Benefits and concerns of a closed nuclear fuel cycle

Abstract

Nuclear power can play an important role in our energy future, helping to meet increasing electricity demand while at the same time decreasing carbon dioxide emissions. However, the nuclear fuel cycle in the United States today is unsustainable. The 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act establishes the U.S. Department of Energy as responsible for disposing of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) generated by commercial nuclear power plants operating in a “once-through” fuel cycle in a deep geologic repository located at Yucca Mountain, NV. However, unyielding political opposition to the Yucca Mountain site has hindered the commissioning process to the extent that the current administration has recently declared the site unsuitable. In light of this, the DOE is exploring other options, including closing the fuel cycle through reprocessing and recycling of spent nuclear fuel. The possibility of closing the fuel cycle is receiving special attention because of its ability to minimize the final high level waste package by separating and isolating the most long-lived components, as well as recovering additional energy value from the original fuel. Reprocessing and recycling of SNF can decrease the volume of waste stored by a factor of 4 and reduce the timeframe of storage from hundreds of thousands of years to thousands of years. Reprocessing and recycling technologies are, however, still very controversial because of the increased cost and proliferation risk reprocessing can present. Estimates of increases in the levelized cost of electricity with reprocessing range from about 10% to 50% due to large uncertainties in the financing, construction, and licensing of a new plant. Ultimately, the U.S. will need to compare each of these fuel cycle options with respect to sustainability, proliferation risk, commercial viability, waste management, and energy security to define the future of nuclear power.