4. Internationalization of the Fuel Cycle and the Nuclear Energy Renaissance: Confronting the Credible Commitment Problem

2020 ◽  
pp. 97-123
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Credible Commitment ◽  
Commitment Problem

Nuclear Power in Latin America: An Overview of Its Present Status

1983 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margarete K. Luddemann
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Field Studies ◽  
Energy Agency ◽  
Self Sufficiency ◽  
Policy Concern ◽  
Alternative Sources

The pivotal role energy plays in national economics not only converts the access to sources of supply into a vivid issue of foreign policy concern, but also causes an understandable preoccupation with investment capabilities and self-sufficiency. A report prepared by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in 1974 predicted a bright future for nuclear energy in the i developing countries and encouraged use of this form of energy after numerous field studies.A nation that commits itself to nuclear energy by purchasing nuclear power-generating technology but not fuel cycle facilities incurs the risk of becoming dependent upon the supplier country because a quick switch to alternative sources of supply is difficult in cases of curtailment of 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.

Accelerator-driven subcritical fission in molten salt core: Closing the nuclear fuel cycle for green nuclear energy

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter McIntyre ◽  
Saeed Assadi ◽  
Karie Badgley ◽  
William Baker ◽  
Justin Comeaux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molten Salt ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Transmutation and the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership

2006 ◽  
Vol 985 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Bresee
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Energy Use ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Closed Fuel Cycle ◽  
State Of The Union ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
The U.S

AbstractIn the January 2006 State of the Union address, President Bush announced a new Advanced Energy Initiative, a significant part of which is the Global Nuclear Energy Initiative. Its details were described on February 6, 2006 by the U.S. Secretary of Energy. In summary, it has three parts: (1) a program to expand nuclear energy use domestically and in foreign countries to support economic growth while reducing the release of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. (2) an expansion of the U.S. nuclear infrastructure that will lead to the recycling of spent fuel and a closed fuel cycle and, through transmutation, a reduction in the quantity and radiotoxicity of nuclear waste and its proliferation concerns, and (3) a partnership with other fuel cycle nations to support nuclear power in additional nations by providing small nuclear power plants and leased fuel with the provision that the resulting spent fuel would be returned by the lessee to the lessor. The final part would have the effect of stabilizing the number of fuel cycle countries with attendant non-proliferation value. Details will be given later in the paper.

Impact on Nuclear Waste Production of Different Fuel Cycle Strategies

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lionel Boucher ◽  
Jean-Paul Grouiller ◽  
Charles Courtois ◽  
Sylvain David ◽  
Matthieu Maurin
Keyword(s):  
Waste Management ◽  
Nuclear Waste ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Present Situation ◽  
Single Stage ◽  
French Law ◽  
Waste Production ◽  
French Case ◽  
Phase Out

In the frame of the French law for the researches about waste management, different dynamic scenarios have been studied [1]. These scenarios are considering the French case and start from the present situation, which consists in a single stage of Plutonium recycling in PWRs. The scenarios described in this paper take into account two main options: Continuation of nuclear energy or phase out option.

Scenario Analysis on the Benefits of Multi-National Cooperation for the Development of a Common Nuclear Energy System Based on PWR and LFR Fleets

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Ciotti ◽  
Jorge L. Manzano ◽  
Vladimir Kuznetsov ◽  
Galina Fesenko ◽  
Luisa Ferroni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Proper Time ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Levelized Cost Of Electricity ◽  
Base Load

Financial aspects, environmental concerns and non-favorable public opinion are strongly conditioning the deployment of new Nuclear Energy Systems across Europe. Nevertheless, new possibilities are emerging to render competitive electricity from Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) owing to two factors: the first one, which is the fast growth of High Voltage lines interconnecting the European countries’ national electrical grids, this process being triggered by huge increase of the installed intermittent renewable electricity sources (Wind and PV); and the second one, determined by the carbon-free constraints imposed on the base load electricity generation. The countries that due to public opinion pressure can’t build new NPPs on their territory may find it profitable to produce base load nuclear electricity abroad, even at long distances, in order to comply with the European dispositions on the limitation of the CO2 emissions. In this study the benefits from operating at multinational level with the deployment of a fleet of PWRs and subsequently, at a proper time, the one of Lead Fast Reactors (LFRs) are analyzed. The analysis performed involves Italy (a country with a current moratorium on nuclear power on spite that its biggest utility operates NPPs abroad), and the countries from South East and Central East Europe potentially looking for introduction or expansion of their nuclear power programmes. According to the predicted evolution of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) a forecast of the electricity consumption evolution for the present century is derived with the assumption that a certain fraction of it will be covered by nuclear electricity. In this context, evaluated are material balances for the front and the back end of nuclear fuel cycle associated with the installed nuclear capacity. A key element of the analysis is the particular type of LFR assumed in the scenario, characterized by having a fuel cycle where only fission products and the reprocessing losses are sent for disposition and natural or depleted uranium is added to fuel in each reprocessing cycle. Such LFR could be referred to as “adiabatic reactor”. Owing to introduction of such reactors a substantive reduction in uranium consumption and final disposal requirements can be achieved. Finally, the impacts of the LFR and the economy of scale in nuclear fuel cycle on the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) are being evaluated, for scaling up from a national to a multinational dimension, illustrating the benefits potentially achievable through cooperation among countries.

Australia’s Atomic Past

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 98-111
Author(s):  
David Lowe
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Uranium Mining ◽  
Educational Materials ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Parliamentary Committee ◽  
Pros And Cons ◽  
Atomic Testing

Abstract I ask in this article whether the legacies of Australia’s nuclear past, including the great secrecy surrounding testing of weapons in the 1950s and 1960s, and subsequent clean-ups, have impacted in particular ways that have ongoing ramifications for policy relating to uranium mining and nuclear energy. My starting point is the sustained examination of the pros and cons of developing the nuclear fuel cycle in Australia, a Parliamentary Committee Inquiry from 2006. Contrasting the submissions and discussions of this committee with exhibition and educational materials relating to the legacies of atomic testing, I suggest that one of the biggest opportunities for constructive policy conversation on nuclear energy suffered from the absence of trust among different groups. This derived, in good measure, from distinctive features in popular remembering of Australia’s atomic past. In 2006, it fed the exasperation of nuclear advocates who did not, and perhaps still do not, appreciate that the neat separation of uranium mining and energy generation from Australia’s earlier encounters with the atom is very hard. Relatedly, I argue that the secrecy around governments’ involvement in atomic testing, and its legacies, is likely to be seized on regularly; and likely to sustain what is a reservoir of public mistrust of government policy.

A study of the nuclear natural resources utilization in open and closed fuel cycles: nuclear energy a sustainable and renewable source of energy

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Letícia Caroline Gonçalves ◽  
José Rubens Maiorino
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resources ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Closed Fuel Cycle ◽  
Pressurized Water ◽  
Renewable Source ◽  
Water Reactor ◽  
Fuel Cycles ◽  
Technological Advances ◽  
Breeder Reactors

In this work, the use of natural resources was analyzed using a simplified methodology and assuming calculation conditions close to the real ones, to assess the sustainability of the nuclear source and the efficiency in the use of these resources. For the analysis of open fuel cycles, four reactors were selected, these being the Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) and Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor (PHWR), two Generation II reactors commonly used until today, the advanced Generation III reactor AP1000 and the conceptual reactor AP-Th 1000. For closed fuel cycles, the variation of the utilization of the natural resource alongside with the variation of the conversion factor were evaluated, parameterized by the burnup. It was observed that the Generation II reactors use only 1% of the natural resources and, despite technological advances, the Generation III reactor did not show a significant increase in comparison to the former. Although the closed fuel cycle includes recycling the burnt fuel from thermal reactors, it exploits only about 10% of the resources. Major improvements are observed in Fast Breeder Reactors, being able to obtain a use of almost 100% with the increase of the burning and the minimization of losses. Although the feasibility of using thorium as a nuclear fuel has been proven, it would be better used in a closed cycle, as in the self-sustainable Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor (LFTR), a Generation IV reactor that can transform the nuclear energy in a sustainable and renewable source of energy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document