Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

The Nov. 25 column by Robert Alvarez is full of assertions that require clarification and/or rebuttal. Sign up for breaking news alerts from The Chronicle First of all, reprocessing of used nuclear fuel is an issue because about 95 percent of the energy value in the original fuel remains in the "spent" fuel , so it begs the question of "shouldn't that valuable resource be recovered?" Secondly, the concept of fast reactors coupled with thermal reactors and reprocessing results in minimum waste and sustainable nuclear fuel supplies for hundreds of years.

Officials have interrupted the multiyear test of converted plutonium fuel at a South Carolina nuclear reactor after the discovery of "excessive growth" in the fuel assemblies, two nuclear watchdog groups said Monday. Advertisement Officials with the two groups said the discovery has implications for other reactors, including Oconee Nuclear Station, where similar types of fuel assemblies using different fuel have produced "the same flaw."

By Michele Boyd and Arjun Makhijani A Fact Sheet Produced by Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Thorium "fuel" has been proposed as an alternative to uranium fuel in nuclear reactors. There are not "thorium reactors," but rather proposals to use thorium as a "fuel" in different types of reactors, including existing light-water reactors and various fast breeder reactor designs. Thorium, which refers to thorium-232, is a radioactive metal that is about three times more abundant than uranium in the natural environment. Some of the largest reserves are found in Idaho in the U.S. Large known deposits are in Australia, India, and Norway. The primary U.S. company dvocating for thorium fuel is Thorium Power (www.thoriumpower.com). Unlike the claims made or implied by thorium proponents, however, thorium doesn't solve the proliferation, waste, safety, or cost problems of nuclear power, and it still faces major technical hurdles for commercialization.

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).

Energy Fuels is trying to alter its special use permit application. They want to open up the restriction, imposed by the Montrose Planning Commission, that states, "only raw uranium ore processed on-site may be stored in the tailings cells." The Montrose Daily Press reports that Energy Fuels CEO, George Glasier, brought up the proposed change for discussion late at the June 10 meeting, the second public hearing before the Planning Commission, after public comments were closed. By this time, many members of the public had already left. In testimony at the May 19 meeting in Nucla, before a large crowd in the high school gymnasium, Energy Fuels had publicly stated they had "no plans to process any material other than uranium ore," according to the Montrose Daily Press.

An armed vessel with a load of recycled nuclear fuel from France arrived amid heavy security Monday at a Japanese port where it was greeted by dozens of protesters. The Pacific Heron -- carrying a British police team to head off possible hijackers on its secretive two-month voyage -- delivered a load of mixed-oxide or MOX fuel, a blend of plutonium and reprocessed uranium. Several dozen anti-nuclear activists and concerned residents rallied at a pier of the Omaezaki fishing port as the ship docked under heavy police guard and cranes unloaded metal containers of the nuclear fuel.

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."

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is considering an application dated January 30, 2008, from Duke Power Company LLC d/b/a Duke Energy Carolinas, LLC, (Duke) for the renewal of its Special Nuclear Material (SNM) License SNM-2503, under the provisions of 10 CFR part 72, for the receipt, possession, storage and transfer of spent fuel and other radioactive materials associated with spent fuel storage at the Oconee Nuclear Station (ONS) Independent Spent fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI), located at the ONS site in Oconee County, South Carolina. If granted, the renewed license will authorize Duke to continue to store spent fuel in a dry cask storage system at the ISFSI. Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 72.42, the renewal term of the license for an ISFSI is limited to 20 years. Duke, however, has also submitted an exemption request with its license renewal application, pursuant to 10 CFR 72.7, seeking a license renewal term of 40 years. In accordance with 10 CFR 72.34, Duke's renewal application included an Environmental Report (which is attached as Enclosure 3, Appendix E of Duke's application).

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has approved Sequoyah Fuels' plan to dispose of contaminated materials in an on-site cell, a plan opposed by some residents near the Gore-area plant. John Ellis, Sequoyah Fuels president, said the NRC approved the plant's on-site disposal site Monday, "after 16 years and two months." The plant, which at one time processed uranium to use in Fuel rods for nuclear power plants, was closed in 1993 after it was found that portions of the plant and groundwater were contaminated.

Creating about 25 shelf-feet of environmental documentation soon will result in a $28 million cleanup project at Sequoyah Fuels plant site near Gore. The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved a plan Monday to eliminate dangerous pollutants there. "We've got a cabinet with documents for the regulators," said John Ellis, Sequoyah Fuels president. "The eight-and-half-by-eleven (inch) ring binders would probably go for about 25 feet. It's everything from feasibility studies, to cell construction plans to site characterization and sampling data with annual groundwater reports - that itself is about 11/2 inches thick." Ellis started work at the facility in 1992, about a year before portions of it were found to be contaminated. After that finding, Sequoyah Fuels completely ceased processing uranium for Fuel rods, its central operation there.

A dozen activists who planned to protest the Kazakh president's proposal to host an international nuclear fuel bank were detained hours before the demonstration was to start on Tuesday, a spokesman for one of their organizations said. Supporters of an international nuclear repository, including the United States, say it would boost global security by dissuading countries from developing their own fuel-production facilities. Iran's development of uranium-enrichment facilities is seen by critics as a precursor to developing nuclear weapons. President Nursultan Nazarbayev this month offered Kazakhstan as the location for the fuel bank. Under the proposal, Kazakhstan would store and supply nuclear fuel to interested countries under the supervision of the United Nation's International Atomic Energy Agency.

"Preparation work is beginning at the production facility "Mayak" for the establishment of a new production complex. It will be supplying Russian nuclear powerplants with the high-density mixed nitride fuel for fast neutron reactors. Information centre of "Mayak" told RusBusinessNews that the start up of the complex is planned for 2018. The initial capacity will amount to 14 tons of fuel annually. In the future the capacity may increase to 40 tons. The estimated cost of the project is 9 billion roubles. The establishment of the high density fuel production facility is a part of the strategy for the development of Russian nuclear power engineering with the new generation fast neutron reactors. One of these is the power generating unit BN-800 which is being constructed at the Beloyarsk Nuclear Power Station in the Sverdlovsk Oblast. "

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.

A federal appeals court has refused a request by several states to force the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to declare spent fuel pools at nuclear power plants a serious environmental threat. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday in Manhattan. It denied appeals by New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts that it review the NRC's rejection of a request by Massachusetts and California that it raise the risk level. The states had argued that spent fuel causes a greater risk of fire than previously appreciated. The appeals court said it must defer to the regulatory agency's expertise. Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said he will continue legal actions to force the agency to create a central national site to store nuclear waste.

A federal appeals court has refused a request by several states to force the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to declare spent fuel pools at nuclear power plants a serious environmental threat. The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Monday in Manhattan. It denied appeals by New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts that it review the NRC's rejection of a request by Massachusetts and California that it raise the risk level. The states had argued that spent fuel causes a greater risk of fire than previously appreciated. The appeals court said it must defer to the regulatory agency's expertise. Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said he will continue legal actions to force the agency to create a central national site to store nuclear waste.

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.

"riends of the Earth reported this week that spent nuclear fuel from an Israeli research reactor has arrived at Savannah River Site in South Carolina. According to Tom Clements, the group's southeastern nuclear campaign coordinator, the shipment of 102 spent fuel assemblies of "material bearing bomb-grade uranium" was listed in a Dept. of Energy document that identifies U.S.-origin nuclear materials returned to the United States as part of the Global Threat Reduction Initiative. He provided that document as well. Jennifer Wagner, a spokeswoman for the National Nuclear Security Administration, confimed the shipment, but provided few details. "NNSA cooperated with Israel on the return of U.S.-origin HEU spent nuclear fuel," she said. "The shipment arrived at the Savannah River Site in January in conjuction with a U.S.-origin fuel return from Turkey.""

"Energy Fuels Inc.'s $150 million uranium mill could be operating in early 2012, perhaps as prices for uranium begin to rise again, Energy Fuels President George Glasier said Saturday. "Uranium is back in favor," Glasier told the Colorado Plateau Section of the Society of Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration Inc. Energy Fuels' Piñon Ridge mill in the west end of Montrose County is being evaluated by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Energy Fuels also is looking to establish long-term contracts that will help it to establish the revenue stream needed to gain financing for the mill, Glasier said."

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".

Fasteners made for spent fuel storage devices at Oyster Creek Generation Station and several other power plants did not meet standards, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The NRC Web site lists information by Transnuclear Inc. that reported "a potential Part 21 violation and has reason to believe that Hwa Shin Bolt Ind. Co. provided unsubstantiated certified material." Transnuclear is performing an evaluation and does not believe the issue has safety significance. However, the company is reporting this issue because Hwa Shin may have supplied parts that may have safety significance, the report stated. The firm also reported that in addition to Oyster Creek, affected plants include Millstone Power Station in Connecticut, Susquehanna in Pennsylvania, Ginna in New York, Brunswick in North Carolina and Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said that initial reviews by Exelon Nuclear, owners of Oyster Creek, have determined Oyster Creek is in possession of the fasteners in question. "However, none are in casks currently in use, that is, in casks loaded with spent fuel," he said.

Fasteners made for spent fuel storage devices at Oyster Creek Generation Station and several other power plants did not meet standards, according to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. The NRC Web site lists information by Transnuclear Inc. that reported "a potential Part 21 violation and has reason to believe that Hwa Shin Bolt Ind. Co. provided unsubstantiated certified material." Transnuclear is performing an evaluation and does not believe the issue has safety significance. However, the company is reporting this issue because Hwa Shin may have supplied parts that may have safety significance, the report stated. The firm also reported that in addition to Oyster Creek, affected plants include Millstone Power Station in Connecticut, Susquehanna in Pennsylvania, Ginna in New York, Brunswick in North Carolina and Cooper Nuclear Station in Nebraska. NRC spokesman Neil Sheehan said that initial reviews by Exelon Nuclear, owners of Oyster Creek, have determined Oyster Creek is in possession of the fasteners in question. "However, none are in casks currently in use, that is, in casks loaded with spent fuel," he said.