APS March Meeting 2011
Volume 56, Number 1
Monday–Friday, March 21–25, 2011;
Dallas, Texas
Session H5: Drowning in Carbon: The Imperative of Nuclear Power
8:00 AM–11:00 AM,
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Room: Ballroom C1
Sponsoring
Units:
FIAP GERA DNP
Chair: Steve Libby, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Abstract ID: BAPS.2011.MAR.H5.3
Abstract: H5.00003 : Used Nuclear Fuel: From Liability to Benefit
9:12 AM–9:48 AM
Preview Abstract
Abstract
Author:
Raymond L. Orbach
(The University of Texas at Austin)
Nuclear power has proven safe and reliable, with operating
efficiencies in
the U.S. exceeding 90{\%}. It provides a carbon-free source of
electricity
(with about a 10{\%} penalty arising from CO$_{2}$ released from
construction and the fuel cycle). However, used fuel from nuclear
reactors
is highly toxic and presents a challenge for permanent disposal
-- both from
technical and policy perspectives. The half-life of the ``bad
actors'' is
relatively short (of the order of decades) while the very long lived
isotopes are relatively benign. At present, spent fuel is stored
on-site in
cooling ponds. Once the used fuel pools are full, the fuel is
moved to dry
cask storage on-site. Though the local storage is capable of
handling used
fuel safely and securely for many decades, the law requires DOE
to assume
responsibility for the used fuel and remove it from reactor
sites. The
nuclear industry pays a tithe to support sequestration of used
fuel (but not
research). However, there is currently no national policy in
place to deal
with the permanent disposal of nuclear fuel. This administration
is opposed
to underground storage at Yucca Mountain. There is no national
policy for
interim storage---removal of spent fuel from reactor sites and
storage at a
central location. And there is no national policy for liberating
the energy
contained in used fuel through recycling (separating out the
fissionable
components for subsequent use as nuclear fuel). A ``Blue Ribbon
Commission''
has been formed to consider alternatives, but will not report
until 2012.
This paper will examine alternatives for used fuel disposition,
their
drawbacks (e.g. proliferation issues arising from recycling), and
their
benefits. For recycle options to emerge as a viable technology,
research is
required to develop cost effective methods for treating used
nuclear fuel,
with attention to policy as well as technical issues.
To cite this abstract, use the following reference: http://meetings.aps.org/link/BAPS.2011.MAR.H5.3