Spallator and APEX Nuclear Fuel Cycle: a New Option for Nuclear Power

BNL--32126 BNL 32126 THE §PALLATOR AND APEX NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE DEP3 004593 A SEW OPTION FDR NUCLEAR POWER

NOTICE M. Steinberg Department of Nuclear Engineering PORTIONS OFTH|SWEPORTftRE ILLEGIBUE. It Brookhaven National Laboratory fiiTbeVrfreproduced from the bast available Upton, L.I., New York 11973 copy to permit the broadest possible avail- ability. presently, but is oemg stored In pools at the power MNOHLX reactor sites. Eventually these elements will either A new nuclear fuel cycle Is described which have to be reprocessed or disposed of. provides a long term supply of nuclear fuel for the thermal LWR nuclear power reactors and eliminates the Weapons materials require high concentrations need for long-term storage of radioactive waste. (>20Z) of the high grade-high purity fissile material Fissile fuel is produced by the Spallator which (Pu-239, U-235 or U-233). For the thermal fission depends on the production of spallation neutrons by nuclear burner power reactors, for example, the light the interaction of high-energy (1 to 2 GeV) protons water reactors (LWRs), one does not need to concen- on a heavy-metal target. The neutrons are absorbed trate fissile U-235 (natural) or Pu-239 (made from in a surrounding natural-uranium or thorium blanket uranium 238) or even U-233 (made from thorium) to in which fissile Pu-239 to 0-233 is produced. these higher levels for use in the power reactor fuel Advances In linear accelerator technology makes it elements. The fissile fuel concentration in the fuel possible to design and construct a high-beam-current elements need only be in the order of 2Z to 4% to be continuous-wave proton linac for production putpose3. able to function in a light water power reactor LHR. The target is similar to a sub-critical reactor and produces heat which Is converted to electricity for We are proposing an alternate new fuel cycle supplying the linac. The Spallator is a self- which eliminates the radioactive fission product waste sufficient fuel producer, '.;hich can compete with the effluent and thus avoids long-lived geological age 2 fast breeder. The APEX fuel cycle depends on recycl- radioactive waste storage »^ an(j supplies fissile ing the transuranlcs and long-lived fission products fuel for the LWR power reactor. For all intents and while extracting the stable and short-lived fission purposes this fuel cycle does not have any radioactive products when reprocessing the fuel. Transmutation waste effluent. Only non-radioactive stable waste and decay within the fuel cycle and decay of the which does not have to be stored in a waste isolation short-lived fission products external to the fuel facility and can be disposed of in a normal fashion to cycle eliminates the need for long-term geological the environment is produced by the system. age storage of fission-product waste. Apex Fuel Cycle Introduction The fuel cycle consists of chemically reprocess- It is well known that Purex nuclear fuel repro- ing LWR spent fuel which has been aged for 1 to 2 cessing for the civilian power program was primarily years. The reprocessing removes the stable non- derived from the need to produce weapons grade pluto- radioactive (NRFP, e.g. the lanthanldes, etc.) and nium. Thus Pu-239 is solvent extracted with tributyl short-lived fission products (SLFP) with half-lives of phosphate (TBP) from an aqueous nitrate solution of <1 to 2 years and returns, in dilute form, the long- spenc fission fuel and the Pu-239 is then recovered lived transuranics (TU's, e.g., Pu, Am, Cm, Np, etc.) and concentrated for mixing with fresh uranium oxide and long-lived fission products (LLFP's, e.g. mainly to make up the fuel in a thermal nuclear power reac- the 30 year half-life Cs, Sr, and 10 year Kr and 16 tor. Actually no fuel reprocessing has been perform- million year I, etc.) to be refabricated into fresh ed for the civilian power economy 3ince deferment of LWR fuel elements. The fissile transuranics (the odd reprocessing was instituted by the Non-proliferation mass-numbered) will fission and the fertile transura- Act of 1976. Thus, most of the reprocessing that has nics (the even mass-nuabered) will be converted to occurred was for the weapons program. The effluent fissile transuranics in the thermal nuclear power high level waste from these production plants contain reactor. The TU's have large thermal neutron cross- up to about 23! of the Pu-239 originally present in sections and can either be readily fissioned or con- the spent fuel from the convertor reactor together verted from fertile material (FM) to fissile fuel (FF) with che fission products. The high-level waste from In the LWRs. Equilibrium concentrations of these the fuel reprocessing plants have been stored to materials are achieved in the fuel cycle within a date, on-site in large engineered storage tanks. relatively short period of time. Recycling the tran- Much work is now being conducted to solidify this suranics, which actually act as fuel, adds to the high level waste for placement in underground excava- power capacity of the LWRs and does not detract from tions for geological age storage in so-called waste the neutron economy of the reactor. Because of their isolation facilities. Because of the Pu-239 content, ouch lower cross-sections, the long-lived fission which ha.3 a 26,000 year half-life, this waste products (LLFPs) [mainly Cs-137 and Sr-90] are not requires storage for a quarter of a million yeara readily transmuted in the LWRs. For these waste (-10 half-lives) to decay to biologically acceptable products we would be nainly relying on the decay background level, along with other long-lived tran- process by storage within the fuel cycle. Somn trans- suranics (Pu, Am, Cm, Up, etc.). The longest-lived mutation will occur in the Spallacor and the LWRs and biologically aoat hazardous fission products are which will shorten the recycle storage times for decay Cs-137 and Sr-90, both of which have half-lives of of the LLFPs to non-radioactive stable isotopes approximately 30 years, require at least 300 years to (NRFP). It is interesting to note that the main long- decay to background. Actually the bulk of che lived radioactive fission products formed in the present waste consists of 80 million gallons stored fission process are the 30 yr half-life Cs-137 and at che weapons materials production plants. The main Sr-90 isotopes so that no other hazardous long-lived radioactive products, in this aged waste consists of nuclides are expected to be formed on recycling. Over Pu, and Cs and Sr fission products. The civilian the longer period of time the total inventory of Cs fual as mentioned above is not being reprocessed and Sr thus reaches asymptotic equilibrium values. MASTER DISTRIBUTE OF THIS MEHT IS In order to implement the above fuel cycle, it One of the possible chelating agents is organi- say be possible to use conventional Purex reprocess- cally 6,6,7,7,8,8,8-heptafluoro-2,2-dimethyl-3,5- ing; however, we are proposing to Improve and design octanedione, briefly referred to as fod. The the reprocessing chemistry to accomplish the goal set chelating reaction of spent U02 fuel can be represent- forth. A fundamental consideration is that the ini- ed as follows: tial purpose of Purex was to produce pure Pu for weapons- Purex was, therefore, operated to allow Pu D02+ FPs + TDs + fod - OO2 + TD(fod) + FP(fod) to spill over into the waste in order to prevent contamination of the Pu metal with fission products. In Fod is a stable organic liquid which can be read- the concept proposed herein, the reverse is allowed ily handled in the atmosphere. For process purposes, for the civilian reactor fuel. Fission products are closed reaction vessels are preferred since elevated allowed to contaminate the fissile Pu, but Pu is not temperatures will be necessary. By extraction of the allowed to contaminate the waste. The purpose of U02 and distillation of the organo-aetallic chelate, a this new reprocessing system is to extract the stable separation and partitioning will be obtained, whereby non-radioactive (NRFP) and shorter-lived fission stable (NRFP) and short-lived products (SLFPs) and the products (SLFPs with <2 years half-life) and to allow long-lived fission products (LLFPs) will be distilled the transuranics and long-lived fission products to out from the transuranics (TUs). The vapor pressures remain in che fuel. Furthermore, in order to produce of the lanthanide chelates have values of over 10 ma make up fissile fuel (FF) for fabricating fresh fuel Hg at 200°C while that of che uranium and plutonium elements for use in the thermal burner LWB. power chelates are as low as 10"^ mm Hg,^ thus the relative reactors, it Is proposed to use the Spallator (linear volatility is Large (~104) and a very large separation accelerator apallation-neutron target reactor) to factor becomes possible. The fod reagent may be produce fissile material.2 Isotopic enrichment of recovered by either extraction with another solvent or 0-235 from natural uranium is not needed and the by hydrogen reduction. If these are not efficient, cycle functions in the same sense as a breeder. the chelated organo-metallic compound can be roasted back to oxide and the fluorine gas will be recovered Chelox Reprocessing for reforaing the fod chelating agent. The detailed process chemistry has yet to be worked out in an B. and The new reprocessing chemistry which we call D program. Because of the relatively small mass of "Chelox" involves the use of a chelating agent to fission products, the cost per unit of power produced extract and separate the stable alkali and rare earth in the total fuel cycle is negligible. Fod is made fission products from the higher valent uranium and from relatively cheap organic materials, e.g. acetone, cransuranic oxides.4 propionic acid, and fluorine, so that make up of fod losses should not be costly. This is accomplished mechanically by chopping up the LWR fuel elements and leaching the exposed spent The organic chelating agent is stable in the OO2 with Che chelating agent. The chop-leach opera- presence of air and water to temperatures of more than tion has been highly developed in the Purex process.1 100°C, however, the radiation stability of Che chelat- The advantages of chop-leach is that contamination ing agent must also be. determined. Some decomposition due to escape of dry particulates and volatiles is can be tolerated because of the relative low cosr of minimized. the reagent in the total fuel cycle cost. Fluorine substitution in the organic structure of the chelating The 3-diketonate chelating chemistry has been agent increases its cheat Ji. and radiation stability. tried out in the laboratory for complexlng and sepa- It is important Co note that fod is only one of a rating transuranics but has never been developed into number of reagents of the S-diketonate class, so that a fuel processing scheme.5 The basic physical chere is a large degree of flexibility in process chemistry of Che process is available in the litera- design with this class of compounds. ture and has been extensively used as an analytical procedure.4 At present, it is visualized that the The recovered uranium, plutonium, transuranlc and DOj from the spent fuel elements will be contacted long-lived fission products (Cs and Sr) are mixed with the organic S-diketonate chelating agent at Cogether and fabricated back into a fuel pellet. In temperatures in thfc order of 100° to 200°C to extract this fabrication procedure, make up fertile and, if most of the fission products and some transuranics, desired, fissile fuel are added to the mixed oxide for leaving the bulk of the uranium and plutonlum undis- production of an LWR zircaloy clad fuel element. If aolved. The aetal complexlng chelating agents have U-235 from an enrichment plant is available, this can been successfully used in extraction of metallic ore be used to makeup fissile fuel. However, this would bodies and analyzed by gas phase chromatography.4 It eventually deplete all the natural U-235 and the is proposed to develop this basic analytical proce- nuclear industry would Chen come to a halt unless a dure into a process which can extract and partition breeder reactor becomes available. It is preferred to the TOs and FPa. The type of diketonate and the have a Spallator make up the fissile material inven- reaction conditions will be one of the major objec- tory for assuring long-tern fuel supply for an LWR tives of tha proposed research and development task. power reactor economy. The Chelox process can also be This R and D will determine the feasibility and the applied to the fast breeder cycle, however, because of process conditions necessary to obtain che optimum che advancageous LWR economics, present deployment and desired separation and partitioning of Che non-radio- acceptability, a Spallator supplying fuel Co a nuaber active (NRF?) stable and short-lived isotopes (SLFP) of LWRs is preferred. from the long-lived transuranics (TUs) and fission products (LLFPs). Once the organometallic compounds, The Spallator for Fissile Fuel Production of the stable and short-lived fission products (SLFPs) are formed these compounds will be separated The Spallator employs a linear accelerator and refined by distillation. Distillation is possi- (LINAC) to generate a high energy proton (1 to 2 GeV) ble because of the widely differing vapor pressures vhich Impinges on a UO2 target and produces apallation and volatilities between che TUs and FP chelates.4 neutrons which can be absorbed in fertile material to produce fissile Pu-239.2»6 The neutron yield is sufficient so chat one 600 HW(e) beam Spallator can supply nine 1000 MW(e) LWRs with fuel throughout the life span of the LWR power reactors. High energy and Table 1 Indicates the design characteristics and fast fission produce heat in the target which can be the production capacity of the Spallator. The basic converted to steam to generate the electrical energy neutron yield for a UO2 target from spallation, and necessary to drive the accelerator. The Spallator is high energy and fast fission, hao been calculated to a self-reliant machine with internal circulation of be equivalent to a net production of 94 fissile atoms power. In contrast to the breeder it is not a net per GeV-proton and is backed up by experiment and producer of power, nor is it a net consumer of power. neutronic model calculations.7'8 The fuel to It only produces fissile fuel for burner (thermal) moderator volume ratio in the target is 2.37. There power reactors. The fast breeder reactor (FBR) is a is a power producing region in the Spallator which is dual purpose machine since it produces fuel in addi- behind the under moderated production section and has tion to power, whereas the Spallator is a single pur- a fuel to moderate volume ratio of 0.5- The peaking pose machine producing only fuel and is thus decoupl- power density is not any higher than in an LWR. The ed from the utility power grid. yield indicated is for re-enriching the spent UO2 from the LWRs which would have fissile concentration of The Spallator consists of two major parts: a approximately 2.5Z. The target reactor is designed to linear accelerator (LIIJAC) and a spallation target. provide just enough heat to power the accelerator. A Over the past 50 years the LINAC has been developed conservative accelerator efficiency of 50Z (line into a highly reliable and efficient research tool. energy to beam energy) and a target power cycle effi- Figure 1 shows the main features of the accelerator. ciency of 33X were assumed. At a 75Z plant factor the There is much confidence that a high current (300 ma production rate of the machine is 3300 Kg/yr of Pu at 2 GeV proton) continuous wave (CW) production which is enough to provide fuel on an equilibrium accelerator can be constructed at a reasonable cost.6 basis for nine 1000 HW(e) LWRs- Although the The target is essentially a subcritical assembly Spallator target is subject to decay heat it is a sub- resembling a power reactor without control rods. critical assembly which shuts down when the beam is Figure 2 shows the target reactor design for the turned off. In this respect it is safer than an LWR. Spallator. Hater cooled pressurized Zr tubes house Zr clad UO2 target assemblies. The proton beam is magnetically spread into a fan shape which scans the TABLE I target tubes by means of a magnet drive. The pie THE SPJUXATOI shape of the target is to produce a "hohlraum" to ACCELERATOR SpALLATIaN REACTOR minimize leakage of reflected neutrons* In this PRODUCTION CAPACITY AND DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS manner, the energy density of the beam on the target is also maintained at a level which prevents damage PROTON ENERGY - 2 GeV MET FISSILE ATOM IIELD FOR - 94 FISSILE ATONS/GEV-PRDTU to the target structure. U02/ZI CLAD - H2O COOLED CURRENT CV - SWIM Son Po«i« - MO iw ACCELERATOR EFFICIENCY - 501

POWEN TO ACCELERATOR - 1200 IM(E) POWER GENERATES IN TARSET - IGOO IW(T> (SELF-SUFFICIENT) PLANT FACTOR - 751 Pu239 FISSILE FUEL PRODUCTION RATE - 3300

FISSILE FUEL NEEDED FOR 1-1000 HV(E) UI - 360 (G/YR 751 P-F. INO 0-6. C.a. to. OF 1000 ".¥(£) LUIIs SUFFORTED - 9

Table 2 gives an estimate of the Spallator cost and Table 3 shows a comparative cost analysis for 1) a Spallator providing fuel for 9 LWRs, 2) a conventional LWR economy without Pu recycle, 3) an LWR economy with Pu recycle, and 4) 6 breeders providing fuel for 3 supported LWSs to provide a total equalized power generation of 9000 MW(e). The breeder has a doubling time of approximately 20 years. The Spallator/LWR economy indicates a 15% lower total lifetime capital investment than the breeder/LWR economy mainly because each breeder costs 70Z more than each LWR9 and the HATcR-COOUD - ZR inventory of fissile material for the breeder is PRESSURE higher than for the LWR. It also appears that under present cost assumptions, the Spallator is competitive with the present U-235 fueled LWRs even with repro- REFLECfOR cessing. Besides being more economical, the Spallator allows the utilities to continue using LWR technology FERTILE which has become commercialized, is safe and is llcetx- IMTESIAL aable. The fast breeder reactor has not yet reached U-233 OS TH-Z32 this position.

Z» - CLAD IH PRESSURE TUBES

TIE SPALUTOR T/WGET DESI3I FIGURE 2 TABLE 2 THE SPALLATOR ACCELERATOR SPALLATION REACTOR

CAPITAL INVESTMENT 1980 DOLLARS

LINEAR ACCELERATOR - U000/KW(E)* X 600 HW - $600 x 106 TARSET - 1200 HW(E) x tlQOO/KVUJ* " 1,200 x 106

TOTAL COST $1,800 x 106

* BASED ON REF. (2) AND (6), THE EARLIER ESTIMATES % INDICATED A UNIT COST FOR THE ACCELERATOR OF J560/KW(E) OF BEAN POWER. FOR THIS COMPARATIVE ESTIM TE WE PRACTICALLY DOUBLED THE COST TO *1000/KW(E) TO ACCOUNT FOR ESCALATION AND CONTINGENCIES- ** TARSET COST IS ASSUMED TO BE EQUAL TO AN LWR POWER REACTOR IN TERMS OF UNIT POWER GENERATION-

- r*rtll« Iktwlal ( FT - riitUf AMI (tw-239, 0-23S. 1 U*a IIMIM prates

[ UHIH mtees* (C*. sr, cr. I. •«-) Z rr. IMIMI tvfat b tacrai Hint fccTcic 6 bCIHI/S LM TO - Ti •••^••li • (P», Jto, (k. «tc.) 9 9 9 9 n - un twl il«it rt-o * io' 19.0 i IS* 19.0 • 10* U.a . IQ9 UflMH tio-2 i in*' t**IT*4 C.IT !•»• 9 Fin 1» THI KK.IIIM.1 lacl^aa 1) SfilUut far innulv PM flMlla tmX. 2) OHIN nfncfMl>t far EMI«U fM. - NX t-as m nr ti.ot) 11 Kt (3JI) r«ercll*c radlia«tlM mci, 3) LHIa far pMiclfli |Mr ami illmiMMU* uriiTwiBi jmd m tmr l*t-tmrm waalm^tcMl-wtm *taca& mt laar'll**' ndivaca. Srsu* cas W moCUlmd tor Tint Can */ *»r- t HtM M-5 • Iff* lM t* am Tfe/ff-233 tml del*. CMT f. HWJK U't a It* fiian II MT a/Df MM «.» a 1J> 11-1 a III) IM a Ul

Cur a, IqfiKIHIH hill" U.| t M* M.J '-IB* Call a, Fait. 'aaaicitia* Full" rt.l i Iff ftafclaicu «M a 10t t«» IWI flHMt •MUIIKI lit a lit IU.I i lOf

t *lv*>tflsItM> HTatM a lOSS Mial IK 111 a ]8fl ««• « 1H* Will * UVU (1|*7*W

• H (MK r« fenxtuiM. MckiUtt II A flow sheet of the entire APEX process concept is given in the attached Figure 3- The Chelox fuel reprocessing scheme is shown in Figure 4. It should Co lae rvwl rakrleatlsa also be noted that the non-radioactive (NRFP) and short-lived fission products (SLFP of <1 to 2 years half-life) are stored in tanks for periods in the order of 20 years to decay these isotopes to background before disposing of them to the environment or UJPT HicC TO I placing them back into the U mines as stable non- ffsog air DlSf radioactive fission products (SRFP). These may also mi TV be used for new stable isotope sources which are not available in nature. T«t« Itel

Subla (nrp) aaat Figures 5 and 6 show calculations for recycling akon-llvM (StTV) the transuranics and the Cs and Sr in accordance with far dlspcMKl CD BJIB the flowsheet shown in Figure 3. As can bo seen, the TUs quickly reach equilibrium oa recycling and also add fissile fuel in the normal wa .hat a thermal »» - UttOm atcarlil (H-23I reactor converts fertile to fis? fuel which then (Rt-Ut. B-CS. 0-J33 fissions and produces power. V .. internal fuel cycle storage of the Cs and S' .hese are decayed and reach near asymptotic values the fuel cycle as given by the data shown inr jre 5. The neutron economy penalty in the LHR ._•> small because of the small thermal neutron cross sections and limiting the concentration through decay in intermediate process storage vessels. Most of the conversion of the Cs and Sr is by aeaus of the decay mechanism and a smallsr portion is by transmutation through neutron absorption in the Spallator and LWRs. Any transmutation will hasten the approach to an equilibrium concentration value for the IXFPs. U/Pu-239 LWRcycle,moreLWRscanbsuppliedfrom The Spallatorwouldproducth0-233inventoryfrom very advantageousltoathorium/U-233fuelcycle. Th/U-233 fuelcycleinthatolong-livedtransura- each Spallator.Thereisalsoanadvantagfth ratio IntheU-233LWRcyclishighertha natural thorium.Furthermore,sincethconversion nics suchaPu-239areformed. proposed incontrastothafCheaqueousPurex Chelox reprocessingareseveral-foldasfollows: corrosive reagents. process withallitdifficultieofhandlinghighly worthwhile forthweaponsprogra m orevenfo going throughasecondTBP extractioncycleispossi- waste. Additionaldecontaminatio n ofthewastby high Pupurity(ahold-over fromweaponsproduction). separated fromtheplutoniuinordertomaintai fissile fuelrecycledsothathighdecontamination stable fissionproductsithlowconcentratio ble withPurex,butevidentl y hasnotbeenfound As aresult,residualFuremain s intheeffluent is moreeasilyobtained.Thincontrastoth factors requiredofthediscar3tablwastproduct conventional Purexwaste,whichhastobesharply program. further cleanupofChewast e forChcivilianpowe •o •o 0' : 7& A / The abovprocessconceptcanalsobapplied The advantagesofthAPEXfuelcyclwith 1. Anon-aqueousfuelreprocessingsystemi 2. Hecanaffordtoleavasmallamounf I 1 1 me: V <: F-' — = •— 101 Z4I E 1. C •a »- -^ KM ^^ a 1 •••• 1 ^« 1—1— = very high,reachingamaximumintheorderof250°C the chelatingagentispreferredbecausofles the chelatprocess.Achopandleachoperationwit particulate contaainationandlowertemperatur reprocessing. diversion forweapons.Additionally,remotehandling more expensivreactors,e.g.thliquidmetalfast of non-aqueousconcentratedfissilematerialmayb fuel elementscanbeadeterrantofissil less hazardouthanremocelyhandlingcorrosive liquids andgases* not haveolearnanewtechnologyandinstall breeder reacto(LMFBR). term LWReconomysothat,theelectricalutilitied applied touraniumrthoriuinaLWRfuelcycle uranium orU-233frothoriuintheSpallator.A economy, throughtheproductionofeitherPu-239from necessity ofdevelopingtheliquidmetalfastbreeder long termsupplyoffuelisavailablewithoutth reactor (LMFBR). stable fissionproductsardiscardedawasto term tarreatrialgeologicaagestoragoflong-lived APEX fuelcyclewithSpallatorproductionand the publicdoesnothavobconcernedaboulong- Chelox reprocessing.Thesystemsolvesthprobleof radioactive waste. APEX fuelcycleflowsheetdesign,and(3)maka chelating process,(2)developindetailtheentir develop thereprocessingchemistryoforganic research anddevelopmentprogrambeinitiateo(1) power reactoeconomy.Itisrecommendedthaa fuel supplyandwastemanagementforalong-termLWR realistic economiassessment. 9 CLIHHATESSEEDFOELON-I~T£PI)VGEOLQGfCAt,~AG3T0AASOFUDICACTtYi!F1SS1OB • ELMMATESKEED*a*CMRICKMEMTrum- • PRODUCESIMTIALREACTS!tivEHToirFO«fatuCTCIE;EITHEIFISSILEP"-239F*DH • PRODUCESLO«s-rEKnSUPFITorI-UCLCA*FUELFO«THELtfitPWEICEACTOECOIOHV. • POTENTIALLYnoteECOKMICU.nuAFASTUEEDEBREACTO!(FEDnwii*aoFUEL • UTILITIESNEEDHONEWt*O*EtKEACTOTECHHOLaCT- • TNEC0IVEHT1CIALUI'OVERHIACTOtTEOIKOLflCYSSOSTAIIE1V*T«eUTILITIE B • RELATIVELYLO>TEHMM!U«.-ioi-»auEousnon-coMMtrt , •QH'MECHMICAL. • APEXUSESIIEA*TERflTECMMOLOST.HOHEEDT O SCnSiSTRATE1SCIENTIFICM1BC|P«|_ 3. ThetemperaturofthCheloxprocessinot 4. Thehandlingofradioactivelyhotrecycled 3. Theentirprocessschemasupportlong 6. Theprocesssystemconceptcanbequally RATUIAI U-238o«FISSILE(1-233FISHUTUUU.TH'Z32> 7. Theobjectivofthconceptisthaonly PRODUCT AMDTtl.MU.UlHCWASTE- CTCLE- Tables 4and5listadditionaladvantageofthe REPROCESS I••(CHELQI)OP'OILIEflfLOVED* 10VMTAGES OFtPEXWCUMFUELCTCIE m i TA1LE S 8. R.G. Alsmiller, et. al., "Neutron Production APtt IS A SAfEll CCOMfUCAL UD HUE PUUFEUUdK ftUlSUMt FUEL CYCU by Hedium-Energy (-1.5 GeV) Protons in Thick Uranium Targets", ORNL/TM 7527, Oak Ridge National Laboratory • ALL PIIIILK KATUIAL i» HAIITAIMI in DILUTE Vom (<«)• "" (January 1981). • iKVflTHT IS IHC LOVflST Of UT fMIL CTCLE dm THM HIIHl)-

• TltCMM. KACTOAS All A tlt«M TKCMMLMT KITH AJi C1CELLHT UFETV UCOII' 9. CP. Zaleski, "Breeder Reactors in Prance", Science 208, No. 4440, pp. 137-44, (April 11, 1980). • S'lUTtH TAMtT It A tSKftlTlCAl ItACfai.

• SPMHTO* mawcd nix. O«LT ON MIUJIS - IT IS A natie roooie fueHme. UrtX WHICH II A DUAL niWHI MCHIM MflKCIf •*«« At WELL At fHSL*

• Tut SfALLATOI II AI IIKrlRHlT fUCNINI " «COOfl.(D MOM ART rSf(l UIO EXCCPT '9* STAITUPI UM.III UFII All nifCfWMT HjilT n|CK XP -4B M THE WCft M1O*

wnAIIIIATIM 0* r-ISIILC HATEIIAL IS ALLMAILE I* CIVILIAN FUEL Research carried out under the auspices CTCIE* PB F«« NtArnl IEIBIIII HIM P«IITTI CONTAKINATION « PB it «I ALLEM^.; of the U.S. Dept. of Energy under ISSVLTIN* IN 9% CMTAH1IATIM OF rilllOII P1IPWKT VASTE* contract no. DE-AC02-76CH00016.

• FUEL ELEHCITI IN US OUT or IEACTO* AIE lAaiaAcrivE. MAKIII THEN MOIE DIFFICULT TO SIVEIT F04 FtOMCIM IfAFONS UTCHAL ~ ALSO Pu IS ISOTOPICALLT CanTAHI!l4TE0 •UXIM IT A FOON VEAFONS UAH RATERIAL<

It is realized that we are recommending a new approach for the nuclear industry which may take a good deal of development funds and a lumber of years to reach commercialization, however, It should take much less than the almost 40 years it took the U.S. to get to the present position, with the same unsolved problems of fuel and waste 3till facing us. Unless the nuclear industry takes a new approach and solves the problems of concern to the public, we may not have a nuclear industry to be concerned about. There is still some opportunity for the country and industry to attempt to take a path divergent from the well-known path. We may find it to be a short-cut to establishing a firmer nuclear industry. The APEX system with Spallator and Chelox appears potentially technically sound and economically viable.

References 1- H. Benedict, T. Pigford, and H. Levi, "Nuclear Chemical Engineering", Chapter 10, pp. 457-563, McGraw-Hill Book Co., N.Y., (1981).

2. M. Steinberg, J.R. Powell, H. Takahashi, P. Grand, and H.J.C. Kouts, "The Linear Accelerator Fuel Enricher Regenerator (LAFER) and Fission Product Transmutor (APEX)", BNL 26951, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton/ N.Y., (1979) and Atomkernergie, 36, No. 3, pp. 42-46 (1980).

3. Proceedings of the International Conference on Nuclear Haste Transmutation, University of Texas Austin, Texas, (July 22-24, 1980). '

4. R.E. Sievers and S.E. Sadlowski, "Volatile Metal Complexes" Science 201, pp. 217-24, (1978) and R. C. Mehrota, R. Bohra, and D.P. Gaus, "Metal 3-Dlketonates and Allied Derivatives", Academic Press, London, (1978).

5. H.A. Swain, Jr. and D.G. Karraker, "Volatile Chelates of Quadivalent Actinides", Inorg. Chem 9 No. 7, pp. 1766-69, (1970). '

6. H.J.C. Kouts and M. Steinberg, Editors, "Proceedings of an Information Meeting in Accelerator Breeding", Conf-770107, held at Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, N.Y. Sponsored by Energy Research and Developaent Administration, Washington. D.C.. (January 18-19, 1977).

7. H. Takahashi, H.J.C. Kouts, P. Grand, J.R. Powell, and M. Steinberg, Atomkernergie, 36. So. 3 pp. 195-99, (1980).