltic NPP consists of two reactor units in an AES-2006 standard design
configuration, intended to operate under base operational conditions with ICUF
above 90% and under transient operation conditions
NPP reactor unit has a two-circuit design: The primary circuit is radioactive entailed by Reactor Coolant Piping System. This circuit
includes pressurized water reactor of VVER-1200 type, four main circulation loops, one
pressurizer, safety systems and primary-related auxiliary systems
Secondary circuit is non-radioactive. It entails steam generating portion of SG, steam pipework,
steam turbine, condenser units, main condensate system with condensate pumps and low
pressure heaters, deaerator, feedwater system with electric feedwater pumps and feedwater
high pressure heaters. Turbine condensers are cooled down by circulating water system with
heat discharged through wet cooling towers into atmosphere
Technological Process
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
AES-2006 Sectional View
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Reactor Plant – General Layout
16
High Safety and Performance Indicators
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
COMPARATIVE TABLE OF MAIN TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF WWER/PWR NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGIES
CharacteristicAS-91 (В-428)
TianwanAS-92
KudankulamAES-2006
BaNPPAP1000
Westinghouse
Thermal power, MWth 3000 3000 3200 3415
Electrical power,gross/net, MWe
1060 / 995 1060 / 995 1181 / 1096.5 1154 / 1117
Specific Efficiency Coefficient, net, %
33.5 33.5 34.2 32.7
Availability factor, % ≥90 ≥90.4 92 93
Probability indices of: 1) cumulative frequency of core damage 2) frequency of limiting emergency release
≤ 10 -6 per year
≤ 10 -7 per year
≤ 10 -6 per year
≤ 10 -7 per year
≤ 10 -6 per year
≤ 10 -7 per year
≤ 5·10 -7 per year
≤ 6·10 -8 per year
17
New Safety Features for DBA and BDBA
Active and passive safety systems for prevention and mitigation of Design Basis Accidents and Beyond Design Basis Accidents.
A four channels safety systems design is incorporated into the plant design:
The active component-based four channel’s safety system design provides the ability to respond to any DBAs scenario and provides a safe status of the reactor plant
Design allows a single safety channel to be out of service for maintenance or any other reasons for unlimited period of time during Unit operation.
The systems to mitigate BDBAs are designed for long-term heat removal from the containment during beyond design-basis accidents (off-line mode is at least 24 hours without operator’s actions)
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Protection Against External Impacts
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
AircraftProtection from the fall
of an aircraft
Snow and ice load
Extreme snow and ice protection
External explosion
NPP components responsible for the safety
are developed with ensuring the security of percussion coursed by
the external explosion.
Seismic loads
NPP is developed with stability to earthquake
Wind loads
Whirlwind and tornado protection
Environmental Impact Assessment
The Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was developed in 2009 There have been public hearings of EIA report – passed successfully Results and Conclusions
Presence of high anthropogenic pressure on the region The hydrological regime of the rivers and lakes in the region will not undergo any changes Non-radioactive releases to the surface waters with concentrations, exceeding the permissible for fishing
basins, are prevented by technical solutions Electromagnetic radiation, noise and harmful releases from the NPP facilities are in the range of permissible
values and have insignificant off-site impact Non-radioactive industrial and domestic waste will be treated and landfill disposed The liquid radioactive waste are subject of conditioning (solidification). The amount of waste is minimized by
the design During normal operation of Baltic NPP the airborne radioactive and chemical releases will have an
insignificant impact on the atmospheric air, public and environment. The radiological impact on the public and environment for design basis accidents does not exceed the
defined exposure doses for the public and is mitigated during BDBAs The risk of Baltic NPP operation is estimated to be significantly lower than the existing anthropogenic
background
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Analysis of the NPP Design
Compliance to the Russian Standards and Regulations All necessary reviews have been performed in accordance with the Russian Legislation
Comparative Analysis of Russian Standards and Regulations to IAEA Safety Standards The analysis results indicate that the Russian rules and norms contain appropriate
requirements. The observed differences are due mainly to the formulation and terminology being in use
Russian documents are significantly more specific than IAEA safety standards, which have mainly conceptual character
Analysis of the design against EUR, Part II requirements A preliminary conclusion is that the Design in general will to a great extent comply with the
EUR requirements, based on the following: The main target indicators for safety, reliability and efficiency are directly incorporated in the design This is an evolutionary design utilizing the same conceptual approaches, practices and design standards as in the EUR
certificated AS-92 design
The expected differences will be related to those EUR requirements which differ from the Russian rules and standards
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Analysis of the NPP Design
Spent Fuel Management Strategy Basis Initial storing for a few years in the spent fuel pool; Further transportation out of
Kaliningrad Region without using the territory of other states
Radioactive Releases and Waste Management Strategy Basis Radioactive releases into the atmosphere - annual effective dose for the public less
than 0.01 mSv for Normal Operation (NO)
Liquid Radioactive releases – activity of liquid releases is lower than the drinking water intervention level; annual effective dose for the public far bellow 0.01 mSv for NO
Liquid Radioactive waste – solidification; Solid waste – Conditioning
The RAW storage capacity is calculated for 10 years of operation; Further transportation out of Kaliningrad Region without using the territory of other states
Emergency Planning Management Strategy Basis In case of severe accident the radiation impact does not exceed the intervention levels
for the population in a distance more than 3 km from the NPP. That is why emergency planning is envisaged only for the NPP personnel
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Contractual approach and possible NPP construction schemes Standard Form of Contract of OJSC "Concern Rosenergoatom" for construction of NPP units
is the basis for development of Feasibility Study Phase I
Comparative analysis The Standard Form of Contract of OJSC "Concern Rosenergoatom" has been compared with
the following internationally recognized contractual approaches:• EPC Lump Sum Turn Key with firm and fixed price
• EPC Lump Sum Turn Key with fixed price (subject to escalation)
• Split Package (Island) Approach
• Multiple Package Approach
Comparative Analysis Results Generally, the Standard Form of Contract of OJSC "Concern Rosenergoatom" is comparable
with the EPC Lump Sum Turn Key with fixed price (subject to escalation) contractual approach, with some differences, conditioned by the Russian legislation and the established NPP construction practice
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Project Implementation – Contractual Approach
23
Project Key Milestones
Achieved Milestones “Declaration of Intent” to Invest in the Construction of Power Units 1 & 2 of the Baltic NPP – approved
by State Corporation “Rosatom” on 11-Sep-2008;
The enactment of the Kaliningrad Region Duma about approval of the “Declaration of Intent to Invest in the construction of NPP 1&2 of the Baltic NPP” on 28-Oct-2008;
“AES-2006. Justification of investments in the construction of Baltic NPP”. Prepared by OJSC “SPbAEP” - approved by the Customer (OJSC “Rosenergoatom”) on 14-Dec-2009;
The Order No.169-r of the Russian Federation Government of 20-Feb-2010 about location of the Baltic nuclear power plant on the territory of the Neman municipal district of the Kaliningrad region;
Development of Design Documentation ongoing. Unit 1 Technical Design Package obtained positive State Examination conclusion on 31-March-2011;
Planned Milestones Unit 1 First Concrete (Reactor Building) – 30-Oct-2011;
Unit 2 First Concrete (Reactor Building) – 30-Oct-2013;
Unit 1 Commercial Operation – Y 2016;
Unit 2 Commercial Operation – Y 2018;
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Калининградская ГРЭС-2
Северная-330
Центральная О-1
Советск-330
БитенайКлайпеда
Юрбаркас
Круонио ГАЭС
Балтийская АЭС
2 блока
Мамоново
# Title Voltage/kV/Length
/km/
Cross-section/mm2/
1 BaNPP-Sovetsk 330 18 2×600
2 BaNPP-Bitenai 330 19 2×300
3 BaNPP-Sovetsk 330 77 2×600
4 BaNPP-Kruoni 330 160 2×300
5 BaNPP-Sovetsk 330 34 2×600
6BaNPP-PS PT Mamonovo
330 190 2×600
7BaNPP-Yurbakas
330 40 2×600
8BaNPP-Central О-1
330 135 2×600
Kaliningrad Region Power Sector
Diagram of Baltic NPP connection to the network after second unit commissioning
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase IPower Output
Internal Demand & Export Potential
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
2011 2017 2020
Year
MW
Available Capacity (MW) Optimistic Internal Demand (MW) Minimum Export Potential (MW)
Year 2011 2017 2020
Available Capacity (MW)
950 2050 3280
Optimistic Internal Demand (MW)
660 1000 1400
Minimum Export Potential (MW)
200 1050 1880
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Power Output
Internal Forecasted Demand and Export Potential
After the launch of Unit 1 in 2016 and Unit 2 in 2018, a substantial export capacity will arise
The excess capacity after meeting initial demand in Kaliningrad Region can be exported to the energy deficit countries of the Baltic Region.
Baltic Region Energy Balance
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Power Output
The energy analyses shows a negative balance for the Baltic countries.
27
Capital Cost Estimate
Basis of the capital cost estimate Capital Cost Estimate developed by the General Designer (Chapter 11 of TD)
• Developed on the basis of Methodology for determination of the cost of construction production in Russian Federation (МДС 81-35.2004)
• Reference plant – Leningrad NPP 2
2 x 1194 MW Units
Base date 4th Quarter of 2010
Currency – Euro
Unit 1 COD – 30 October 2016
Unit 2 COD – 30 April 2018
Exchange Rate – 40 Russian Ruble / 1 Euro
Expected accuracy – ±25%
Breakdown as per IAEA accounting system
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Financial and Economic Evaluation
Base Costs
Total Installed Costs
Supplementary Costs
Owner’s Costs
Financial Costs
Direct Costs Indirect Costs
28
Capital Cost Estimate
General Approach to Capital Cost Estimate Analysis of the estimate developed by the General Designer
Communications with the Client to clarify unclear items
Verification of buildings, structures, systems, etc. against the General Plant Layout (phase B, sheet 2/2)
Identify capital costs that are not included in the General Designer estimate on the basis of proprietary check list
Add the costs excluded from the General Designer estimate on the basis of in-house database, after appropriate adjustment to reflect the project time, location and specifics for Kaliningrad region
Cost distribution by IAEA major account codes
Develop Cost Risk Analysis and capital costs possible ranges were identified
Contingency Analysis based on the Cost Risk Analysis
Develop cash flows on the basis of the project implementation schedule and the standard EPC Contract payment conditions
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Financial and Economic Evaluation
29
Capital Cost Estimate
Analysis of the estimate developed by the General Designer Factoring approach utilized at this stage (Technical Design) of the project
Estimating is iterative process – per project phases
General Designer experience indicates that increase of the capital costs is expected for the next iteration of the estimate (Detail Design phase of the project)
Contingency allowance of approx. 3% is applied on the base estimate on the basis of the adopted methodology (МДС 81-35.2004)
The international practice for contingency allowance at this phase of projects and level of project definition recommends over 10% (AACE International)
The following costs are not included in the General Designer estimate• First fills and special materials
• Utilities during construction (water, electricity, etc.)
• First core fuel
• Operating personnel (during construction)
• Licenses (nuclear regulator)
• Escalation
• Financial costs
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Financial and Economic Evaluation
30
Capital Cost Estimate / Results
In 90% of the cases the construction of Baltic NPP will require capital costs in the range from € 6.63 Billion to € 8.15 Billion
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Financial and Economic Evaluation
O&M Cost Methodology: O&M costs are determined applying the IAEA accounting system and are presented as
personnel and non-personnel expenses Basis for the estimation is client’s data from Balakovo NPP Adjustments of the basic costs were made to reflect the specific conditions of the Baltic NPP Contributions to 3 funds (Decommissioning, Nuclear Safety & Physical protection) have been
added to the O&M costs
Decommissioning costs Based on the current Rosenergoatom rules (1.3% of revenue); Calculated as annual payments in the Decommissioning fund
Fuel costs Fresh fuel costs are estimated based on the prices on the international market Spent fuel costs are based on Balakovo NPP data
Operating Costs
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Financial and Economic Evaluation
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Financial and Economic Evaluation
O&M cost risk ReasonRange of
ConsequencesLikelihood
Ability toinfluence
Fuel costs. Internationalmarket of energy resources
Price of natural uranium could increase,following price increase of other energyresources
Low High Low
O&M costs for personnel Personnel costs might increase following theinflation processes and approximation ofsalaries in Russia to EU levels
Low High Low
O&M costs for repair andmaintenance
O&M costs for repair and maintenance couldbe higher than predicted
Low Low Low
O&M costs for nuclear liabilityinsurance
Nuclear liability insurance might becomemore expensive due to either increasedlimits or increased premiums
Very Low Mid Low
• Increase of O&M costs will be mainly due to the inflation and escalation processes.
• Risk analysis demonstrates that the risk of O&M and fuel costs increase is low, with low expected impact on LCOE.
• There is no significant risk for the plant in terms of operation costs, if it is managed safely and reliably.
CONCLUSIONS
Operating Costs / Risk Analysis
Gross Power 1194 MW
Nominal Power 1181 MW
Net Power 1097 MW
Average Availability 92%
Lifetime 50 years
Construction schedule Unit 1 – commissioning on the 30th October 2016 Unit 2 – commissioning on the 30th April 2018
Basic Financial Model / Technical Inputs
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Financial and Economic Evaluation
Basic Financial Model / Major Assumptions
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I
Financial and Economic Evaluation
Ownership structure 51% Rosenergoatom 49% Strategic Investor
Financing structure Base Case – 100% equity (balance sheet financing) Second option – 50% equity & 50% debt financing
Discount rate – 6% Electricity sales
Russia – 300 MW Baltic region (Lithuania) – 1000 MW Germany and Poland – 1000 MW
Electricity Tariff in target markets Presented by the Client
Baltic NPP Feasibility Study Phase I Financial and Economic Evaluation
CAPEX is within international publicly announced price levels
At the selected set of assumptions, the project is financially feasible in all scenarios
Conclusions
Thank you