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.

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.

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.

Global Developments in Multinational Initiatives at the Back End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle

2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles McCombie ◽  
Neil Chapman ◽  
Thomas H. Isaacs
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Radioactive Wastes ◽  
Nuclear Materials ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Open Questions ◽  
Risk Areas

Interest in expanding nuclear power globally continues to grow and various studies are underway to examine all issues associated with much expanded nuclear programmes. The most open questions today are related to the security and non-proliferation implications and to the disposal of radioactive wastes. The security and proliferation concerns have been almost entirely focussed on enrichment technology at the front-end of the nuclear fuel cycle and on reprocessing. Although these are the highest risk areas, it is also important that the potential security problems associated with waste management (in particular with the storage and disposal of spent fuel and radioactive wastes) are not neglected. Furthermore, the costs of national geological repositories imply that, for new or small nuclear programmes, such facilities can be implemented only in the far future, if at all. The international community should continue to strengthen its efforts to highlight the risks and to facilitate solutions that reduce the threats of nuclear materials being distributed widely across the globe. In practice, this challenge has been taken up by a number of organisations that are developing initiatives that can alleviate the potential global security and proliferation problems by promoting multinational approaches to the fuel cycle. This paper addresses those initiatives that are concerned with the storage and final disposal of radioactive wastes and spent nuclear fuel.

scholarly journals Elaboration of approach to nuclear energy systems assessment by criterion of sustainable development

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
Vladimir I. Usanov ◽  
Stepan A. Kviatkovskii ◽  
Andrey A. Andrianov
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy Systems ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Subject Areas ◽  
Key Events

The paper describes the approach to the assessment of nuclear energy systems based on the integral indicator characterizing the level of their sustainability and results of comparative assessment of several nuclear energy system options incorporating different combinations of nuclear reactors and nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The nuclear energy systems are characterized by achievement of certain key events pertaining to the following six subject areas: economic performance, safety, availability of resources, waste handling, non-proliferation and public support. Achievement of certain key events is examined within the time interval until 2100, while the key events per se are assessed according to their contribution in the achievement of sustainable development goals. It was demonstrated that nuclear energy systems based on the once-through nuclear fuel cycle with thermal reactors and uranium oxide fuel do not score high according to the integral sustainable development indicator even in the case when the issue of isolation of spent nuclear fuel in geological formation is resolved. Gradual replacement of part of thermal reactors with fast reactors and closing the nuclear fuel cycle results in the achievement of evaluated characteristics in many subject areas, which are close to maximum requirements of sustainable development, and in the significant enhancement of the sustainability indicator.

Conceptual Study of Neutron Physics of Nuclear Fuel Cycle for Ceramic Fast Reactor

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuesong Yan ◽  
Yaling Zhang ◽  
Yucui Gao ◽  
Lei Yang
Keyword(s):  
High Temperature ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fast Reactor ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Fission Products ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Purification Method ◽  
Neutron Physics ◽  
Conceptual Study

Abstract To make the nuclear fuel cycle more economical and convenient, as well as prevent nuclear proliferation, the conceptual study of a simple high-temperature dry reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) for a ceramic fast reactor is proposed in this paper. This simple high-temperature dry (HT-dry) reprocessing includes the Atomics International Reduction Oxidation (AIROX) process and purification method for rare-earth elements. After removing the part of fission products from SNF by a HT-dry reprocessing without fine separation, the remaining nuclides and some uranium are fabricated into fresh fuel which can be used back to the ceramic fast reactor. Based on the ceramic coolant fast reactor, we studied neutron physics of nuclear fuel cycle which consists operation of ceramic reactor, removing part of fission products from SNF and preparation of fresh fuels for many time. The parameters of the study include effective multiplication factor (Keff), beam density, and nuclide mass for different ways to remove the fission products from SNF. With the increase in burnup time, the trend of increasing 239Pu gradually slows down, and the trend of 235U gradually decreases and become balanced. For multiple removal of part of fission products in the nuclear fuel cycle, the higher the removal, the larger the initial Keff.

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.

The Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. Program to Support Disposition of Enriched Uranium-Bearing Materials

2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen M. Schutt ◽  
Norman P. Jacob
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Material ◽  
Nuclear Materials ◽  
Bearing Materials ◽  
Enriched Uranium

The disposition of surplus nuclear materials has become one of the most pressing issues of our time [1, 2]. Numerous agencies have invoked programs with the purpose of removing such materials from various international venues and dispositioning these materials in a manner that achieves non-proliferability. This paper describes the Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc (NFS) Nuclear Material Disposition Program, which to date has focused on a variety of Special Nuclear Material (SNM), in particular uranium of various enrichments. The major components of this program are discussed, with emphasis on recycle and return of material to the nuclear fuel cycle.

Developing a Concept for a National Used Fuel Interim Storage Facility in the United States

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Wayne Lewis
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Waste ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
The United States ◽  
Yucca Mountain ◽  
Storage Facility ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Geological Repository ◽  
Interim Storage

In the United States (U.S.) the nuclear waste issue has plagued the nuclear industry for decades. Originally, spent fuel was to be reprocessed but with the threat of nuclear proliferation, spent fuel reprocessing has been eliminated, at least for now. In 1983, the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 [1] was established, authorizing development of one or more spent fuel and high-level nuclear waste geological repositories and a consolidated national storage facility, called a “Monitored Retrievable Storage” facility, that could store the spent nuclear fuel until it could be placed into the geological repository. Plans were under way to build a geological repository, Yucca Mountain, but with the decision by President Obama to terminate the development of Yucca Mountain, a consolidated national storage facility that can store spent fuel for an interim period until a new repository is established has become very important. Since reactor sites have not been able to wait for the government to come up with a storage or disposal location, spent fuel remains in wet or dry storage at each nuclear plant. The purpose of this paper is to present a concept developed to address the DOE’s goals stated above. This concept was developed over the past few months by collaboration between the DOE and industry experts that have experience in designing spent nuclear fuel facilities. The paper examines the current spent fuel storage conditions at shutdown reactor sites, operating reactor sites, and the type of storage systems (transportable versus non-transportable, welded or bolted). The concept lays out the basis for a pilot storage facility to house spent fuel from shutdown reactor sites and then how the pilot facility can be enlarged to a larger full scale consolidated interim storage facility.

scholarly journals Recent Progress on the Standardized DOE Spent Nuclear Fuel Canister

2002 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Keith Morton ◽  
Spencer D. Snow ◽  
Tom E. Rahl ◽  
Tom J. Hill ◽  
Richard P. Morissette
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Recent Progress ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Transportation Systems ◽  
Pressure Vessels ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Regulatory Agencies ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
American Society ◽  
Interim Storage

The Department of Energy (DOE) has developed a set of containers for the handling, interim storage, transportation, and disposal in the national repository of DOE spent nuclear fuel (SNF). This container design, referred to as the standardized DOE SNF canister or standardized canister, was developed by the Department’s National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program (NSNFP) working in conjunction with the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) and the DOE spent fuel sites. This canister had to have a standardized design yet be capable of accepting virtually all of the DOE SNF, be placed in a variety of storage and transportation systems, and still be acceptable to the repository. Since specific design details regarding the storage, transportation, and repository disposal of DOE SNF were not finalized, the NSNFP recognized the necessity to specify a complete DOE SNF canister design. This allowed other evaluations of canister performance and design to proceed as well as providing standardized canister users adequate information to proceed with their work. This paper is an update of a paper [1] presented to the 1999 American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Pressure Vessels and Piping (PVP) Conference. It discusses recent progress achieved in various areas to enhance acceptance of this canister not only by the DOE complex but also fabricators and regulatory agencies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document