Fuel Cycle Strategies and National P&TPrograms

U.S. Advanced Fuel Cycle Strategy

Frank Goldner, PhD
U.S. Department of Energy
September 26, 2006
1Abstract•••The current state of Fuel Cycle Strategies and National Programs for
the United States at the moment cannot be separated from theemerging U.S. Global Nuclear Energy Partnership program.
As part of President Bush’s Advanced Energy Initiative, Secretary ofEnergy Samuel W. Bodman announced on February 6, 2006 a $250
million Fiscal Year (FY) 2007 request to launch a Global Nuclear
Energy Partnership (GNEP). This new initiative is a comprehensive
strategy to enable the expansion of emissions-free nuclear energy
worldwide by demonstrating and deploying new proliferation
resistant technologies to recycle nuclear fuel, minimize waste, andimprove our ability to keep nuclear technologies and materials outof the hands of terrorists.
The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership has four main goals. (1)reduce America’s dependence on foreign sources of fossil fuels andencourage economic growth. (2) recycle nuclear fuel using new
proliferation-resistant technologies to recover more energy andreduce waste, (3) encourage prosperity growth and clean
development around the world. And (4) utilize the latest
technologies to reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation worldwide.
2Abstract (continued)• One near-term effort to implement GNEP is a Technology Demonstration Program.
The GNEP Technology Demonstration Program is based on a five-year technology
plan, which is currently being developed in consultation with scientists from DOE’s
national labs. This detailed roadmap for GNEP technology development anddemonstration process is focused on technologies that will:• Separate the high-energy elements of spent nuclear fuel that can be recycled.
• Develop “fast burner” reactors that can convert these high-energy elements into
electricity and shorter-lived isotopes, dramatically reducing the volume, heatload, and toxicity of the waste.
• Integrate modern nuclear materials management concepts into each step of thefuel cycle to increase safeguards confidence.
• Close the nuclear fuel cycle through research and technologies for recycling fueland fabricating fuel suitable for recycling.
• A parallel effort under consideration is how to involve industry, both national andinternational, in partnership with the Technology Demonstration effort. Toward thisend we have sought this year expressions of interest from industry on participatingin our program and hope soon to pursue requests for proposals.
• In summary, it should be obvious that pursuit of fuel cycle strategies and programsin the U.S. cannot be separated from the emerging GNEP program. We lookforward to pursuing GNEP as an international effort which can not only further
nuclear power development as a safe, economic, environmentally friendly, andproliferation resistant resource in the United States, but also worldwide.

34

Key U.S. Fuel Cycle Related Program Elements• Expand nuclear power(NP2010)• Manage & minimize spent fuel(Yucca Mountain)• Demonstrate advanced recycle technology (no separated Pu)• Demonstrate Advanced Burner Reactors(Sodium FR)• Establish reliable fuel services(Leasing, Backup)• Demonstrate small, exportable reactors(Robust, Secure)• Enhance nuclear safeguards technology(Advanced Design )5

GNEP Fuel Cycle Concept – U.S. Dual Tracks

Track 1

Track 2•

Enlist industry to build commercial scale to UnitedStates Government specs••

SNF would be processed into acceptabledisposable waste forms andtransuranics/lanthanides

Enlist foreign partners on R&D to resolve key
uncertainties•

Transuranics/Lanthanides could be vitrified inunlikely case Track 2 proves too difficult•

Transuranics/Lanthanides would be stored for future
conversion into fast reactor fuel•Host site not at risk of becoming de facto
repository

6

US Technology: Recycle & Fast Reactors

7

100 GW(e) LWR once-through option - U.S. Base CaseLWR Fuel Fab –1,950 tons/yr

U

100 GWe - 300 GWthLWRs

100 ton/yr Fission
Prod.

25 ton/yr TRU+ 1,825 U

33% efficient power conversion
50,000 MWD/MT8Equilibrium Example: ABRs for a 100 Gw(e) System
Bottom Line – SENDS MUCH LESS TRU to RepositoryU
1,091 tons/yr LEU
LWR Fuel
Fab – 1,170 tons/yr

0.1% TRU process loss
60 GWe - 181 GWthU

L

LWRs

UREX

64 ton/yr Fission Prod.
0.02 ton/yr TRU

15 ton/yr TRU
40. GWe - 105 GWth

CR=0.50

Sodium - ABRs
CR=0.50

PYRO

30 ton/yr Fission Prod.
0.1 - 1 ton/yr TRU0.1 - 1 % TRU process loss
100 ton/yr Fission Prod.
25 ton/yr TRUAABR Fuel Fab9

Am Target Behavior in Fast and Thermal Systems
Am Target in Thermal System

Am Target in Fast System

1000

1000
Pu238

Pu238

Am241
800

Am241
800

Am243

Am243
Cm

SUMTOT

Mass (kg/IHMMT)

Mass (kg/IHMMT)

Cm
600

400

200

SUMTOT
600

400

200

000

510152025

Irradiation Time (year)

3035400

510152025303540

Irradiation Time (year)• Am transmuted more quickly in a thermal spectrum• For either system, multi-recycle will be required• A thermal region in a fast reactor may combine
benefits of both systems
10Technology Approach Under Consideration for U.S.

• Build on proven capabilities of fuel cycle nations inlieu of engineering demos– Use international experience with existing andprevious facilities that have been constructed andoperated– Use U.S. technological base enhanced byinternational collaborative applied research andtechnology development• Operate advanced recycling and reactor
prototype in the U.S. as early as possible– Early industrial emphasis to build commercial
prototypes of separations and fast reactor facilities

11

Domestic Actions• Engage domestic and international industry & potential hosting sites– Request for Expressions Of Interest issued August 7, 2006; Responses received
September 8, 2006•••

Industry Information Meeting took place August 14, 2006
Consolidated Recycle Treatment Facility
Advanced Burner Reactor– Evaluate responses to determine path forward• Detailed Siting Studies– Financial Assistance Funding Opportunity Announcement released August 3, 2006
– Applications received September 7, 2006 and anticipate issuing awards later in theyear– Announcement includes potential for hosting commercial-scale operations• National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) process to be completed during
Summer 2008
– Coverage for all aspects of GNEP

• June 2008 Secretarial decision

12

International Actions• Pursue Development of international high-level GNEP strategy– Analyze individual national strategic plans– Analyze potential for international fuel leasing regime• Use existing agreements for near-term cooperation– Efforts currently ongoing via GIF, AFCI, and I-NERI• Develop specific R&D tasks to be accomplished with specificnations over the near-future• Address country-specific opportunities/challenges topartnership

13

Summary• GNEP vision appears vibrant with significant interest– Making progress in addressing challenges• Propose adapting GNEP technology acquisition– Industrial emphasis to commercial scale, Track 1– Federal and foreign R&D to tackle undemonstrated technologies, Track 2– Requires careful implementation, however gains exceed risks• International partnership essential for technology path
– Success of U.S. program more dependent on R&D at foreign facilities in
bypassing engineering demos– Interest by countries in partnering bilaterally with US• Need International mechanisms to support GNEP goals– Enlist partners in GNEP
– Define incentives and means for partner participation•It should be obvious that pursuit of fuel cycle strategies and programs in the U.S.
cannot be separated from the emerging GNEP program. We look forward topursuing GNEP as an international effort which can not only further nuclear
power development as a safe, economic, environmentally friendly, andproliferation resistant resource in the United States, but also worldwide.

14