scholarly journals Impact of Fukushima Daiichi Accident on Japan’s Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Spent Fuel Management

2014 ◽  
pp. 117-122
Author(s):  
Joonhong Ahn
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Fuel Management ◽  
Fukushima Daiichi

scholarly journals The Need for Integrating the Back End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle in the United States of America

MRS Advances ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (19) ◽  
pp. 991-1003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evaristo J. Bonano ◽  
Elena A. Kalinina ◽  
Peter N. Swift
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Dry Storage ◽  
The Us

ABSTRACTCurrent practice for commercial spent nuclear fuel management in the United States of America (US) includes storage of spent fuel in both pools and dry storage cask systems at nuclear power plants. Most storage pools are filled to their operational capacity, and management of the approximately 2,200 metric tons of spent fuel newly discharged each year requires transferring older and cooler fuel from pools into dry storage. In the absence of a repository that can accept spent fuel for permanent disposal, projections indicate that the US will have approximately 134,000 metric tons of spent fuel in dry storage by mid-century when the last plants in the current reactor fleet are decommissioned. Current designs for storage systems rely on large dual-purpose (storage and transportation) canisters that are not optimized for disposal. Various options exist in the US for improving integration of management practices across the entire back end of the nuclear fuel cycle.

Last Developments About Spent Fuel Management in Belgium

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. Wittebolle
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Research Centre ◽  
Total Output ◽  
Storage Facility ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Fuel Management ◽  
Dry Storage ◽  
Wet Storage ◽  
Interim Storage

Abstract In Belgium 57% of the electricity is presently generated by 7 nuclear units of the PWR type located in Doel and Tihange. Their total output amounts to 5632 MWe. Part of the spent fuel unloaded from the first three units has been sent till 2000 for reprocessing in the Cogema facility at La Hague. As the reprocessing of the spent fuel produced by the last four units is not covered by the contracts concluded with Cogema, Synatom, the Belgian utilities’ subsidiary in charge of the front- and back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle for all PWR reactors in Belgium, decided to study the possible solutions for a temporary storage of this spent fuel. End of 1993, the Belgian government decided that reprocessing (closed cycle) and direct disposal (open cycle) of spent fuel had to be considered as equal options in the back-end policy for nuclear fuel in Belgium. The resolution further allowed continued execution of a running reprocessing contract (from 1978) and use of the corresponding Pu for MOX in Belgian NPP’s, but requested a reprocessing contract concluded in 1990 (for reprocessing services after 2000) not to be executed during a five-year period. During this period priority was to be given to studies on the once-through cycle as an option for spent fuel management. Figure 1 is a chart showing the two alternatives for the spent fuel cycle in Belgium. In this context, Synatom entrusted Belgatom1 to develop a dedicated flask (called “bottle”) for direct disposal of spent fuel, to perform a design study of an appropriate encapsulation process and to prepare a preliminary feasibility study of a complete spent fuel conditioning plant. Meanwhile preparation works were made for the construction of an interim storage facility on both NPP sites of Doel and Tihange in order to meet increasing storage capacity needs. For selecting the type of interim storage facility, Belgatom performed a technical-economical analysis. Considerations of design and safety criteria as well as flexibility, reversibility, technical constraints, global economical aspects and construction time led to adopt dry storage with dual purpose casks (in operation since end 1995) for the Doel site and wet storage in a modular pool for the Tihange site (in operation since 1997). In parallel, ONRAF/NIRAS, the Belgian Agency for the management of radioactive waste and enriched fissile materials and the Belgian nuclear research centre, SCK•CEN, conduct underground investigations in view of geological disposal. The paper describes the methodology that Belgatom has developed to provide the utilities with appropriate solutions (reracking, dry storage in casks, wet storage in ponds, etc.) and how Belgatom demonstrated also the feasibility of spent fuel conditioning with a view to direct disposal in clay layers. The spent fuel storage facilities in operation in Belgium and designed and built by Belgatom are then briefly presented.

scholarly journals A new approach to the recycling of spent nuclear fuel in thermal reactors within the REMIX concept

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-98
Author(s):  
Nikita V. Kovalev ◽  
Boris Ya. Zilberman ◽  
Nikolay D. Goletsky ◽  
Andrey B. Sinyukhin
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Natural Uranium ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
High Concentration ◽  
Energy Potential ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Reprocessed Uranium

A review of simulated nuclear fuel cycles with mixed uranium-plutonium fuel (REMIX) was carried out. The concept of REMIX fuel is one of the options for closing the nuclear fuel cycle (NFC), which makes it possible to recycle uranium and plutonium in VVER-1000/1200 thermal reactors at a 100% core loading. The authors propose a new approach to the recycling of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in thermal reactors. The approach implies a simplified fabrication of mixed fuel when plutonium is used in high concentration together with enriched natural uranium, while reprocessed uranium is supposed to be enriched and used separately. The share of standard enriched natural uranium fuel in this nuclear fuel cycle is more than 50%, the share of mixed natU+Pu fuel is 25%, the rest is fuel obtained from enriched reprocessed uranium. It is emphasized that the new approach has the maximum economic prospect and makes it possible to organize the fabrication of this fuel and nuclear material cross-cycling at the facilities available in the Russian Federation in the short term. This NFC option eliminates the accumulation of SNF in the form of spent fuel assemblies (SFA). SNF is always reprocessed with the aim of further using the primary reprocessed uranium and plutonium. Non-recyclable in thermal reactors, burnt, reprocessed uranium, the energy potential of which is comparable to natural uranium, as well as secondary plutonium intended for further use in fast reactors, are sent as reprocessing by-products to the storage area.

Long Term Storage of Nuclear Spent Fuel as Key Role of Japan’s Nuclear Fuel Cycle Until 2100: Cost and Benefit

2010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tadahiro Katsuta
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Storage Site ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Final Disposal ◽  
Enriched Uranium ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
Reprocessing Plant

Political and technical advantages to introduce spent nuclear fuel interim storage into Japan’s nuclear fuel cycle are examined. Once Rokkasho reprocessing plant starts operation, 80,000 tHM of spent Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) fuel must be stored in an Away From Reactor (AFR) interim storage site until 2100. If a succeeding reprocessing plant starts operating, the spent LEU will reach its peak of 30,000 tHM before 2050, and then will decrease until the end of the second reprocessing plant operation. Throughput of the second reprocessing plant is assumed as twice of that of Rokassho reprocessing plant, indeed 1,600tHM/year. On the other hand, tripled number of final disposal sites for High Level Nuclear Waste (HLW) will be necessary with this condition. Besides, large amount of plutonium surplus will occur, even if First Breeder Reactors (FBR)s consume the plutonium. At maximum, plutonium surplus will reach almost 500 tons. These results indicate that current nuclear policy does not solve the spent fuel problems but rather complicates them. Thus, reprocessing policy could put off the problems in spent fuel interim storage capacity and other issues could appear such as difficulties in large amount of HLW final disposal management or separated plutonium management. If there is no reprocessing or MOX use, the amount of spent fuel will reach over 115,000 tones at the year of 2100. However, the spent fuel management could be simplified and also the cost and the security would be improved by using an interim storage primarily.

Pyroprocess Facility Design for a Nuclear Fuel Cycle

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. S. You ◽  
W. M. Choung ◽  
J. H. Ku ◽  
S. I. Moon ◽  
H. D. Kim
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Atomic Energy ◽  
Nuclear Fuels ◽  
Fuel Utilization ◽  
Facility Design ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Energy Research ◽  
Utilization Research

The Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute (KAERI) has been developing pyroprocess for the dry conditioning of PWR spent nuclear fuels since 1997. The ACPF (Advanced spent fuel Conditioning Process Facility) was developed for volume reduction research on spent PWR fuel. Several years later, the PRIDE (PyRoprocess Integrated inactive Demonstration) facility was also developed for SFR fuel utilization research by pyroprocessing. An integrated full pyroprocess was used in the PRIDE facility. Presently another pyroprocess facility, ESPF (Engineering Scale Pyroprocess Demonstration Facility), is being conceptually designed for the future demonstration of an engineering-scale pyroprocess.

scholarly journals Analysis of system characteristics of a reactor with supercritical coolant parameters

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 243-247
Author(s):  
Anton S. Lapin ◽  
Aleksandr S. Bobryashov ◽  
Victor Yu. Blandinsky ◽  
Yevgeny A. Bobrov
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Energy Production ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Industry ◽  
Reactor System ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Light Water ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle

For 60 years of its existence, nuclear energy has passed the first stage of its development and has proven that it can become a powerful industry, going beyond the 10% level in the global balance of energy production. Despite this, modern nuclear industry is capable of producing economically acceptable energy only from uranium-235 or plutonium, obtained as a by-product of the use of low enriched uranium for energy production or surplus weapons-grade plutonium. In this case, nuclear energy cannot claim to be a technology that can solve the problems of energy security and sustainable development, since it meets the same economic and ‘geological’ problems as other technologies do, based on the use of exhaustible organic resources. The solution to this problem will require a new generation of reactors to drastically improve fuel-use characteristics. In particular, reactors based on the use of water cooling technology should significantly increase the efficiency of using U-238 in order to reduce the need for natural uranium in a nuclear energy system. To achieve this goal, it will be necessary to transit to a closed nuclear fuel cycle and, therefore, to improve the performance of a light-water reactor system. The paper considers the possibility of using a reactor with a fast-resonance neutron spectrum cooled by supercritical water (SCWR). The SCWR can be effectively used in a closed nuclear fuel cycle, since it makes it possible to use spent fuel and discharge uranium with a small amount of plutonium added. The authors discuss the selected layout of the core with a change in its size as well as the size of the breeding regions (blankets). MOX fuel with an isotopic plutonium content corresponding to that discharged from the VVER-1000 reactor is considered as fuel. For the selected layout, a study was made of the reactor system features. Compared with existing light-water reactors, this reactor type has increased fuel consumption due to its improved efficiency and nuclear fuel breeding rate up to 1 and above.

scholarly journals A scenario study on the transition to a closed nuclear fuel cycle using the nuclear energy system modelling application package (NESAPP)

2022 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Andrei A. Andrianov ◽  
Olga N. Andrianova ◽  
Ilya S. Kuptsov ◽  
Leonid I. Svetlichny ◽  
Tatyana V. Utianskaya
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
System Modelling ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Sustainability Metrics ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle

The paper presents the results of a case study on evaluating performance and sustainability metrics for Russian nuclear energy deployment scenarios with thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle. Ten possible scenarios are considered which differ in the shares of thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors, including options involving the use of mixed uranium-plutonium oxide fuel in thermal reactors. The evolution of the following performance and sustainability metrics is estimated for the period from 2020 to 2100 based on the considered assumptions: annual and cumulative uranium consumption, needs for uranium enrichment capacities, fuel fabrication and reprocessing capacities, spent fuel stocks, radioactive wastes, amounts of plutonium in the nuclear fuel cycle, amounts of accumulated depleted uranium, and the levelised electricity generation cost. The results show that the sustainability of the Russian nuclear energy system can be significantly enhanced through the intensive deployment of sodium-cooled fast reactors and the transition to a closed nuclear fuel cycle. The authors have highlighted some issues for further considerations, which will lead to more rigorous conclusions regarding the preferred options for the development of the national nuclear energy system.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document