|
As you will see by reading this page there are
enormous economical benefits to being able to reprocess and recycle nuclear
fuel coming out of the current commercial nuclear reactors in this country. But
due to Jimmy Carters edict, nuclear fuel in this country cannot be reprocessed.
He is afraid that if we reprocess fuel some of the fissile material will be
stolen by rouge countries and made into bombs.
A new laser
method to supply nuclear fuel
Inside
a bland industrial building in Wilmington, N.C., an experiment is in the works
that could vastly reduce the cost, time, and space needed to make fuel for
nuclear power plants.
In that
building, secret uranium-enrichment technology licensed by GE-Hitachi Nuclear
Energy is nearing a pilot test. If successful, the new technology will enable
the company to supply low-cost nuclear fuel to power reactors worldwide,
officials say.
Only broad
outlines of the “Separation of Isotopes by Laser EXcitation,” or SILEX
technology, are public. Most details are classified under the Atomic Energy Act.
The Present Fuel Cycle
Uranium is mined, refined,
and converted to yellowcake. Natural uranium out of the ground contains isotopes
in the mass proportions 99.3% Uranuium-238 and 0.7% uranium-235. Since only
uranium-235 will fission and produce heat in a nuclear reactor, the mass of
uranium-235 must be increased to about 3.0% or 4.0% to be suitable for present
day light water reactors (LWR). Natural uranium with only 0.7% fissile U235 will
not keep the chain reaction going. A gaseous centrifugal process enriches the
natural uranium.
As an interesting
sideline, there is a controversy about Iraq enriching uranium to a sufficient
enrichment to make atomic bombs. Aluminum tubes were found in Iraq. Did Iraq
have the process to enriched uranium for an atomic bomb? It is an open question.
Aluminum tubes are used in the centrifuge enrichment process.
From the enriched uranium
material the reactor manufacturers chemically combine the uranium into pellets
of uranium oxide. The pellets are then stacked into long tubes. These tubes are
arranged in individual square shaped housings called a fuel bundle. A reactor
core is made up if many individual fuel bundles.
The fuel bundles stay in
the reactor core for about 4 to 6 years and then some need to be replaced due to
fuel burn-up and/or fuel damage due to the intense radiation. This is called the
once-through cycle because the fuel bundles once out of the reactor are never
opened to retrieve the remaining uranium-235, which is still a good fissionable
fuel. The fuel bundles still contain 95% to 99% of unused uranium that could be
reprocessed, put into new fuel bundles, and recycled into the reactor.
The fuel bundles coming
out of the reactor are stored in a pool of water at each reactor site. It is
intended to transport the bundles to the storage facility call YUCCA
Mountain in Nevada when it becomes ready to receive the fuel. The fuel is
considered to be spent or termed depleted uranium (DU ) because current law
in the US does not permit the fuel bundles to be reprocessed to retrieve the
good fuel remaining. Preprocessing is being done in other some other
countries. Moreover, the volume of waste that is not really waste will fill
up YUCCA Mountain whereas the volume of real waste would not even start to
fill up YUCCA Mountain.
The figure below shows the fuel cycle as it should be.
The fuel bundles
are not stored in a pool of water, but are reprocessed and the uranium and
plutonium are put back into the new fuel bundles.
After reprocessing
the fission product wastes are vitrified in glass and stored. The volume of waste is very
small and not as radioactive as the uranium and plutonium plus fission
product currently being stored.

Reprocessing and recycling nuclear fuel
is worth enormous amounts of money.
John K. Sutherland,
Chief Scientist, Edutech Enterprises said the following:
"Now,
would anyone - who claims to be rational willingly choose to bury a refined
product (spent fuel) that even after one cycle of use, still has a future
potential gross electricity value of at least $130,000,000/tonne (or about
260 billion dollars for each year's worth of U.S. spent fuel) and is
recyclable? It would be like junking a Mercedes after driving it for a few
days. Even pure gold is worth only $14,000,000/tonne, and look how we
protect and recover that."
John further points
out that the total U. S. refined depleted uranium (DU) stockpile so far sitting at the surface
and neglected, though managed, is about 5 times the potential energy
contained in the entire Middle East oil resources.
Nuclear waste may
be recycled
Brushing aside
concerns from members of Congress, scientists and antiproliferation
activists, the Energy Department is moving ahead with a plan to recycle
nuclear waste into new power plant fuel.
The plan would
reverse 30 years of U.S. policy, first outlined by President Carter,
opposing the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel on the grounds it would
increase the threat of nuclear proliferation.
Dennis Spurgeon,
assistant secretary of energy, has announced the government would spend up
to $20 million to study the private development of a "commercial-scale" fuel
reprocessing plant and an advanced reactor that could use fuel produced from
the waste.-
Cox News
Service
My Comment:
It takes 30 years to reverse the obvious from Jimmy Carters mistake. We may
join the rest of the world after all.
Reprocessing method could allay
weapons fear
Gerald E. Marsh1
and George S. Stanford2
- 5433 East View Park,
Chicago, Illinois 60615, USA
- 4700 Highland Avenue,
Downers Grove, Illinois 60515, USA
Sir:
We believe that
your worry about US plans to reprocess nuclear fuel ("Recycling the past"
Nature 439,
509–510; 2006) is misplaced. Since President Carter imposed a
reprocessing ban in 1977, it has become clear that other nations'
decisions about building nuclear weapons do not depend on what the United
States does with its spent fuel.
Furthermore, we
consider your claim that "recycling involves separating components that
can readily be used to build nuclear weapons" to be misleading on two
counts. First, degraded plutonium in spent reactor fuel can only be used
in an explosive device with considerable difficulty. Second, although
current recycling processes produce pure plutonium that can be used for
weapons, the US plan is to perfect a new method called UREX+, which would
be configured so as never to separate weapons-quality plutonium.
UREX+ processing is
the first step towards consuming excess plutonium in advanced,
metal-fuelled fast reactors and reducing the rate at which reactor-grade
plutonium is accumulating around the world. Moreover, fast reactors can
extract more than 99% of the energy in mined uranium — over a hundred
times better than the thermal reactors used today. The combination of
recycling and fast reactors also reduces the time that waste needs to be
isolated, from thousands of years to a few hundred.
There is still the
associated problem that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty gives all
signatories the right to develop a full-scale fuel cycle, and with it the
technological infrastructure for making bombs. President Bush has begun to
address this, by proposing that the spread of reprocessing technology be
curtailed, with waste management and nuclear fuel supplied at reasonable
cost—although to be acceptable, such a scheme should be run by an
international entity such as the International Energy Agency or the
International Atomic Energy Agency.
Properly
managed, nuclear power can meet growing energy demand safely, cleanly and
indefinitely.
Hillary Clinton Follows Bill in Paying off
the Left.
From Gretchen Randall's articles.
Issue: Senator
Hillary Clinton (D-NY) is reported today by Greenwire as saying
recycling of spent nuclear fuel has "serious problems" and could create
proliferation risks. She's wrong. But she is in typical far left company.
President Jimmy Carter, during his illustrious administration, banned all
nuclear fuel recycling because he feared nuclear weapons proliferation.
Based on that ban, Hazel O'Leary, Energy Secretary under President Clinton,
halted development at Argonne National Laboratory of the recycling method
known as pyro-metallurgical recycling. This is the type of recycling being
considered today by the Department of Energy and it does not increase the
likelihood of nuclear weapons proliferation, does not produce anything that
could be used for making bombs and, in fact, could turn decommissioned
warheads into fuel that could be used in a new generation of fast reactors.
Comment 1: Ms. Clinton is obviously moving to appease her
environmental fringe base that opposes the development of any energy
sources, no matter how environmentally friendly they may be.
Comment 2: Recycling nuclear fuel would give us centuries of clean,
safe electricity that is vital to our economic health and national security.
Comment 3: Recycling also resolves any problems involved with the
storage of nuclear waste in the Yucca Mountain repository
The Japanese Reprocess
nuclear Fuel
Nuclear Power is at
the center of their energy resources.
Japanese
nuclear plant starts test operation to reprocess depleted uranium TOKYO (The
Associated Press) - Dec 21 - By MARI YAMAGUCHI Associated Press Writer A
nuclear fuel reprocessing plant in northern Japan started tests with
depleted uranium Tuesday, taking a major step in the country's closely
watched efforts to use experimental reprocessed fuel to boost its energy
self-sufficiency.
The test at Rokkasho, about 580 kilometers
(360 miles) northeast of Tokyo, marks the first use of radioactive materials
at the plant, said Masanori Hiroo, a spokesman for plant operator Japan
Nuclear Fuel Ltd. The plant is at the center of Japan's hopes of using a
reprocessed fuel called mixed oxide, or MOX, in nuclear reactors.
The 2.1 trillion yen (US$20 billion; euro14.95 billion) Rokkasho plant began
operating in the early 1990s as a fuel storage site, and is expected to hold
fuel and waste for up to 50 years. Since opening, it has taken in 779 tons
(857 short tons) of spent fuel, more than a quarter of its capacity
The reprocessed fuel the plant is
expected to eventually make could be used in reactors that burn a mixture of
uranium and plutonium, or more advanced fast-breeder reactors, which
use plutonium instead of uranium and produce more plutonium for use as fuel.
Nuclear power is at the center of
resource-poor Japan's plans to become more energy independent. Japan's 52
active nuclear power plants supply more than one-third of its energy and
government plans call for more production.
My comment: The Japanese do
not worry about proliferation, nor are they encumbered by environmentalists.
They have their priorities right.
News
release: Knoxville News Sentinel May05, page B-1 says,
"Uranium Hexafluoride on move to Ohio" to ". be processed into a more
stable form for long-term storage.
" Meanwhile, DOE management are doing nothing
to insure, in the long term, that we will be able to make practical use of
that existing $70 trillion fuel material (Depleted Uranium
Hexafluoride) which has the potential to supply the whole USA with 700 years
of electrical energy.
Comment by an old friend in
the nuclear industry:
This, a bird in our hand (700
years of fuel material and with technology developed by the US) is better
than the pies in the sky (solar, wind, etc.) being evolved by DOE, its
supporters and its contractors. If we opt for the bird in the hand, it
will take a lot of hard work, dedication and time to recover our
$70,000,000,000,000 fuel material and to attain the potential for 700
years of electricity for the whole country. In the mean time, on our
present course, we will not attain the 700 years of electrical power,
but will continue to support middle-Eastern activities with our oil
dependency.
My explanation:
Depleted Uranium Hexafluoride is a form of Uranium 238 which is not a fuel
that will fission, but if deployed in a Fast Breeder Reactor it captures a
neutron and becomes Plutonium 239 that will fission and produce energy. Some
day our descendants in the distant future will look at us and say what fools
we were.
Epilogue
The reason that spent LWR fuel is called
“waste” today is that President Carter banned reprocessing in the hope that
the U.S. persuade the rest of the world not to reprocess. Since the
French, British, Russians, and Japanese are already reprocessing on a commercial scale and
the rest of the world will soon follow suite as the worlds reserves of
fossil fuels diminishes, it seems to many of us who work in the field that the
U.S. should reverse its position and lead the world in the development of a
diversion resistant pyroprocessing technology that Argonne National Laboratory
has been investigating.
Return to
Top
|