Laser Enrichment of Uranium: Power Promises and Proliferation Perils Dr. Charles D. Ferguson Philip D. Reed Senior Fellow for Science and Technology.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
US-India Civil Nuclear Relations ITRN 603 International Trade Relations Kristin Isabelli Slide 1.
Advertisements

1 American National Security In the Coming Decade American National Security Policy.
Iran’s Nuclear Program: Status and Implications Olli Heinonen Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs Harvard Kennedy School 19 November, 2013.
ANS Winter Meeting Key Insights. Plenary Session Takeaways Global Nuclear Leaders are non-Western – China/India/Russia/South Korea Current challenge to.
E NERGY R ESOURCES I NTERNATIONAL, I NC. Uranium Enrichment Presentation for Foundation for Nuclear Studies by Julian Steyn July 24, 2006.
Enrichment Processes. Nuclear Fuel Cycle Diagram * Figure from The Nuclear Fuel of Pressurized Water Reactors and Fast Reactors, ed. H. Bailly, D. Menessier,
Oh, I almost forgot, it packs a 150 to 170 kiloton nuclear punch It’s about the size of an office trash can Let’s start with a modern nuclear.
IAEA Sources of Radiation Fuel Cycle - Overview Day 4 – Lecture 5 (1) 1.
Uranium Enrichment Nuclear Bomb Test Little Boy Reactor Core.
IAEA Sources of Radiation Nuclear Fuel Cycle – Enrichment Day 4 – Lecture 6(2) 1.
Global Dynamism Index (GDI) 2013 summary report Model developed by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU)
.1 Overview of B&W Medical Isotope Production System Foundation for Nuclear Studies September 27, 2011 Steve Schilthelm Deputy Program Manager.
Nuclear Renaissance and Nonproliferation in North-East Asia Hua HAN Associate Professor School of International Affairs Beijing University.
Determining the Irreducible Elements of an Interim Agreement with Iran: A Freeze Plus David Albright ISIS November 5, 2013.
Laser Isotope Separation – The Genie is out of the Bottle Olli Heinonen Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs John F. Kennedy School of Government.
Nuclear Fuel, Uranium Enrichment, Fuel Fabrication, MOX Seminar on Nuclear Science and Technology for Diplomats P. Adelfang (+)Division of Nuclear Fuel.
LIS ENRICHMENT IN FRANCE ILIAS Meeting Prague 20 April 2006 S.JULLIAN Thanks to Alain PETIT CEA Saclay.
Nuclear Energy and Australia Presentation by Prof Jim Falk, Australian Centre for Science, Innovation and Society.
Global Places. Q1. Name the country given by the X. X France Germany Greece Italy Poland Russia Spain Sweden Switzerland Ukraine.
GTRI’s Nuclear Removal Programs Kelly Cummins Director of Former Soviet Union and Asian Threat Reduction National Nuclear Security Administration Presented.
Foreign Obligations and Annual Inventories Jessica Norles Savannah River National Laboratory.
Japan’s Nuclear Energy Program
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Overview International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO) Presented by Jon R. Phillips.
Briefing to the ROK- United Nations Disarmament Conference
The Nuclear Renaissance Dr. Charles K. Ebinger Director, Energy Security Initiative Brookings.
The Nonproliferation Treaty. Atoms for Peace December 8, 1953 President Eisenhower spoke to the UN suggesting that peaceful uses of the atom be promoted.
Global Markets Introduction
Safety Driven Performance Conference 2013 The future of managing asset-intensive businesses John Keefe APM/RBMI Technical Manager Asset Integrity Services.
South Africa – Verification Lessons Learned from the Dismantled Nuclear Weapons Programme Olli Heinonen Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs.
Nuclear Reactors and Nuclear Energy Conversion of mass-energy to electrical energy mass-energy  thermal  kinetic  electric Produces large amounts of.

PBNC- 1 Overview of US Nuclear Energy Initiatives /06- 1 Harold McFarlane President American Nuclear Society.
Steven Biegalski, Ph.D., P.E. Director, Nuclear Engineering Teaching Laboratory Associate Professor, Mechanical Engineering Dusting off the Atom: Nuclear.
Chapter 15 New Global Players in the Twenty- First Century Global Issue 3.
IASP World Conference 2017 in Islamabad
Assessment of Iran’s Nuclear Program Press Event Tuesday, September 14, 2004 Dr. Charles D. Ferguson Science and Technology Fellow.
Current Military Expenditures Top 20 United States$305.4 Billion Russia $55.0 Japan $41.1 China $37.5 United Kingdom $34.6 France $29.5 Germany $24.7 Saudi.
4/2003 Rev 2 I.4.9a – slide 1 of 14 Session I.4.9a Part I Review of Fundamentals Module 4Sources of Radiation Session 9aFuel Cycle - Overview IAEA Post.
IAEA Scientific Forum 2007 ‘ Understanding Clandestine Nuclear Procurement Networks’ Mark Fitzpatrick Senior Fellow for Non-Proliferation International.
1 NRC Assistance for Emerging Nuclear Power Programs Jack Ramsey, Senior Level Advisor Office of International Programs March 11, 2009.
63 rd Session of UNECE Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation – the Work of the ECE Geneva, 31 March 2009 Panel One: Energy Efficiency, Air Pollution.
Critical and Source Driven Subcritical Systems for: - Waste Transmutation - Fuel Breeding Phillip Finck Associate Laboratory Director for Nuclear Science.
Enrichment. U-238 More than 99% of the Uranium in the ground is U-238. U-238 doesn’t fission.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE LECTURE 1: The World of International Economics.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency Jean Maurice Crete Division of Concepts and Planning, Safeguards Training Section Capacity Building for Safeguards.
U.S. HEU Disposition Program Robert M. George HEU Disposition Program Manager Office of Fissile Materials Disposition.
More Developed Countries Australia Canada France Germany Israel Italy Japan Norway Russia South Korea Spain Sweden Taiwan United Kingdom United States.
2016 Global Manufacturing Competitiveness Index. 2Deloitte and US Council on Competitiveness I 2016 Global Manufacturing Competitiveness IndexCopyright.
Nuclear Fuel Production Fissile Nuclei Uranium and Plutonium 235 U 239 Pu.
Nuclear Safety & Security in the DPRK Sharon Squassoni Senior Fellow & Director Proliferation Prevention Program Asan Institute “The 2012 US-North Korea.
DESIGING A NUCLEAR WEAPON. WHEN MOST PEOPLE THINK NUCLEAR ENERGY, THEY THINK BOMB. THEY THINK, “OH, MY GOSH, TERRORIST ARE GOING TO STEAL THE FUEL AND.
Short how nuclear plant works how nuclear power works.
Investing in Cameco. About Cameco  One of the largest uranium producers in the world  Headquarters are located in Saskatoon SK.  Leading provider of.
1 Sixth ROK-UN Conference on Disarmament and Non-Proliferation Issues 3-5 December 2007 CONTROLLING SENSITIVE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE ACTIVITIES Mr Jeff Robinson,
Climate Change Policies: The Road to Copenhagen Dr Robert K. Dixon.
Isotope Separator Isotope separation is the process of concentrating specific isotopes of a chemical element by removing other isotopes. E.g., separating.
Nuclear Energy: Good, Bad, or Ugly? By: Russell Dehaut, Courtney Sperger, and Craig Hughes.
Nuclear Proliferation and Arms Control (Part 2)
Flag Quiz #1 10 Flags.
IAEA International Conference on Fifty Years of Nuclear Power – The next Fifty Years Moscow - Obninsk, Russian Federation - June 28, 2004 Nuclear.
Risks of different events
Snapshot of Global PV Markets
What does it take for the DPRK to be a nuclear threat?
Japan’s Nuclear Energy Program
Who Has the Bomb? US 1945 USSR/Russia 1949 UK 1952 France 1960
Flags of Countries.
1 Point! 2 Points! 3 Points! 4 Points! 5 Points!!
TENEX on the World Nuclear Fuel Market: Looking into the Future
Flags of Countries.
Global Commercial Agriculture
Presentation transcript:

Laser Enrichment of Uranium: Power Promises and Proliferation Perils Dr. Charles D. Ferguson Philip D. Reed Senior Fellow for Science and Technology October 26, 2009

Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils Be Forewarned Those who know the full details can’t reveal them (nondisclosure agreements) Those who don’t know all of the details but who can assess the proliferation risks can and should still talk and inform the public the best they can Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils Outline of Talk Brief tutorial on laser isotope separation (LIS) of uranium What is known about the SILEX method of enrichment being developed in Wilmington, NC, by Global Laser Enrichment? What are the challenges in detecting and safeguarding LIS facilities? What is the proliferation risk and what assessments are needed? Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils Why enrich uranium? Natural uranium contains 0.72 percent U-235, 99.28 percent U-238, and 0.0054 U-234 U-235 is the fissile isotope useful for nuclear reactors and bombs. Most commercial reactor fuels require low enriched uranium (LEU): usually 3-5% enriched in U-235 Nuclear bombs require highly enriched uranium (HEU): typically greater than 90% enriched but even approximately 80% enriched uranium can be useful for bombs Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

What is Laser Isotope Separation (LIS) ? Use of lasers to selectively excite U-235, the fissile isotope, from the much more abundant isotope U-238 Promises to provide improved enrichment method as compared to first generation gaseous diffusion and second generation gaseous centrifugation methods Two types of LIS: AVLIS (Atomic Vapor Laser Isotope Separation) Molecular Laser Isotope Separation (MLIS) Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils AVLIS Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils MLIS 16 micron wavelength infrared (IR) laser excites uranium-235 hexafluoride (UF6) gas Another laser (either IR or UV) dissociates a fluorine atom to form uranium-235 pentafluoride (UF5), which precipitates out as a white powder Similar techniques: MOLIS and CRISLA A single stage MLIS device will not produce high enough concentration of LEU  need to link multiple stages in a cascade Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

What countries have explored LIS? At least 20 countries are known to have investigated this method. Includes: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Britain, China, France, Germany, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Pakistan, Romania, Russia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Stares, and Yugoslavia During the past decade, LIS research uncovered in Iran and South Korea have raised proliferation concerns. Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Separation of Isotopes by Laser Excitation (SILEX) Development work began in Australia in 1990s USEC began collaboration with Australian researchers in 1996. USEC acquired rights to SILEX in 2000. But due to unspecified technical and market concerns, USEC relinquished the license in 2003. In 2006, Silex Corporation made an exclusive license with GE’s Nuclear Energy Division. In 2007, GE’s Nuclear Energy Division forms an alliance with Hitachi Corporation of Japan. (GEH Corporation) Later in 2007, Global Laser Enrichment (GLE) corporation is formed. In 2008, Cameco, a uranium mining, conversion, and fuel fabrication company headquartered in Canada, buys 24% stake in GLE. This year, GLE is reportedly moving ahead with Test Loop operations. Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils How does SILEX work? Recall the cautionary note about those who know and those who don’t know the full details  Classified project Uses mixture of UF6 with a carrier gas (proprietary info) Mixture is cooled to separate resonance peaks of U-235 and U-238 16 μm laser selectively excites 235UF6 One or more infrared laser frequencies may be used. A Raman conversion cell is used to convert the 10.8 μm laser pulses into 16 μm pulses. The actual separation efficiency is classified and so is the repetition rate of the laser pulses as well as the pulse widths. High repetition rates (> 250 Hz) and narrow pulse widths (< 100 ns) are most desirable to enrich enough uranium -- John L. Lyman, “Enrichment Separative Capacity for SILEX,” Report for Los Alamos National Laboratory Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

What are the reported advantages of SILEX? “Low power consumption and capital costs. Relatively simple and practical separation modules. Modular technology providing versatility in deployment” Projected enrichment efficiency 2 to 20 as compared to 1.3 for the centrifuge method. --www.silex.com.au Would a successful SILEX enrichment plant spark a corporate “arms race” among other nuclear companies? If successful, the real secret would be revealed—the fact that the process can be done to a scale that can make large quantities of enriched uranium. Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Why is LIS comparatively hard to detect and can it be safeguarded? Small land area required as compared to diffusion and centrifuge methods—perhaps only need a large warehouse “The current international system is able to safeguard a declared LIS facility, but it is not able to timely detect the diversion of significant amounts of uranium to a LIS facility.” --David Daniels, presentation to 1999 Science & World Affairs conference Advanced technologies could “outflank” export controls in “nations with moderate-size economies during the first decades of the twenty-first century.” –Stanley Erickson, LANL report, October 2001. Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

Why SILEX may not pose a major proliferation concern Many elements of the SILEX system are technically challenging. Hard to make well-collimated stream of gas Details of carrier gas closely held Very advanced laser system Most likely would need large team of technical experts as well as significant financial resources Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils

The Next A.Q. Khan Black Market? Dr. A. Q. Khan stole centrifuge designs from URENCO in the early 1970s and used this information to develop uranium enrichment for Pakistan’s bomb program. Many experts then thought that Pakistan was too backward technologically to master enrichment. Let’s not be caught by surprise by laser enrichment Need for thorough analysis of the proliferation risks of this technology Detailed assessments needed by NRC and DOE Need to involve IAEA in these assessments Will the increasing use of advanced lasers in civilian non-nuclear applications leak over to nuclear proliferation? Can corporations agree not to pursue this technology? Laser Enrichment: Promises and Perils