Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How can the cost of spent fuel reprocessing be reduced and reliable isolation of all the wastes be ensured?

  • Published:
Radiochemistry Aims and scope

Abstract

The facilities operating in the world are today incapable of reprocessing the whole amount of the already accumulated and annually unloaded NPP spent fuel. Therefore, the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) reprocessing is not considered today as the only alternative of the nuclear fuel cycle. The paper attempts to analyze measures aimed at reducing expenditures for NPP fuel reprocessing. In the author’s opinion, the existing approach to the SNF reprocessing technology should be revised taking into account prospects for using REMIX fuel, with possible expansion of the range of fission products suitable for further use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. The present status of IAEA safeguards on nuclear fuel cycle facilities, IAEA Bull., 1980, no. 22; Multilateral Approaches to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Expert Group Report to the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, 2005, https://www.iaea.org/INPRO/2nd_Dialogue_Forum/mna-2005_web.pdf.

  2. Carter, J., Nuclear Power Policy Statement on Decisions Reached Following a Review, April 7, 1977, The American Presidency Project, http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=7316.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Budushchee atomnoi energetiki. Mezhdistsiplinarnoe issledovanie Massachusetskogo tekhnologicheskogo instituta (Future of the Atomic Power Engineering: an Interdisciplinary Study of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology), http://www.seu.ru/programs/atomsafe/books/FAE1.pdf.

  4. Zhiznin, S.Z. and Timokhov, V.M., Geopoliticheskie i ekonomicheskie aspekty razvitiya yadernoi energetiki. Energeticheskaya politika i diplomatiya: k 15-letiyu MIEP (Geopolitical and Economical Aspects of the Progress of Nuclear Power Engineering. Energy Policy and Diplomacy: to the 15th Anniversary of the International Institute of Economics and Law), http://www.vestnik.mgimo.ru/sites/default/files/pdf/007_zhizninsz_ timohovvm_0.pdf.

  5. Scientific and technical basis for the geological disposal of radioactive wastes, Tech. Rep. Ser., Vienna: IAEA, 2003, no. 413.

  6. Geological disposal of radioactive waste, IAEA Safety Standards Ser., Vienna: IAEA, 2006, no. WS-R-4.

  7. The use of numerical models in support of site characterization and performance assessment studies of geological repositories, IAEA TECDOC, Vienna: IAEA, 2013, no. 1717.

  8. Planning and design considerations for geological repository programmes of radioactive waste, Tech. Rep. Ser., Vienna: IAEA, 2015, no. 1755.

  9. Bunn, M., Fetter, S., Holdren, J.P., and van der Zwaan, B., The economics of reprocessing vs. direct disposal of spent nuclear fuel, Final Report 8/12/1999–7/30/2003, https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/nuclear-engineering/22-812j-managing-nuclear-technology-spring-2004/readings/repro_report.pdf.

  10. Von Hippel, F.A., Sci. Global Secur., 2004, vol. 12, pp. 137–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Lagus, T.P., Reprocessing of Spent Nuclear Fuel: A Policy Analysis, 2005 WISE Intern, Univ. of Minnesota, August 4, 2005, http://www.wise-intern.org/journal/2005/lagus.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bunn, M., Assessing the Benefits, Costs, and Risks of Near-Term Reprocessing and Alternatives, http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/files/inmm_assessing_ the_benefits_costs_risks_nearterm_reprocessing_alterna tives_2006.pdf.

  13. Von Hippel, F., Why Reprocessing Persists in Some Countries and not in Others: The Costs and Benefits of Reprocessing, April 9, 2009, http://www.npolicy.org/article_file/Why_Reprocessing_Persists_in_Some_ Countries_and_Not_in_Others-The_Costs_and_Benefits_ of_Reprocessing.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  14. CBO Testimony, Statement of P.R. Orszag, Director: Costs of Reprocessing vs. Directly Disposing of Spent Nuclear Fuel before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of United States Senate, November 14, 2007.

  15. La Tourrette, T., Light, T., Knopman, D., and Bartis, J.T., Managing Spent Nuclear Fuel Strategy Alternatives and Policy Implications, Environment, Energy, and Economic Development. A Rand Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment Program, www.rand.orgas.

  16. Dennis, K.J., Rugolo, J., Murray, L.T., and Parrella, J., Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Should the United States Resume Reprocessing? A pro and con, November/December 2009, http://thebulletin.org/2009/november/should-united-states-resume-reprocessingpro-and-con.

    Google Scholar 

  17. The Future of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle. An Interdisciplinary MIT Study, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2011, https://energy.mit.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/MITEI-The-Future-of-the-Nuclear-Fuel-Cycle- Summary-Report.pdf.

  18. Critique of “The Future of Nuclear Power: An Interdisciplinary MIT Study,” Proc. Workshop “The 10–50 Solution: Technologies and Policies for a Low-Carbon Future,” Pew Center on Global Climate Change and National Commission on Energy Policy, Pew Center/NCEP 10–50 Workshop. http://www.c2es.org/docUploads/10-50_Cochran.pdf.

  19. The economics of the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, NEA Report, Nuclear Energy Agency, OECD, 2013, no. 7061.

  20. Spencer, B.B., Del Cul, G.D., and Collins, E.D., in Proc. Int. Conf. Global’2003: Atoms for Prosperity (New Orleans, USA, Nov. 16–20, 2003), ANS, 2003, pp. 2255–2259, http://web.ornl.gov/~webworks/cppr/y2001/pres/117445.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Vergnes, J. et al., in Int. Conf. on Future Nuclear Systems Global’97, Yokohama (Japan), Oct. 5–10, 1997, pp. 743–746.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Durret, L.F. et al., in Int. Conf. on Future Nuclear Systems Global’97, Yokohama (Japan), Oct. 5–10, 1997, pp. 860–861.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Golfier, H. et al., in Int. Conf. on the Back-End of the Fuel Cycle Global’2001, Paris, Sept. 9–13, 2001, paper 175.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fedorov, Yu.S., Kudryavtsev, E.G., Bibichev, B.A., et al., in Proc. Int. Conf. Global’2005, Tsukuba (Japan), Oct. 9–13, 2005, paper 124, p. 5.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Fedorov, Yu.S., Kudryavtsev, E.G., Bibichev, B.A., et al., At. Energy, 2005, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. 572–576.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Pavlovichev, A.M., Pavlov, V.I., Fedorov, Yu.S., et al., At. Energy, 2006, vol. 101, no. 6, pp. 863–868.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Pavlovichev, A.M., Pavlov, V.I., Semchenkov, Yu.M., et al., At. Energy, 2008, vol. 104, no. 4, pp. 257–261.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Fedorov, Yu.S., Bibichev, B.A., Zilberman, B.Ya., et al., Proc. Int. Conf. Global’2009, Paris, Sept. 6–11, 2009, paper 9054.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Zilberman, B.Ya., Fedorov, Yu.S., Rimskii-Korsakov, A.A., et al., At. Energy, 2012, vol. 113, no. 6, pp. 383–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Dekusar, V.M., Kagramanyan, V.S., et al., Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Yadern. Energet., 2013, no. 4, pp. 109–117.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Postovarova, D.V., Kovalev, N.V., Onegin, M.S., and Bibichev, B.A., Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Yadern. Energet., 2016, no. 1, pp. 100–108.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Teplov, P.S., Alekseev, P.N., Bobrov, E.A., and Chibinyaev, A.V., EPJ Nucl. Sci. Technol., 2016, vol. 2, p. 41, http://www.epj-n.org/articles/epjn/pdf/2016/01/epjn150063.pdf.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Pokhitonov, Yu.A., Starchenko, V.A., Shvedov, A.A., et al., in Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. SAFEWASTE 2000, Montpellier Corum (France), Oct. 2–4, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Pokhitonov, Yu.A. and Romanovskii, V.N., Radiochemistry, 2005, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 1–13.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Pokhitonov, Yu.A., in Waste Management Conf., Phoenix, Arizona (USA), Febr. 25–March 1, 2003; Febr. 24–28, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Pokhitonov, Yu., in Waste Management Conf., Phoenix, Arizona (USA), March 6–10, 2016.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Khlopin Radium Institute, 2-i Murinskii pr. 28, St. Petersburg, 194021, Russia

    Yu. A. Pokhitonov

Authors
  1. Yu. A. Pokhitonov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yu. A. Pokhitonov.

Additional information

Original Russian Text © Yu.A. Pokhitonov, 2017, published in Radiokhimiya, 2017, Vol. 59, No. 6, pp. 481–487.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pokhitonov, Y.A. How can the cost of spent fuel reprocessing be reduced and reliable isolation of all the wastes be ensured?. Radiochemistry 59, 547–553 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1134/S1066362217060017

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1066362217060017

Keywords

Search

Navigation