1. 3/26/2008 Closing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Paul Wilson WPUI Advances in Nuclear

2. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward2 What is the Nuclear Fuel Cycle? Enrichment Conversion Mining Reactors Separation Geologic Disposal Used Fuel Storage Fuel Fabrication

3. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward3 Closing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Front-end –Uranium resources –Life-cycle emissions Back-end –Used Fuel Policy –Yucca Mountain Closing the fuel cycle –Waste Disposal –Resource Extension –Separations technologies –Nuclear Non-proliferation

4. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward4 Uranium Resources 71 years at current consumption

5. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward5 Megatons to Megawatts Convert high-enriched uranium (HEU) to nuclear fuel –>80 MT US weapons material –500 MT Russian weapons material Currently providing ~50% of nuclear fuel supply –10% of US electricity Similar program beginning for Pu/MOX

6. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward6 Enrichment Technology Gaseous diffusion –Energy intensive –Original commercial scale technology Gas centrifuge –~4% of the energy consumption of diffusion –All new facilities (LES in NM) Laser-based –Renewed interest

7. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward7 Global Enrichment Capacity Nation/Supplier200220062015 France/Areva10,800* 7500 Germany-Netherlands-UK / Urenco 5850900011,000+ Japan/JNFL90010501500 USA/USEC8,000*11,300*3500+ USA/Urenco & Areva004000+ Russia/Tenex20,00025,00033,000+ China/CNNC1,00010001000+ Other5300 Total~46,50048,45061,800+ Requirements (WNA)48,42857,000 - 63,000 Ref: Uranium Information Center: http://www.uic.com.au/nip33.htm

8. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward8 Life-cycle Emissions Ref:Fusion Technology Institute FDM-1261: http://fti.neep.wisc.edu/pdf/fdm1261.pdf

9. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward9 Life-cycle Emissions 60% of emissions from fuel cycle front- end –Mostly emissions from electricity used for enrichment –Assumes 68% fossil-fueled electricity grid Emissions may increase as U-ore grade decreases Emissions may decrease as –Centrifuges replace diffusion, and –Grid increases low-emission fraction

10. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward10 What is “Nuclear Waste”? A B

11. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward11 The 3 C’s of Used Nuclear Fuel Compact … Contained … Cared for Imagine all your electricity for an entire lifetime was generated by nuclear energy –About 1 million kWh (2006 EIA) About 1 soda-can of used nuclear fuel

12. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward12 The 3 C’s of Used Nuclear Fuel Compact … Contained … Cared for Fuel itself is solid Wrapped in metal Stored in pool/cask

13. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward13 The 3 C’s of Used Nuclear Fuel Compact … Contained … Cared for Carefully tracked Decades of experience in safe handling Easy to detect and monitor Paid for in Nuclear Waste Fee

14. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward14 Nuclear Waste Policy Federal gov’t (DOE) takes possession of spent nuclear fuel beginning in 1998 –To be placed in permanent deep geologic disposal Utilities (=consumers) pay $1/MWh into Nuclear Waste Fund –~$30B as of Q3 2007 (including interest) ~$560M from WI

15. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward15 Yucca Mountain

16. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward16 Yucca Mountain Timeline 1957: National Academy recommends deep geologic disposal as preferred solution 1978: Study begins @ Yucca Mtn 1982: Nuclear Waste Policy Act –63,000 metric tonnes of spent nuclear fuel in first repository 1985: Three sites approved for intensive study 1987: Yucca Mtn selected as preferred site 2002: Yucca Mtn suitability affirmed by President & Congress 2006: New Senate Majority leader –Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) 2008: Application for license expected at US Nuclear Regulatory Commission for 2017 opening –Current funding level means schedule in question (2021?)

17. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward17 Repository Regulatory Limits Fundamental limit: Exposure to public –Nearest humans @ 20 km site boundary –2005: Updated EPA rule <15 mrem/y for first 10,000 years <350 mrem/y for remaining 1,000,000 years typical US background radiation ~250 mrem/y Secondary engineering limits –Total inventory of isotopes –Temperature/heat load of facilitiy

18. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward18 Estimated Dose from Yucca Mtn Ref: DOE Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

19. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward19 Estimated Dose from Yucca Mtn Ref: DOE Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

20. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward20 Reconsidering Used Fuel Policy S.784 [110 th Congress] –Federal Accountability for Nuclear Waste Storage Act of 2007 –Introduced into the Senate by H. Reid (D-NV) –Amend NWPA to require Transfer of spent nuclear fuel to independently operated dry cask storage facilities (at plant site!) Title of waste to be transferred to DOE

21. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward21 Reconsidering Used Fuel Policy S.37 [110 th Congress] –Nuclear Waste Access to Yucca Act –Introduced into the Senate by P. Dominici (R-NM) –Immediately withdraw land for use as repository –Amend NWPA to Allow construction of infrastructure before license granted Repeal capacity limit –Establish rail routes –Establish use of Nuclear Waste Fund –Establish “nuclear waste confidence”

22. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward22 Integrated Spent Fuel Management Combination of –At-reactor storage (wet & dry) –Interim centralized storage –Deep geologic disposal Performance-based licensing –Avoid need to demonstrate performance for first-of-a-kind facility before construction –Study performance and amend as necessary with NRC oversight

23. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward23 Reduce HLW Extend Resource Manage Proliferation Threat

24. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward24 Majority of Spent Nuclear Fuel is Not Waste Typical fresh PWR assembly –425 kg U After discharge –398 kg U –5 kg Np, Pu, Am, Cm –22.5 kg FP Disposal necessary Can be fissioned for energy generation Similar to depleted U

25. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward25 Advanced fuel cycles LWRs/ALWRs Thermal Recycle Full Recycle Generation IV Reactors Fresh U Advanced Fuel Reprocessing w/o Pu Separation

26. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward26 Minimize High-Level Waste Nuclear Futures Legal Limit Extended License for Current Reactors Continued Constant Energy Generation Constant Market Share Growing Market Share Total Discharged Fuel by 2100, MTHM 63,000120,000240,000600,000 1,300,000 Current approach 124921 Expanded capacity 1 2 5 11 1 2 5 Thermal Recycle Full Recycle 1

27. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward27 Fast Recycle Energy Balance Current reactors are based on U-235 –0.71% in natural uranium ore Fast reactors with multi-recycle are based also on U-238 –99.29% in natural uranium ore Extends resource by 140x –70 years  10,000 years Already mined depleted U becomes resource

28. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward28 Depleted Uranium Theoretically centuries of energy content

29. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward29 Separations History Primary technology borrowed from weapons program –Aqueous process required separation of Pu from spent fuel France – La Hague UK – Sellafield Japan – Rokkasho Concern for nuclear proliferation led this being banned by executive order –Carter, 1977 This was reversed but NWPA (1982) made direct disposal financially preferable

30. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward30 Modern Separations Technology Pyroprocessing/Electrochemical –Originally designed for breeder fuel cycles –Separate U & Pu together UREX+1a –Aqueous process separates all components heavier than U as a single stream (Np, Pu, Am, Cm, etc) –Other variations yield different streams e.g. Np+Pu & Am+Cm –Never demonstrated at commercial scale

31. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward31 Cost of Reprocessing MIT Report (2003) –0.51 ¢/kWh for once through UOX –2.24 ¢/kWh for single recycle MOX –0.79 ¢/kWh for mixed fleet fuel cycle costs Congressional Budget Office Testimony (2007) –Total PV cost over 50 years –Boston Consulting Group: $1.9B –Kennedy School: $25.8B Same assumptions: $5.6-10.8B

32. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward32 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Global nuclear expansion = –Global expansion of fuel cycle technology, OR –Development of global fuel cycle service market No technological silver bullet –Some technologies can increase incentives to prefer fuel cycle services over technology deployment

33. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward33 Reduce Proliferation Risk Reliable fuel services –Supplier states are most economically attractive option –Internationally guaranteed supply Small-scale reactors –Small size for growing economies with limited access to capital –Long life cores to minimize refueling Advanced Safeguards –Technology & diplomacy

34. WPUI Lunch 3/26/2008 The Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Moving Forward34 Global Nuclear Energy Partnership US Nuclear Power Proliferation- Resistant Recycling Advanced Burner Reactors Minimize Nuclear Waste Reliable Fuel Services Small- Scale Reactors Advanced Nuclear Safeguards Reduced Proliferation Risk

35. 3/26/2008 Paul Wilson wilsonp@engr.wisc.edu energy.wisc.edu