scholarly journals Reviving Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing in the U.S.

2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 51-76
Author(s):  
Emily M. Farah

Nuclear power generation is responsible for fifteen percent of the world’s electricity, and since the beginning of the century additional nuclear reactors have appeared on the global grid in places other than the United States and Europe. Currently, sixty one nuclear reactors are under construction, and three-quarters of those are located in four countries: China, India, South Korea, and Russia. China aims to quadruple its nuclear power capacity by 2020. The United Arab Emirates entered into a 20 billion dollar contract with a South Korean consortium to build four nuclear reactors expected to be operational in 2017. Nuclear power creates radioactive waste with a half-life that spans thousands of years. If nations could reduce the radioactivity and volume, and thus the potential harmfulness, of nuclear waste by recycling spent nuclear fuel, would they take this opportunity? In the United States, the answer is no. In France, however, the answer is yes. The purpose of this paper is not to advocate for or condemn the use of nuclear technology.

MRS Advances ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (19) ◽  
pp. 991-1003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evaristo J. Bonano ◽  
Elena A. Kalinina ◽  
Peter N. Swift

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.


Author(s):  
Donald Wayne Lewis

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.


Author(s):  
Bruno Merk ◽  
Dzianis Litskevich ◽  
Karl R. Whittle ◽  
Mark Bankhead ◽  
Richard Taylor ◽  
...  

The current generation of nuclear reactors are evolutionary in design, mostly based on the technology originally designed to power submarines, and dominated by Light Water Reactors. The aims of the GenIV consortium are driven by sustainability, safety and reliability, economics, and proliferation resistance. The aims are extended here to encompass the ultimate and universal vision for strategic development of energy production, the ‘perpetuum mobile’ – at least as close as possible. We propose to rethink nuclear reactor design with the mission to develop a system which uses no fresh resources and produces no fresh waste during operation as well as generates power safe and reliably in economic way. The results of the innovative simulations presented here demonstrate that, from a theoretical perspective, it is feasible to fulfil the mission through the reuse of spent nuclear fuel from currently operating reactors as the fuel for a new reactor. The produced waste is less burdensome than current spent nuclear fuel which is used as feed to the system. However, safety, reliability and operational economics will need to be demonstrated to create the basis for the long term success of nuclear reactors as a major carbon free, sustainable, and applied highly reliable energy source.


Author(s):  
Michael F. Keller

The world possess hundreds of years of economical coal reserves that are becoming increasingly unpopular due to climate-change concerns. The ability of renewable energy to supply the planet’s needs is limited. The once bright promise of American nuclear power has dimmed considerably due to the high cost of building new facilities, with the recent events in Japan creating even more uncertainties. Small nuclear reactors are now being proposed, but their limited size creates problematic competitiveness issues. Our energy options for the future are becoming progressively more limited. A completely unexpected solution lies with a hybrid gas turbine designed to cleanly produce large amounts of electrical power using two fuel sources. This recently proposed and unique U.S. technology employs a large combustion (gas) turbine in tandem with a small and efficient helium gas reactor. Relative to conventional methods, the hybrid greatly increases energy production, appreciably reduces costs while dramatically reducing emissions and solid wastes, particularly spent nuclear fuel which is also essentially worthless as bomb material. The commercial potential of the hybrid is unprecedented. The helium gas reactor marriage with the combustion turbine opens the door for the continued use of one of the worlds’ most abundant and low-cost fuel resources, coal. The hybrid-nuclear coal gasification configuration dramatically reduces environmental impacts while also supporting the co-production of all manner of liquid transportation fuels, substitute natural gas, hydrogen, process heat and industrial chemicals. Replacement of the aging fleet of US coal plants with hybrid-nuclear/coal gasification units would dramatically reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions without resorting to the problematic sequestration (pumping into the ground) of CO2. Further, coal sludge waste and ponds would be eliminated. The unique characteristics of the hybrid also sustain the co-production of stored energy (compressed air) and solar power and move both of these expensive green resources into more competitive positions. The hybrid’s unique operational capabilities readily support the electrical grid, particularly the increasing variability caused by greater use of renewable energy. The use of hybrid-nuclear energy plants would significantly extend the life of the world’s fuel resources, to the benefit of future generations. The hybrid relies on tried-and-proven technologies as well as the large body of knowledge developed over the 50 year history of nuclear reactors and combustion turbines. The unique characteristics of the hybrid overcome the engineering, financial and regulatory obstacles that have long held back the full-scale commercial deployment of the gas reactor. The hybrid technology is considerably safer than current reactors. Melting of the nuclear fuel is not possible, the reactor can not cause explosions or burnup, and radiation releases to the environment are extremely unlikely. No operator actions are necessary to keep the public safe. Hybrid nuclear energy is a fail-safe and evolutionary new direction for nuclear power.


Author(s):  
Michael H. Fox

Nuclear power is considered by many to be an old technology locked in the past— they say the future is with solar and wind. Commercial nuclear power began in 1951 when Russia built the first civilian nuclear power reactor, followed by the British in 1956 and the Americans in 1957. In the 1960s and 1970s, nuclear power plants blossomed all over the world. There were 42 reactors in the United States in 1973; by 1990 there were 112. Some of these were closed, so by 1998 there were 104 operating nuclear reactors (the same number operating at the end of 2012) providing about 100 GWe (gigawatts electric ) to the grid. Worldwide, there were 432 operating nuclear reactors as of mid-2013. Nuclear reactors have been providing about 20% of the electricity in the United States for over 20 years, with no emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2 ). France gets nearly 75% of its electricity from nuclear power, the highest proportion of any nation. Germany and Japan each got more than 25% of their electricity from nuclear power in 2010; though Germany shut down about half of its reactors, Japan temporarily shut down all of its reactors, and both are considering permanently closing down their reactors after the accident in Fukushima, Japan, in 2011. So nuclear power has been providing electricity for over 50 years and plays a major role in the energy mix for a number of countries. But nuclear power is also critically important for an energy future that will meet our electrical power needs with minimal production of greenhouse gases and benign effects on the environment. We must go back to the future if we want to make serious inroads into reducing greenhouse gases and global warming. To see why nuclear power is critical for the future, let’s begin our journey by touring a nuclear power plant. The Wolf Creek nuclear power plant sits on the flat plains of Kansas about 60 miles south of Topeka and 4 miles from Burlington, about 200 miles east of the wheat fields I farmed as a kid. A 5,090-acre lake filled with crappie, walleye, large and smallmouth bass, and other game fish provides cooling water for the reactor and also provides a fishing mecca for Kansans. The 10,500-acre site, including the reactor complex and the lake, has about 1,500 acres of wildlife habitat, and about one-third is leased to area farmers and ranchers. The plant itself takes up less than half a square mile. The lake provides habitat for waterfowl, as well as for bald eagles and osprey. It is hard to imagine that electricity for 800,000 people is generated in this pristine area of farmland and nature preserve.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document