Overview of the U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Waste Forms Development

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Gray ◽  
John Vienna ◽  
Patricia Paviet
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
High Level Waste ◽  
Fuel Cycles ◽  
Waste Forms ◽  
The U.S

In order to maintain the U.S. domestic nuclear capability, its scientific technical leadership, and to keep our options open for closing the nuclear fuel cycle, the Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) invests in various R&D programs to identify and resolve technical challenges related to the sustainability of the nuclear fuel cycle. Sustainable fuel cycles are those that improve uranium resource utilization, maximize energy generation, minimize waste generation, improve safety and limit proliferation risk. DOE-NE chartered a Study on the evaluation and screening of nuclear fuel cycle options, to provide information about the potential benefits and challenges of nuclear fuel cycle options and to identify a relatively small number of promising fuel cycle options with the potential for achieving substantial improvements compared to the current nuclear fuel cycle in the United States. The identification of these promising fuel cycles helps in focusing and strengthening the U.S. R&D investment needed to support the set of promising fuel cycle system options and nuclear material management approaches. DOE-NE is developing and evaluating advanced technologies for the immobilization of waste issued from aqueous and electrochemical recycling activities including off-gas treatment and advanced fuel fabrication. The long-term scope of waste form development and performance activities includes not only the development, demonstration, and technical maturation of advanced waste management concepts but also the development and parameterization of defensible models to predict the long-term performance of waste forms in geologic disposal. Along with the finding of the Evaluation and Screening Study will be presented the major research efforts that are underway for the development and demonstration of waste forms and processes including glass ceramic for high-level waste raffinate, alloy waste forms and glass ceramics composites for HLW from the electrochemical processing of fast reactor fuels, and high durability waste forms for radioiodine.

Analysis of Environmental Friendliness of Advanced Nuclear Fuel Cycle in Korea

2003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yong Han Kim ◽  
Kun Jai Lee ◽  
Won Zin Oh
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Clean Energy ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Utilization Efficiency ◽  
High Level Waste ◽  
Environmental Friendliness ◽  
Fuel Cycles ◽  
Advanced Fuel

In order to show that the nuclear energy could be a clean energy, radioactive waste management, especially high level waste has to be successfully managed and also accepted by the public. As discussed, progressed and focused at GEN IV international project, reduction of long lived actinide source term and corresponding toxicity through transmutation process has been recognized as one possible solution to the problem and draw lots of attention these days and active R&D efforts are pursued and progressed worldwidely. Especially, much of interest has been initiated to the accelerator driven system (ADS) for the transmutation of the actinide as a subcritical reactors or combination to fast reactor (FR) to generate energy and transmute the HLW simultaneously in a cleaner and safer ways. This study compare and clarifies the roles and merits of the FR and ADS, which would be expected to be introduced into the future Korean nuclear fuel cycle partly, in view of environmental friendliness especially with the existing nuclear fuel cycle dominated by PWR in Korea. After selecting the most plausible and appropriate reactor strategy scenario, the mass flow balance of active radionuclides from ore to waste for several cases of advanced nuclear fuel cycle (where “advanced nuclear fuel cycle” means the nuclear fuel cycle with FR or ADS) is analyzed by computer code. Advanced nuclear fuel cycle with only FR or ADS, and with both FR and ADS were considered for this analysis. A spread sheet type of code, that compute material flow and some environmental friendliness indices chronologically, was developed and analyzed for the calculation. Some indices for the environmental friendliness (i.e. amount of actinide nuclides, radioactivity and radiotoxicity of them, and uranium resource requirement) for several types of advanced nuclear fuel cycles are analyzed comparing with those of once-through fuel cycle. According to the final results, it confirmed quantitatively that the advanced fuel cycle with FRs and ADSs would be one of the possible alternatives to relieve the burden of HLW waste management because those fuel cycle options might reduce the generation of the transuranic radionuclides by tens to hundreds times less compared to that of once-through fuel cycle. Especially advanced nuclear system combined with FR and ADS shows much better effects compared to not combined system. Resource utilization efficiency is also much upgraded high by the introduction of advanced fuel cycles with a significant high share of fast reactors (i.e. only a half amount of uranium can be consumed in case of introduction of breakeven type FR compared to once-through fuel cycle case.)

scholarly journals Integration of the Back-end of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: An Overview

MRS Advances ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 253-264
Author(s):  
François Diaz-Maurin ◽  
Rodney C. Ewing
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Waste Management ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Fully Coupled ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACTRecent efforts have been made toward the integration of the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle in the United States. The back-end integration seeks to address several management challenges: 1) current storage practices are not optimized for transport and disposal; 2) the impact of interim storage on the disposal strategy needs to be evaluated; and 3) the back-end is affected by—and affects—nuclear fuel cycle and energy policy choices. The back-end integration accounts for the various processes of nuclear waste management—onsite storage, consolidated storage, transport and geological disposal. Ideally, these processes should be fully coupled so that benefits and impacts can be assessed at the level of the full fuel cycle. The paper summarizes the causes and consequences of the absence of integration at the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle in the U.S., critically reviews ongoing integration efforts, and suggests a framework that would support the back-end integration.

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.

Evaluating the Collective Radiation Dose to Workers from the U.S. Once-Through Nuclear Fuel Cycle

2014 ◽  
Vol 185 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven L. Krahn ◽  
Allen G. Croff ◽  
Bethany L. Smith ◽  
James H. Clarke ◽  
Andrew G. Sowder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Sustainability Features of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options

2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 2377-2398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Passerini ◽  
Mujid Kazimi
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Energy Potential ◽  
Fuel Cycle Analysis ◽  
The Impact

The nuclear fuel cycle is the series of stages that nuclear fuel materials go through in a cradle to grave framework. The Once Through Cycle (OTC) is the current fuel cycle implemented in the United States; in which an appropriate form of the fuel is irradiated through a nuclear reactor only once before it is disposed of as waste. The discharged fuel contains materials that can be suitable for use as fuel. Thus, different types of fuel recycling technologies may be introduced in order to more fully utilize the energy potential of the fuel, or reduce the environmental impacts and proliferation concerns about the discarded fuel materials. Nuclear fuel cycle systems analysis is applied in this paper to attain a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of fuel cycle alternatives. Through the use of the nuclear fuel cycle analysis code CAFCA (Code for Advanced Fuel Cycle Analysis), the impact of a number of recycling technologies and the associated fuel cycle options is explored in the context of the U.S. energy scenario over 100 years. Particular focus is given to the quantification of Uranium utilization, the amount of Transuranic Material (TRU) generated and the economics of the different options compared to the base-line case, the OTC option. It is concluded that LWRs and the OTC are likely to dominate the nuclear energy supply system for the period considered due to limitations on availability of TRU to initiate recycling technologies. While the introduction of U-235 initiated fast reactors can accelerate their penetration of the nuclear energy system, their higher capital cost may lead to continued preference for the LWR-OTC cycle.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document