scholarly journals Sustainability Features of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options

2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 2377-2398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Passerini ◽  
Mujid Kazimi
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Energy Potential ◽  
Fuel Cycle Analysis ◽  
The Impact

The nuclear fuel cycle is the series of stages that nuclear fuel materials go through in a cradle to grave framework. The Once Through Cycle (OTC) is the current fuel cycle implemented in the United States; in which an appropriate form of the fuel is irradiated through a nuclear reactor only once before it is disposed of as waste. The discharged fuel contains materials that can be suitable for use as fuel. Thus, different types of fuel recycling technologies may be introduced in order to more fully utilize the energy potential of the fuel, or reduce the environmental impacts and proliferation concerns about the discarded fuel materials. Nuclear fuel cycle systems analysis is applied in this paper to attain a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of fuel cycle alternatives. Through the use of the nuclear fuel cycle analysis code CAFCA (Code for Advanced Fuel Cycle Analysis), the impact of a number of recycling technologies and the associated fuel cycle options is explored in the context of the U.S. energy scenario over 100 years. Particular focus is given to the quantification of Uranium utilization, the amount of Transuranic Material (TRU) generated and the economics of the different options compared to the base-line case, the OTC option. It is concluded that LWRs and the OTC are likely to dominate the nuclear energy supply system for the period considered due to limitations on availability of TRU to initiate recycling technologies. While the introduction of U-235 initiated fast reactors can accelerate their penetration of the nuclear energy system, their higher capital cost may lead to continued preference for the LWR-OTC cycle.

scholarly journals Optimization models of a two-component nuclear energy system with thermal and fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrey A. Andrianov ◽  
Ilya S. Kuptsov ◽  
Tatyana A. Osipova ◽  
Olga N. Andrianova ◽  
Tatyana V. Utyanskaya
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Optimization Models ◽  
Oxide Fuel ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Two Component

The article presents a description and some illustrative results of the application of two optimization models for a two-component nuclear energy system consisting of thermal and fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle. These models correspond to two possible options of developing Russian nuclear energy system, which are discussed in the expert community: (1) thermal and fast reactors utilizing uranium and mixed oxide fuel, (2) thermal reactors utilizing uranium oxide fuel and fast reactors utilizing mixed nitride uranium-plutonium fuel. The optimization models elaborated using the IAEA MESSAGE energy planning tool make it possible not only to optimize the nuclear energy system structure according to the economic criterion, taking into account resource and infrastructural constraints, but also to be used as a basis for developing multi-objective, stochastic and robust optimization models of a two-component nuclear energy system. These models were elaborated in full compliance with the recommendations of the IAEA’s PESS and INPRO sections, regarding the specification of nuclear energy systems in MESSAGE. The study is based on publications of experts from NRC “Kurchatov Institute”, JSC “SSC RF-IPPE”, ITCP “Proryv”, JSC “NIKIET”. The presented results demonstrate the characteristic structural features of a two-component nuclear energy system for conservative assumptions in order to illustrate the capabilities of the developed optimization models. Consideration is also given to the economic feasibility of a technologically diversified nuclear energy structure providing the possibility of forming on its base a robust system in the future. It has been demonstrated that given the current uncertainties in the costs of nuclear fuel cycle services and reactor technologies, it is impossible at the moment to make a reasonable conclusion regarding the greatest attractiveness of a particular option in terms of the economic performance.

scholarly journals A scenario study on the transition to a closed nuclear fuel cycle using the nuclear energy system modelling application package (NESAPP)

2022 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Andrei A. Andrianov ◽  
Olga N. Andrianova ◽  
Ilya S. Kuptsov ◽  
Leonid I. Svetlichny ◽  
Tatyana V. Utianskaya
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
System Modelling ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Sustainability Metrics ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle

The paper presents the results of a case study on evaluating performance and sustainability metrics for Russian nuclear energy deployment scenarios with thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle. Ten possible scenarios are considered which differ in the shares of thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors, including options involving the use of mixed uranium-plutonium oxide fuel in thermal reactors. The evolution of the following performance and sustainability metrics is estimated for the period from 2020 to 2100 based on the considered assumptions: annual and cumulative uranium consumption, needs for uranium enrichment capacities, fuel fabrication and reprocessing capacities, spent fuel stocks, radioactive wastes, amounts of plutonium in the nuclear fuel cycle, amounts of accumulated depleted uranium, and the levelised electricity generation cost. The results show that the sustainability of the Russian nuclear energy system can be significantly enhanced through the intensive deployment of sodium-cooled fast reactors and the transition to a closed nuclear fuel cycle. The authors have highlighted some issues for further considerations, which will lead to more rigorous conclusions regarding the preferred options for the development of the national nuclear energy system.

scholarly journals Integration of the Back-end of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: An Overview

MRS Advances ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 253-264
Author(s):  
François Diaz-Maurin ◽  
Rodney C. Ewing
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Waste Management ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Fully Coupled ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACTRecent efforts have been made toward the integration of the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle in the United States. The back-end integration seeks to address several management challenges: 1) current storage practices are not optimized for transport and disposal; 2) the impact of interim storage on the disposal strategy needs to be evaluated; and 3) the back-end is affected by—and affects—nuclear fuel cycle and energy policy choices. The back-end integration accounts for the various processes of nuclear waste management—onsite storage, consolidated storage, transport and geological disposal. Ideally, these processes should be fully coupled so that benefits and impacts can be assessed at the level of the full fuel cycle. The paper summarizes the causes and consequences of the absence of integration at the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle in the U.S., critically reviews ongoing integration efforts, and suggests a framework that would support the back-end integration.

scholarly journals Optimization models of two-component nuclear energy system with thermal and fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (3) ◽  
pp. 100-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrey Alekseevich Andrianov ◽  
Ilya Sergeevich Kuptsov ◽  
Tatiana Andreevna Osipova ◽  
Olga Nikolaevna Andrianova ◽  
Tatyana Vladimirovna Utyanskaya
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Optimization Models ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Two Component

scholarly journals The Need for Integrating the Back End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle in the United States of America

MRS Advances ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (19) ◽  
pp. 991-1003 ◽  
Author(s):  
Evaristo J. Bonano ◽  
Elena A. Kalinina ◽  
Peter N. Swift
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Dry Storage ◽  
The Us

ABSTRACTCurrent practice for commercial spent nuclear fuel management in the United States of America (US) includes storage of spent fuel in both pools and dry storage cask systems at nuclear power plants. Most storage pools are filled to their operational capacity, and management of the approximately 2,200 metric tons of spent fuel newly discharged each year requires transferring older and cooler fuel from pools into dry storage. In the absence of a repository that can accept spent fuel for permanent disposal, projections indicate that the US will have approximately 134,000 metric tons of spent fuel in dry storage by mid-century when the last plants in the current reactor fleet are decommissioned. Current designs for storage systems rely on large dual-purpose (storage and transportation) canisters that are not optimized for disposal. Various options exist in the US for improving integration of management practices across the entire back end of the nuclear fuel cycle.

scholarly journals Elaboration of approach to nuclear energy systems assessment by criterion of sustainable development

2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
Vladimir I. Usanov ◽  
Stepan A. Kviatkovskii ◽  
Andrey A. Andrianov
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy Systems ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Subject Areas ◽  
Key Events

The paper describes the approach to the assessment of nuclear energy systems based on the integral indicator characterizing the level of their sustainability and results of comparative assessment of several nuclear energy system options incorporating different combinations of nuclear reactors and nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The nuclear energy systems are characterized by achievement of certain key events pertaining to the following six subject areas: economic performance, safety, availability of resources, waste handling, non-proliferation and public support. Achievement of certain key events is examined within the time interval until 2100, while the key events per se are assessed according to their contribution in the achievement of sustainable development goals. It was demonstrated that nuclear energy systems based on the once-through nuclear fuel cycle with thermal reactors and uranium oxide fuel do not score high according to the integral sustainable development indicator even in the case when the issue of isolation of spent nuclear fuel in geological formation is resolved. Gradual replacement of part of thermal reactors with fast reactors and closing the nuclear fuel cycle results in the achievement of evaluated characteristics in many subject areas, which are close to maximum requirements of sustainable development, and in the significant enhancement of the sustainability indicator.

Accelerator-driven subcritical fission in molten salt core: Closing the nuclear fuel cycle for green nuclear energy

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter McIntyre ◽  
Saeed Assadi ◽  
Karie Badgley ◽  
William Baker ◽  
Justin Comeaux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Molten Salt ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Overview of the U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Waste Forms Development

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Gray ◽  
John Vienna ◽  
Patricia Paviet
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
High Level Waste ◽  
Fuel Cycles ◽  
Waste Forms ◽  
The U.S

In order to maintain the U.S. domestic nuclear capability, its scientific technical leadership, and to keep our options open for closing the nuclear fuel cycle, the Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) invests in various R&D programs to identify and resolve technical challenges related to the sustainability of the nuclear fuel cycle. Sustainable fuel cycles are those that improve uranium resource utilization, maximize energy generation, minimize waste generation, improve safety and limit proliferation risk. DOE-NE chartered a Study on the evaluation and screening of nuclear fuel cycle options, to provide information about the potential benefits and challenges of nuclear fuel cycle options and to identify a relatively small number of promising fuel cycle options with the potential for achieving substantial improvements compared to the current nuclear fuel cycle in the United States. The identification of these promising fuel cycles helps in focusing and strengthening the U.S. R&D investment needed to support the set of promising fuel cycle system options and nuclear material management approaches. DOE-NE is developing and evaluating advanced technologies for the immobilization of waste issued from aqueous and electrochemical recycling activities including off-gas treatment and advanced fuel fabrication. The long-term scope of waste form development and performance activities includes not only the development, demonstration, and technical maturation of advanced waste management concepts but also the development and parameterization of defensible models to predict the long-term performance of waste forms in geologic disposal. Along with the finding of the Evaluation and Screening Study will be presented the major research efforts that are underway for the development and demonstration of waste forms and processes including glass ceramic for high-level waste raffinate, alloy waste forms and glass ceramics composites for HLW from the electrochemical processing of fast reactor fuels, and high durability waste forms for radioiodine.

Scenario Analysis on the Benefits of Multi-National Cooperation for the Development of a Common Nuclear Energy System Based on PWR and LFR Fleets

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Ciotti ◽  
Jorge L. Manzano ◽  
Vladimir Kuznetsov ◽  
Galina Fesenko ◽  
Luisa Ferroni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Opinion ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Power ◽  
Power Plants ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Proper Time ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Levelized Cost Of Electricity ◽  
Base Load

Financial aspects, environmental concerns and non-favorable public opinion are strongly conditioning the deployment of new Nuclear Energy Systems across Europe. Nevertheless, new possibilities are emerging to render competitive electricity from Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) owing to two factors: the first one, which is the fast growth of High Voltage lines interconnecting the European countries’ national electrical grids, this process being triggered by huge increase of the installed intermittent renewable electricity sources (Wind and PV); and the second one, determined by the carbon-free constraints imposed on the base load electricity generation. The countries that due to public opinion pressure can’t build new NPPs on their territory may find it profitable to produce base load nuclear electricity abroad, even at long distances, in order to comply with the European dispositions on the limitation of the CO2 emissions. In this study the benefits from operating at multinational level with the deployment of a fleet of PWRs and subsequently, at a proper time, the one of Lead Fast Reactors (LFRs) are analyzed. The analysis performed involves Italy (a country with a current moratorium on nuclear power on spite that its biggest utility operates NPPs abroad), and the countries from South East and Central East Europe potentially looking for introduction or expansion of their nuclear power programmes. According to the predicted evolution of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) a forecast of the electricity consumption evolution for the present century is derived with the assumption that a certain fraction of it will be covered by nuclear electricity. In this context, evaluated are material balances for the front and the back end of nuclear fuel cycle associated with the installed nuclear capacity. A key element of the analysis is the particular type of LFR assumed in the scenario, characterized by having a fuel cycle where only fission products and the reprocessing losses are sent for disposition and natural or depleted uranium is added to fuel in each reprocessing cycle. Such LFR could be referred to as “adiabatic reactor”. Owing to introduction of such reactors a substantive reduction in uranium consumption and final disposal requirements can be achieved. Finally, the impacts of the LFR and the economy of scale in nuclear fuel cycle on the Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) are being evaluated, for scaling up from a national to a multinational dimension, illustrating the benefits potentially achievable through cooperation among countries.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document