Group items tagged

Article Highlights * Advancements in nuclear power should help the world move beyond fossil fuels. * In particular, spent fuel recycling with fast reactors would solve some of the most vexing problems facing conventional nuclear power. * Other benefits include reducing weapons proliferation risks and excess plutonium and uranium stockpiles. When you combine the country's addiction to oil to its mounting concern over global warming you have a clear-cut case for expanded nuclear power. The issue has been clouded, however, by the recent decision to stop work on the Yucca Mountain permanent spent fuel repository in Nevada, so far the only real solution the United States has for its accumulating spent fuel from its 104 light water reactors (LWR).

RADIOACTIVE waste from a new generation of nuclear power stations will have to be stored above ground for 100 years, the Government has been told. The claim comes as the possibility of a nuclear power station being built to replace the existing one at Wylfa on Anglesey continues to grow. Hugh Richards, of the Welsh Anti Nuclear Alliance (Wana), told officials at the Department for Environment and Climate Change: "Both the promoters of new reactors and the Government have largely ignored the implications of those reactors discharging high burn-up spent fuel. New-build spent fuel, already acknowledged as twice as hot and twice as radioactive as legacy-spent fuel, will have to cool down for 100 years on each site before it can go for deep underground disposal.

The Savannah River Site has become the home of an Australian import that is a lot less cute than a kangaroo or koala. The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) announced Thursday that the Savannah River Site will be the new home for 32 pounds of highly enriched uranium (HEU) in spent nuclear fuel from Australia. The HEU spent fuel was transported by truck, rail and ship under secure conditions with the cooperation of Australia and several international organizations. With the completion of this shipment, NNSA's Global Threat Reduction Initiative has successfully removed more than 220 pounds of U.S.-origin HEU fuel from Australia since 1998. "The NNSA worked closely with Australia to oversee this important shipment of highly enriched uranium spent nuclear fuel," said NNSA Principal Deputy Administrator Ken Baker. "The removal of this U.S.-origin highly enriched uranium from Australia is another major milestone in NNSA's cooperative effort to reduce the threat of nuclear proliferation and demonstrates the strong international commitment to nonproliferation."

Nuclear and renewables are often pitted against each other when discussing clean energy resources. Storage poses one of the most pressing issues for both fuels. For nuclear, how and where to store spent fuel for the next several centuries or so remains an unanswered question. Since the inception of nuclear power, it was assumed that either the current generation or the next would come up with a technical solution to address how to store it safely over the long term. That has not happened, and spent nuclear fuel continues to be temporarily stored at nuclear power plant sites.

Nuclear and renewables are often pitted against each other when discussing clean energy resources. Storage poses one of the most pressing issues for both fuels. For nuclear, how and where to store spent fuel for the next several centuries or so remains an unanswered question. Since the inception of nuclear power, it was assumed that either the current generation or the next would come up with a technical solution to address how to store it safely over the long term. That has not happened, and spent nuclear fuel continues to be temporarily stored at nuclear power plant sites.

EDF, the French firm which owns eight of Britain's nuclear power stations has shipped hundreds of tons of used radioactive material to Russia. More than 1,500 tons of spent fuel produced by the power company EDF was discovered in metal containers near a Siberian town. The company claims that it recycles almost all of its fuel. Environmental experts have claimed that 13 per cent of the spent fuel from the company's French power plants is on the site and described it as "really dirty stuff".

EDF, the French firm which owns eight of Britain's nuclear power stations has shipped hundreds of tons of used radioactive material to Russia. More than 1,500 tons of spent fuel produced by the power company EDF was discovered in metal containers near a Siberian town. The company claims that it recycles almost all of its fuel. Environmental experts have claimed that 13 per cent of the spent fuel from the company's French power plants is on the site and described it as "really dirty stuff".

The governments new draft National Policy Statement on nuclear power, indicating which issues the new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) should take on board, and which it can ignore, contains this remarkable statement: "The Government is satisfied that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations. As a result the IPC need not consider this question." The draft Statement goes on to say that 'Geological disposal will be preceded by safe and secure interim storage'. So it seems, the waste issue is all in hand and we needn't bother too much about it, or any problems with the much more active spent fuel that the new reactors' high fuel 'burn up' approach will create. Despite the fact that the highly active spent fuel is to be kept on site at the plant for perhaps several decades, that is evidently not something IPC will have to consider in its assessment of whether the proposed plants can go ahead. Instead the IPC will just focus on any conventional local planning and environmental impact issues that may emerge in relation to the 10 new nuclear plants that the government has now backed.

The governments new draft National Policy Statement on nuclear power, indicating which issues the new Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) should take on board, and which it can ignore, contains this remarkable statement: "The Government is satisfied that effective arrangements will exist to manage and dispose of the waste that will be produced from new nuclear power stations. As a result the IPC need not consider this question." The draft Statement goes on to say that 'Geological disposal will be preceded by safe and secure interim storage'. So it seems, the waste issue is all in hand and we needn't bother too much about it, or any problems with the much more active spent fuel that the new reactors' high fuel 'burn up' approach will create. Despite the fact that the highly active spent fuel is to be kept on site at the plant for perhaps several decades, that is evidently not something IPC will have to consider in its assessment of whether the proposed plants can go ahead. Instead the IPC will just focus on any conventional local planning and environmental impact issues that may emerge in relation to the 10 new nuclear plants that the government has now backed.

Germany has returned over 20 pounds of highly enriched uranium fuel to the U.S. for safeguarding from terrorists or potential misuse, the government said Tuesday. The National Nuclear Security Administration said the spent fuel shipment was transported by ship and rail under secret and secure conditions. Spokeswoman Casey Ruberg said the material was secured at the federal Savannah River site near Aiken, S.C., on Sept. 23. Overall, nearly 115 pounds of spent fuel, originally provided by the United States for use in research reactors, has been returned to the United States from Argentina, Portugal, Romania and Germany during the past year, the agency said.

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) manages high-level waste (HLW) at sites across the DOE complex. This HLW is the highly radioactive waste material produced as a byproduct of the reactions that occur inside nuclear reactors: * Much of this HLW is spent (depleted) nuclear fuel, which has been accepted for disposal. * Some HLW consists of other highly radioactive materials that are determined (consistent with existing law) to require permanent isolation. * The remaining HLW comprises the liquid and solid waste byproducts (containing significant concentrations of fission products) that remain after spent fuel is reprocessed to extract isotopes that can be used again as reactor fuel. Although commercial reprocessing is currently not practiced in the United States, the defense reprocessing programs at certain facilities managed by DOE do produce significant quantities of HLW. From time to time, however, in accordance with DOE Order 435.1 exit icon, DOE has determined that certain waste resulting from reprocessing spent nuclear fuel is actually waste incidental to reprocessing (WIR), rather than HLW. For an understanding of the role that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) plays in the waste determination and disposal processes, see the following pages, as well as the related information provided below:

A recent letter ("The case against storing at Yucca," June 11) shows a lack of understanding of nuclear waste; for example, the writer is worried about hundreds of truck or train loads of spent fuel, and mentioned the Graniteville accident. Sign up to get local news by e-mail Thousands of trucks and train cars of gasoline and other hazardous chemicals are crossing the country every day. They represent a risk thousands of times greater than spent fuel. The Graniteville accident involved tank cars of gaseous chlorine and killed people. After an accident a car load of spent fuel would just lie there until picked up. No terrorist would waste his time on such a target. At Savannah River Site, it was calculated that a truck load of explosives in a fuel storage pool couldn't spread radioactivity past the plant boundary. I hoped that, if a terrorist had a truck load of explosives, he was dumb enough to explode it at the plant rather than where he could kill people.

Eleven years after its last nuclear reactor was shut down, the University may be making strides to reinstate a new one on campus. The Illinois Student Senate approved a resolution April 8 to create a new integral fast reactor for use by the nuclear engineering department. "The integral fast reactor is a research reactor," said David Wall, freshman in LAS. "It takes spent fuel from your normal reactor and uses it as more energy." Spent fuel, or fuel that has already been used, is a problem in energy consumption and conservation, said Wall, who served in the U.S. Navy as an electrical and nuclear operator. The new reactor would enable engineers to use this energy instead of leaving it in the form of waste. Wall said this is the equivalent of taking a tissue box full of used or spent fuel and creating a shot glass-sized amount of waste out of it.

If no federal repository for spent nuclear fuel is opened in the next 100 years, the nation's taxpayers could be on the hook to pay for on-site storage, such as the dry casks at Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon. That cost could run anywhere between $10 billion and $26 billion. That was the conclusion of the Government Accounting Office, which just released a report on the costs of nuclear waste management -- whether it be a long-term repository, centralized storage or on-site storage. The United States has 70,000 tons of waste stored at 80 sites in 35 states. By 2055, the amount of waste is expected to increase to 153,000 tons. The GAO also conducted a scenario in which fuel stays on site for 500 years. It concluded the cost for that scenario could range between $34 billion to $225 billion.

If no federal repository for spent nuclear fuel is opened in the next 100 years, the nation's taxpayers could be on the hook to pay for on-site storage, such as the dry casks at Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon. That cost could run anywhere between $10 billion and $26 billion. That was the conclusion of the Government Accounting Office, which just released a report on the costs of nuclear waste management -- whether it be a long-term repository, centralized storage or on-site storage. The United States has 70,000 tons of waste stored at 80 sites in 35 states. By 2055, the amount of waste is expected to increase to 153,000 tons. The GAO also conducted a scenario in which fuel stays on site for 500 years. It concluded the cost for that scenario could range between $34 billion to $225 billion.

There are two million high-level radioactive fuel bundles sitting at temporary storage sites in Canada, as the Nuclear Waste Management Organization wrestles with the mandate of finding a community to host a central storage facility for the waste for perhaps tens of thousands of years. More than 120,000 high-level radioactive fuel bundles are stored at the Point Lepreau nuclear power plant in New Brunswick. (Canadian Press)More than 120,000 high-level radioactive fuel bundles are stored at the Point Lepreau nuclear power plant in New Brunswick. (Canadian Press) Throw in the fact that the cost of storing this nuclear waste could be up to $24 billion - a figure that will likely rise - and environmental groups are dead set against a central facility, and it shapes up to be a challenge of colossal proportions. The process of finding a site to bury the high-level spent fuel has dragged on for decades as reactors keep churning out more spent bundles.

Yucca Mountain may never be used, but a physicist lays out his argument favoring repositories over costly reprocessing. By Frank von Hippel September 15, 2009 * EmailE-mail * printPrint * Share * increase text size decrease text size Text Size The Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository project is now comatose, if not dead. And that puts us back at square one on a crucial question: What are we going to do with all the radioactive waste being discharged by U.S. nuclear power reactors? Many conservatives on Capitol Hill favor the French "solution": spent-fuel reprocessing. But reprocessing isn't a solution at all: It's a very expensive and dangerous detour. Reprocessing takes used or "spent" nuclear fuel and dissolves it to separate the uranium and plutonium from the highly radioactive fission products. The plutonium and uranium are then recycled to make new reactor fuel, thereby reducing the amount of fresh uranium required by about 20%. But based on French and Japanese experience, the cost of producing this recycled fuel is several times that of producing fresh uranium reactor fuel.

"In a special issue of Daedalus on the "Global Nuclear Future," published by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, Pierre Goldschmidt posits that further improving the reliability of fuel supply is best achieved by giving priority to fuel leasing contracts coupled with long-term generic export licenses, and last resort multilateral fuel supply arrangements. Regarding the back-end of the fuel cycle, Goldschmidt argues that developing multinational fuel-storage and geological disposal facilities will be relegated to the distant horizon due to the prevailing "Not-In-My-Backyard" syndrome."

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) today released its Report to Congress on the Demonstration of the Interim Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel from Decommissioned Nuclear Power Reactor Sites (DOE/RW-0596, December 2008). The report was prepared pursuant to direction in the House Appropriations Committee Report that accompanied the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 that the Department develop a plan to take custody of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) currently stored at decommissioned reactor sites.

Before the Vermont Public Service Board issues a certificate of public good to the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, it should demand that Entergy, which owns and operates the plant in Vernon, provide more information on its plans to handle spent fuel and low-level radioactive waste produced during operation, reported a consultant to the state. "Spent nuclear fuel is perhaps the most dangerous radioactive waste of all in terms of its threat to human health and the environment," wrote Michael A. Mullet, who reviewed Entergy's plan to manage nuclear waste.

Duke Energy has signed a contract with the Department of Energy for the disposal of spent fuel generated by its proposed William States Lee III nuclear power plant in South Carolina. Duke's contract with the department is the first publicly announced for disposal of spent fuel from new reactors. In a November 10 press statement, Duke Energy Chief Nuclear Officer Dhiaa Jamil said the contract "is a vital step in supporting the timely licensing" of the station.

Saying there are growing uncertainties about US nuclear waste policy, the governors of 19 states adopted a resolution Sunday that seeks to deter the Obama administration and private energy companies from building any interim storage facilities for spent nuclear fuel in the Western US. The resolution, adopted at a meeting of the Western Governors' Association in Park City, Utah, says it appears "increasingly likely" that the administration of US President Barack Obama will propose establishing one or more centralized interim storage facilities for spent fuel from US nuclear power plants. But the 19 western governors, many of whom staunchly oppose having nuclear waste sent to their states, said in their resolution that no such interim storage facility shall be built in a western state without the written consent of the governor. "The creation of interim storage sites would be a direct result of the federal government's failure to begin accepting spent fuel on schedule," the resolution says.

Workers at the Hanford nuclear reservation have removed a 1.2 million gallon basin that once held 1,100 tons of spent uranium fuel roads, the U.S. Department of Energy says, and are beginning to clean up contaminated soil underneath the basin. Contractor CH2M Hill's Plateau Remediation Company started excavating the contaminated soil on Sunday, meeting a deadline under DOE's agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the state of Washington. Earlier this month, workers finished years of work removing the K East Basin that once stored highly radioactive materials underwater, one of the greatest hazards at the former plutonium production site. The basin held spent nuclear fuel from Hanford's nine reactors beneath 20 feet of water for shielding. Soil underneath the concrete basin was contaminated by leaks in the 1970s and 1990s, DOE says.

Workers at the Hanford nuclear reservation have removed a 1.2 million gallon basin that once held 1,100 tons of spent uranium fuel roads, the U.S. Department of Energy says, and are beginning to clean up contaminated soil underneath the basin. Contractor CH2M Hill's Plateau Remediation Company started excavating the contaminated soil on Sunday, meeting a deadline under DOE's agreement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the state of Washington. Earlier this month, workers finished years of work removing the K East Basin that once stored highly radioactive materials underwater, one of the greatest hazards at the former plutonium production site. The basin held spent nuclear fuel from Hanford's nine reactors beneath 20 feet of water for shielding. Soil underneath the concrete basin was contaminated by leaks in the 1970s and 1990s, DOE says.

"The company wants to use radioactive waste as fuel in a next-generation reactor. Eric Loewen won't even utter the words "spent nuclear fuel." That's the industry term of art for the nuclear fuel bundles that are pulled out of today's reactors after they're done making electricity. Loewen, a nuclear engineer at General Electric ( GE - news - people ), doesn't see them as "spent" at all. He sees them as raw material for a new type of nuclear reactor. "It's used, but it's an energy asset," he says."