Matching Analysis of Technical Parameters and Safety Standards for Nuclear Replacement of Coal-Fired Units

In the context of the growing share of renewable energy and the impending decommission of a large number of coal-fired units, nuclear energy is the only green energy that can replace coal power for a stable, clean, efficient, and large-scale power supply. This article compares the differences between coal power and nuclear power in terms of thermal system, thermal cycle, turbine parameters, and safety. It discusses the possibility of replacing the boiler of a coal power plant with nuclear power, that is, replacing the boiler of a coal power plant with a nuclear reactor for generation/heating/cogeneration. For coal-fired units with similar capacity that do not use a reheat cycle (at or below high pressure) and nuclear power units (such as a high-temperature gas-cooled reactor), as well as coal-fired units with a reheat cycle (ultra-high pressure and above) and nuclear power units (such as pressurized water reactors), there are great differences in steam parameters. In terms of steam turbines, the size of nuclear power units is relatively larger, requiring additional dehumidification measures. In addition, the safety factors and management methods considered in the site selection, construction, and operation of nuclear power plants are more stringent and complex, and comprehensive analysis and evaluation are needed in aspects such as waste treatment and accident emergency response. Except for the relevant provisions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers code for pressure vessels, nuclear power units are not compatible with coal-fired units in terms of safety standards. Therefore, considering comprehensively, it is believed that the scheme of nuclear power replacing coal-fired units for power generation/heating/cogeneration program is not feasible at present.