Argonne National Laboratory is managed by The University of Chicago for the U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Fuel Cycles and Repositories Dr. Phillip Finck Deputy Associate Laboratory Director Applied Science and Technology and National Security

2 Advanced fuel cycles can help significantly improve repository utilization but they cannot replace repositories Even in the case of very significant expansion of the nuclear option YM could be sufficient to satisfy the US waste management needs beyond the end of this century.

3 A Rich History: Lessons from the Past Fermi:The vision to close the fuel cycle 50s: First electricity-generating reactor: EBR-I with a vision to close the fuel cycle for resource extension 60-70s:Expected uranium scarcity – significant fast reactor programs 80s: Decline of nuclear – uranium plentiful USA (& others): once-through cycle and repository 2 paths France, Japan (& others): closed cycles to solve the waste issue Late 90s in the U.S.: Rebirth of closed-cycle research and development for improved waste management Now: Long-term energy security, environment, and the role of nuclear

4 Spent Nuclear Fuel Generation and Accumulation Cutoff for Current Fleet of Reactors

5 The Nuclear Energy Future 2100: 46 TW 2050: 30 TW ( Hoffert et al., Nature 395, 883,1998) World Fuel Mix 2001 Oil Ga s Coal Nucl. Renew. ( EIA International Energy Outlook 2004) 85% fossil Conclusions Develop multiple energy sources Nuclear energy share must grow Major markets in developing nations Year AD Atmospheric CO 2 (ppmv) Temperature (°C) CO 2 -- Global Mean Temp

6 Yucca Mountain Technical Limits Statutory limit needs to be changed to take advantage of closed fuel cycles Dose rate is the basis for licensing; peak dose occurs >100,000 years –Dominated by major actinides (from plutonium and uranium decay) Thermal engineering limits have been imposed to increase the reliability of prediction of repository performance over the long term Container temperature limit (short term fission product) Drift wall temperature limit (fission products and transuranics) Between drifts rock temperature limit (transuranics)

7 Spent Nuclear Fuel Management Options

8 Advanced Fuel Cycle Architecture A closed fuel cycle that meets the objectives of reducing the environmental impact of nuclear energy while increasing energy production can be composed of a combination of –LWRs (or other Fast Reactors) –Fast Reactors Technology choices must be made for –LWR fuels and fuel separations technologies –Fast Reactor technologies, fuels, and fuel separations technologies R&D must be completed for the reference choices –(MOX fuel) –UREX separation technologies –Fast Reactors –Fuels and separations for closure of the fuel cycle

9 Advanced Separations: Aqueous Spent Fuel Treatment (UREX+) R & D Objectives 200-MT capacity at high reliability Safe and proliferation-resistant Minimal waste streams Demonstration Focus Areas Optimized flowsheet Plant-scale remote handling and process equipment design Waste stream solidification and storage form demonstrations Material control and inventory measurement systems Chopping Volatilization Solidification Dissolution Concentration Fuel or Waste Form

10 Advanced Spent Fuel Treatment: Pyroprocessing Demonstration Focus Areas Remote handling equipment for high capacity (100 kg TRU) and reliability Fuel and waste forms Materials control and inventory measurement systems R & D Objectives Integrated, closed fast reactor fuel cycle Safe and proliferation- resistant Minimized waste streams Fuel Fuel Element Preparation U/TRU Electrolysis and Oxidant Production Equipment Metal Waste Form Production U Electrorefiner U Product Processor Ceramic Waste Form Production U/TRU Product Processor Fission Products Cladding U U / TRU Salt U/ TRU Salt

11 Advanced Fast Reactor Demonstration Focus Areas Prototypical recycled fuel Verification of safety performance Remote handling refueling equipment Economics for deployed power reactors R & D Objectives 200-MWt demonstration burner Cost reduction design features Co-located with processing facility Fuels and safety testing capability

12 Science Needs Better understanding of chemical phenomena to dominate losses, waste and costs Better understanding of materials phenomena to dominate fuel behavior and facility cost and lifetime Better simulation and modeling to reduce margins, dominate cost, safety and proliferation resistance  Towards a modernized approach to nuclear R&D To support these ambitious objectives, scientific and engineering research need to work jointly

13 –Existing reactors –Existing repository –New Facilities Interim storage Separation plants New reactors Fuel fabrication plants Logistics: Optimizing a Complex System The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates that the cost of electricity for a closed fuel cycle could be up to 10% higher than for a once-through cycle Benefits include –100X improvement in repository waste loading (thermal constraint) –Potential for expanded nuclear and resource extension Cost reduction should be a major objective Overall system optimization needs to be addressed –How many of each? –Where? –When? –What materials need to be stored/transported?