1. Global Nuclear Energy Partnership Paul Lisowski GNEP Deputy Program Manager and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fuel Cycle Management Office of Nuclear Energy U.S. Department of Energy National Governor’s Association Federal Facilities Task Force, Augusta, GA May 23, 2007

2. Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting2 Outline Global Energy Demand and GNEP What is GNEP? G NE P Approach

3. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting3 Why do we need a Global Partnership? Rising Energy Demand –World energy consumption is projected to increase by 71% (2003-2030) –U.S. electricity consumption is projected to increase by 40% (2004-2025) Environmental Concerns –Climate change –High Level Waste/Spent Nuclear Fuel disposal Proliferation Concerns –Accumulation of plutonium –Terrorists, rogue states Source: "Life-Cycle Assessment of Electricity Generation Systems and Applications for Climate Change Policy Analysis," Paul J. Meier, University of Wisconsin-Madison, August, 2002.

4. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting4 Source: Pasternak, “Global Energy Futures and Human Development: A Framework for Analysis” Human Development Index: Life expectancy Education GDP 80% of population is below 0.8 HDI Electricity and Economic Development go Hand in Hand Annual per Capita Electricity Use (kWh) Human Development Index

5. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting5 Electricity Consumption is Primarily Concentrated in a Few Nation States Electricity consumption per country in million kWh, (CIA factbook, April 2006)CIA factbook

6. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting6 There is a Great Opportunity for Civil Nuclear Energy to Make a Difference Wikimedia®

7. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting7 Outline Global Energy Demand and GNEP What is GNEP? G NE P Approach

8. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting8 GNEP is a Strategy to Support Civilian Nuclear Power Expansion Worldwide Expand use of nuclear power Minimize nuclear waste Develop and deploy recycle technology Develop and deploy advanced recycle reactors Establish reliable fuel services Support grid-appropriate exportable reactors Enhance nuclear safeguards technology The goal of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) is the expansion of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes worldwide in a safe and secure manner that supports clean development without air pollution or greenhouse gases, while reducing the risk of nuclear proliferation. - GNEP Statement of Principles

9. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting9 Outline Global Energy Demand and GNEP What is GNEP? G NE P Approach

10. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting10 Key International Elements of GNEP Augment and Support Nonproliferation Efforts Establish supply arrangements among nations for reliable fuel services to avoid the need for enrichment and reprocessing technologies. Develop, demonstrate, and deploy advanced, proliferation resistant nuclear power reactors Develop, in cooperation with the IAEA, enhanced nuclear safeguards Over time, promote ending separation of plutonium, eventually eliminating excess stocks of civilian plutonium

11. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting11 GNEP International Engagement Pathways Policy Engagement –Establish bilateral and multilateral partnerships based on GNEP principles, including fuel supplier, fuel recipient and prospective recipient countries Framework Development –International fuel assurance system that includes: Reliable fuel leasing mechanisms between fuel suppliers and users; Emergency fuel banks/reserves in the event of an interruption in supply. Technical Collaboration –Advanced fuel cycle cooperation (only with established fuel cycle countries) –Grid-Appropriate Reactors (small and medium size, 10-350 Mwe); –Infrastructure development for countries interested in nuclear power

12. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting12 GNEP International Engagement and Partnership Development Activities Engaged with advanced fuel cycle countries, reactor and candidate reactor countries since February 2006 announcement. –(E.G., Russia, China, France, UK, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Australia, Germany, Argentina, Brazil, Indonesia, Philippines, Ukraine, Nigeria, Ghana, South Africa, Vietnam, Malaysia, Poland, Bahrain, Jordan, Mexico). US and 5 other supplier nations proposed a reliable fuel supply initiative at the IAEA in September 2006. Developed and circulated Statement of Principles for GNEP US, Japan, France, Russia, and China with UK and IAEA observers met in Ministerial meeting with the Secretary of Energy on 5/21/2007 in DC to state commitment to GNEP

13. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting13 Outline Global Energy Demand and GNEP What is GNEP? G NE P Approach

14. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting14 Slide from P. Dehmer http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/presentations/ Nuclear Energy Provides 20% of U.S. Electricity Nuclear Share of Electricity Generation 2005 104 Source: NEI http://www.nei.org/

15. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting15 The Last Permit for U.S. Reactors Was Issued in 1979, but we expect that to Change Units Ordered Construction Permits Issued Full-power Operating Licenses Operable Units Shutdowns 1955196019651970197519801985199019952000 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Number of Units 8.23 quads of Nuclear Electric Power is produced by 104 operable nuclear power plants in the U.S. (i.e., average nuclear power plant = 0.08 quads) Slide from P. Dehmer http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/presentations/

16. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting16 The Domestic Elements of GNEP and NP2010 Can Advance Nuclear Energy in the U.S. Expand nuclear power to help meet growing energy demand in an environmentally sustainable manner. Develop, demonstrate, and deploy advanced technologies for recycling spent nuclear fuel that –Do not separate plutonium, and –Simplify the disposition of nuclear waste, thereby helping to ensure the need for only one geologic repository in the United States through the end of this century. Develop, demonstrate, and deploy advanced reactors that consume transuranic elements from recycled spent fuel.

17. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting17 At Present the U.S. Has a Once-Through Fuel Cycle Once-Through Fuel Cycle Closed Fuel Cycle Spent Nuclear Fuel disposed after a single pass through nuclear reactors in a geological repository If nuclear power increases at the anticipated rate, the U.S. will need between 5 and 11 repositories by the end of the century

18. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting18 GNEP Will Move the U.S. from a Once Through to a Closed or Recycling Fuel Cycle Once-Through Fuel Cycle Closed Fuel Cycle Spent nuclear fuel would be separated into useable and waste materials Residual waste would go to a geological repository or long-term storage Useable components would be recycled in fast reactors called Advanced Burner Reactors

19. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting19 GNEP Baseline Scenario for the U.S. - Nuclear energy provides 33% of electricity by the end of the century 23% of electricity supply LWR: 198 GWe FR: 33 GWe 28% of electricity supply LWR: 344 GWe FR: 72 GWe 33% of electricity supply LWR: 588 GWe FR: 122 GWe Based on Conversion Ratio of 0.5

20. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting20 GNEP Will Build on Waste Management Technologies Already in Place Worldwide Reprocessing Waste Storage Facility at La Hague, France Waste from 1 GWe reactor operating for 1 Year Fission Products and Minor Actinides in Glass Compressed fuel bundle cladding and hardware

21. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting21 Potential Benefits of Closed Fuel Cycle Include Improved Waste Management Certain elements (plutonium, americium, cesium, strontium, and curium) are primarily responsible for the decay heat that limits repository performance Large gains in repository space are possible by processing spent nuclear fuel to remove those elements –The recovered elements must be treated –Cesium and strontium must be stored separately for 200-300 years –Plutonium, americium, and curium can be recycled for transmutation and/or fission Irradiation in reactors

22. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting22 Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing Products Uranium: 499 kg, 0.12 m 3 as oxide Gases on Molecular Sieve: 0.45 kg, 0.00026 m 3 Technetium/ TRU Losses/ Zr Hulls & Structure: 154 kg, 0.035 m 3 Uranium/Plutonium/Neptunium: 19.7 kg, 0.004 m 3 as oxide Americium: 0.64 kg, 0.000048 m 3 as oxide Curium: 0.027 kg, 0.0000022 m 3 as oxide Cs/SrAlumino-Silicate: 14.7 kg, 0.006 m 3 Fission Prod./ U/TRU Losses In Borosilicate Glass : 50 kg, 0.018 m 3 Typical Spent PWR Fuel Assembly in the United States today: 50 GWd/MTHM burnup Mass: 460 kg Initial Heavy Metal plus 141 kg cladding and structural material Geologic Disposal uses about 0.65 m 3 of available repository volume per assembly Structure: 141 kg Recycle as Fuel Storage / Permanent Disposal < 10 % of the Repository Space < 1% of the Radiological Hazard

23. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting23 Radioactive Waste Management with GNEP Process waste has 1% of the radiological hazard compared to spent nuclear fuel High Level Waste volume reduced by at least a factor of 10 compared to the direct disposal of spent nuclear fuel All repository design and licensing requirements are still maintained –Process waste disposal greatly reduces heat load on the repository Enables different options for geologic waste disposal –Reduced potential exposure (~ 1/100 or less) for waste from the same amount of spent fuel –Same potential exposure, but for waste from a greater amount of spent fuel (~ waste from 100 times or more spent fuel) –Combinations of both, reduced potential exposure and waste from a greater amount of spent fuel (e.g., 1/10 of the potential exposure or less and waste from 10 times or more spent fuel) Opportunity for further improvement with research and development of more robust waste forms

24. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting24 Outline Global Energy Demand and GNEP What is GNEP? G NE P Approach

25. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting25 Initially GNEP Envisions Three Facilities Nuclear fuel recycling center (CFTC) Advanced Fuel Cycle Facility (AFCF) Advanced recycling reactor (ABR) Transmutatuon Fuel Industry Led, with Laboratory, University, and International Collaboration Support Laboratory Led, Industry, University, and International Collaboration Support

26. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting26 The GNEP R&D Program Uses Resources Across the Nation R&D mission –Support for technology development needs of GNEP facilities –Long-term development of advanced separations, transmutation fuel and recycle technologies along with validated simulation and computational techniques to advance the development and approval of fuel cycle technology. Ten national laboratories are engaged in the GNEP R&D program A university supporting research program started in FY07

27. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting27 The GNEP Strategic Plan Calls for Specific Actions for the Near Term Obtain input from U.S. and international industries and governments on how best to bring the needed GNEP facilities into being, what technology and policy issues must be resolved, and what business obstacles must be overcome. Develop a detailed GNEP technology roadmap for demonstrating solutions to the remaining technical issues in order to support commercial GNEP facilities. Pursue industry participation in the development of conceptual design and other engineering studies that support both a nuclear fuel recycling center and an advanced recycling reactor. Prepare a programmatic GNEP Environmental Impact Statement. Prepare a decision package for the Secretary of Energy for a 2008 decision

28. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting28 National Environmental Policy Act Analysis GNEP Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) –assess reasonable alternatives –analyze potential environmental impacts –assist DOE decision-making GNEP Siting Studies –Stakeholder interest in hosting one or both commercial-scale facilities –14 grant applications received –9 states (ID, IL, KY, NM, OH, SC, TN, UT, WA) –Both DOE and non-DOE sites proposed Notice of Intent (NOI) 1/2007 Notice of Intent (NOI) 1/2007 Public Scoping Process 1/2007-6/2007 Public Scoping Process 1/2007-6/2007 Draft PEIS Summer 2007 Draft PEIS Summer 2007 Public Comment on Draft PEIS Fall 2007 Public Comment on Draft PEIS Fall 2007 Final PEIS Late Spring 2008 Final PEIS Late Spring 2008 Record of Decision (ROD) Summer 2008 Record of Decision (ROD) Summer 2008 Advance Notice of Intent (ANOI) 3/2006 Advance Notice of Intent (ANOI) 3/2006

29. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting29 Purpose of the GNEP PEIS Assess reasonable alternatives that: –encourage expansion of nuclear energy production; –reduce nuclear proliferation risks; and –reduce the volume, thermal output, and radiotoxicity of spent fuel before disposal in a geologic repository

30. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting30 GNEP PEIS Environmental Issues Land Use Visual Resources Air Quality Water Resources Biological Resources Cultural Resources Waste Management Site Infrastructure Socioeconomics Environmental Justice Human Health Accidents/Terrorism Transportation Geology and Soils

31. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting31 Domestic Programmatic Alternatives Alternative 1: No Action –Continue once-through fuel cycle –Continue status quo in which commercial reactors generate and store spent fuel until DOE can dispose of it in a geologic repository –Continue ongoing nuclear fuel cycle research and development Alternative 2: GNEP Proposed Action –Broad implementation of a closed fuel cycle that could include one or more nuclear fuel recycling centers and one or more advanced recycling reactors With respect to Alternative 2, DOE is conducting a project-specific analysis to site, construct, and operate any or all of the three GNEP fuel cycle facilities

32. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting32 GNEP Site Alternatives Examined as Part of the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement DOE Sites Argonne National Laboratory (IL) Hanford (WA) Idaho National Laboratory (ID) Los Alamos National Laboratory (NM) Oak Ridge Reservation (TN) Paducah (KY) Portsmouth (OH) Savannah River National Lab (SC) Non-DOE Sites Atomic City, ID Barnwell, SC Hobbs, NM Morris, IL Roswell, NM

33. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting33 Global Nuclear Energy Partnership / Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative Budget (Dollars in thousands) FY 2006FY 2007FY 2008 (Request) AFCI/GNEP$78,408$167,500$395,000

34. May 23, 2007Federal Facilities Task Force Meeting34 Our Approach is to: Engage with industry and form international partnerships Advance relevant research and development using national laboratories, international collaborations, universities, and industry Demonstrate competence: –Involve the foremost national and international expertise Achieve a Secretarial decision that will put in place the cornerstone for the future of nuclear power through approval and continuation of a program that will develop and foster –A vibrant domestic nuclear electrical generation industry with adequate paths to deal with the spent nuclear fuel and that will over time close the fuel cycle –A successful global collaboration that will address the expansion of nuclear power and nuclear weapons proliferation