Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Reactor Strategies: Adjusting to New Realities
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
XA9746007, ;/ IAEA-TECDOC-990 Nuclear fuel cycle and reactor strategies: Adjusting to new realities Contributed papers International Symposium held in Vienna, 3-6 June 1997 organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency in co-operation with the European Commission, the OECD Nuclear Energy Agency and the Uranium Institute o w Aiomc mwmy December 1997 -07 The IAEA does not normally maintain stocks of reports in this series. However, microfiche copies of these reports can be obtained from INIS Clearinghouse International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramerstrasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria Orders should be accompanied by prepayment of Austrian Schillings 100, in the form of a cheque or in the form of IAEA microfiche service coupons which may be ordered separately from the INIS Clearinghouse. The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Materials Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramerstrasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND REACTOR STRATEGIES: ADJUSTING TO NEW REALITIES CONTRIBUTED PAPERS IAEA, VIENNA, 1997 IAEA-TECDOC-990 ISSN 1011-4289 ©IAEA, 1997 Printed by the IAEA in Austria December 1997 FOREWORD The International Symposium on Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Reactor Strategies: Adjusting to New Realities was held from 3 to 6 June 1997 in Vienna, Austria. It was organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in co-operation with the European Commission, the Nuclear Energy Agency of the OECD (OECD/NEA) and the Uranium Institute (UI). More than 300 participants from more than 40 countries and 5 organizations took part. The reason for organizing the symposium was to face the new realities in the nuclear fuel cycle and to come to conclusions on how these new realities should be addressed. In the light of these objectives, international working groups prepared key issue papers on six topics that were selected as the central themes for consideration at the symposium. An International Steering Group composed of the representatives of 12 countries and three international organizations co-ordinated the work of the six working groups. Working Group 1 on "Global Energy Outlook" established assessments of the scenarios of future requirements for nuclear energy to provide a basis for the work of the other Working Groups. Working Group 2 on "Present Status and Immediate Prospects of Plutonium Management" dealt with the problems arising from growing stocks of separated plutonium, both from civilian and military programmes. Working Group 3 on "Future Fuel Cycle and Reactor Strategies" discussed the factors influencing future reactor and fuel cycle concepts and the resulting trends for the next 50 years. Working Group 4 on "Safety, Health and Environmental Implications of the Different Fuel Cycles" assessed and compared the overall environmental and health effects of different systems of the nuclear fuel cycle. Working Group 5 on "Non-proliferation and Safeguards Aspects" discussed the existing non- proliferation regime and new initiatives. Furthermore, it considered non-proliferation aspects for different fuel cycle options and for nuclear materials declared excess to defense needs. Working Group 6 on "International Co-operation" assessed the types of international co- operative activities and arrangements and drew conclusions for the future. Each of the six working groups wrote a key issue paper. These key issue papers are published as a separate publication. During the symposium, addresses and papers presented by leading experts and policy makers provided additional information in these fields. The key issues were explored further in discussions by the participants and a panel, of experts, which helped to highlight the main problems to be addressed in designing the policies for the nuclear fuel cycle in the next 50 years. Special emphasis was placed on the problem of disposition of separated plutonium of civil origin and of plutonium originating from the dismantlement of nuclear weapons. This TECDOC contains all the papers presented, together with a summary of the symposium and a list of participants. EDITORIAL NOTE In preparing this publication for press, staff of the IAEA have made up the pages from the original manuscripts as submitted by the authors. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the IAEA, the governments of the nominating Member States or the nominating organizations. Throughout the text names of Member States are retained as they were when the text was compiled. The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply any judgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities and institutions or of the delimitation of their boundaries. The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA. The authors are responsible for having obtained the necessary permission for the IAEA to reproduce, translate or use material from sources already protected by copyrights. CONTENTS Opening Session Opening Address 9 H. Blix Opening Address 15 S. Thompson Opening Address 19 G. Clark Opening Address 21 J.P. Contzen Session I Alternative long term strategies for sustainable development: Rapidly increasing electricity consumption in Asian countries and future role of nuclear energy 29 N. Sagawa Nuclear energy and materials in the 21st century 43 R.A. Krakowski, J.W. Davidson, C.G. Bathke, E.D. Arthur, R.L. Wagner, Jr. Some aspects of nuclear power development in Russia and studies on its optimal long term structure 65 N.I. Ermakov, V.M. Poplavsky, M.F. Troyanov, V.I. Oussanov, A.N. Chebeskov, A. V. Malenkov, B.K. Gordeev Session II The US program for disposition of excess weapons plutonium 79 M. Bunn The AIDA-MOX 1 program: Results of the French-Russian study on peaceful use of plutonium from dismantled Russian nuclear weapons 93 N.N. Yegorov, E. Kudriavtsev, V. Poplavsky, A. Polyakov, X. Ouin, N. Camarcat, B. Sicard, H. Bernard Experience with civil plutonium management: Technology and economics 105 N. Zarimpas, G.H. Stevens Session III Development potential for thermal reactors and their fuel cycles 117 J.T. Rogers, H.L. Dodds, Jr., P.C. Florido, U. Gat, S. Kondo, N.S. Spinks Fast reactors: R&D targets and outlook for their introduction 127 V. Poplavsky, B. Barre, K. Aizawa Fuel cycle technologies — The next 50 years 139 L.N. Chamberlain, S.E. Ion, J. Patterson The DUPIC alternative for backend fuel cycle 153 S.S. Lee, M.S. Yang, H.S. Park, P. Boczar, J. Sullivan, R.D. Gadsby Session IV Risk associated with the transport of radioactive materials in the fuel cycle 161 F. Lange, J. Mairs, C. Niel Radioactive material releases in the nuclear fuel cycle — Recent experience and improvements 173 CJ. Allan, P.J. Allsop, R.W. Anderson, C.R. Boss, S.E. Frost Transmutation of radioactive waste: Effect on the nuclear fuel cycle 185 N.C. Rasmussen, T.H. Pigford Radiological and environmental aspects of fast reactor fuel cycle facilities 195 A.R. Sundararajan, L. V. Krishnan, P. Rodriguez Session V Safeguarding of large scale reprocessing and MOX plants 203 R. Howsley, B. Burrows, H. de Longevialle, H. Kuroi, A. Izumi Safeguarding of spent fuel conditioning and disposal in geological repositories 209 H. Forsstrom, B. Richter Regional safeguards arrangements: The Argentina-Brazil experience 219 M. Marzo, H.L Gonzales, M.C.L. Iskin, H. Vicens Non-proliferation and safeguards aspects of alternative fuel cycle concepts 231 P.J. Persiani Session VI Guidelines for the responsible management of plutonium 241 P.H. Agrell US-Russia cooperation in the disposition of weapons grade fissile materials 247 H.R. Canter, D.A. McArthur, N. Yegorov, A. Zrodnikov Nuclear energy in Asia and regional co-operation 255 M. Ishii International co-operation with regard to regional repositories for radioactive waste disposal 261 P.J. Bredell, H.D. Fuchs Internationalization of the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle: Problems and prospects 271 E. Hackel Closing the fuel cycle — Reaching a public consensus 279 B. Altshuler, F. Janouch, R. Wilson Closing Session Summary of the Symposium 293 P. Jelinek-Fink LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 305 OPENING SESSION OPENING ADDRESS H. Blix Director General, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna Introduction The concept of the nuclear fuel cycle emerged almost as early as the concept of using controlled nuclear fission to generate electricity. It was widely believed, amongst the scientific and technical experts of that time, that a closed fuel cycle would be the most desirable option: spent fuel from power reactors would be reprocessed and recovered plutonium would be recycled as fuel for fast breeder reactors. Not only the experts but also people outside the technical elite were impressed by the promise that the closed cycle would offer. In the late 1970s the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation (INFCE) was conducted. Forty countries and four international organizations were represented. By this time we were looking at a gradually maturing technology which had produced "new realities" in terms of the technical aspects of the fuel cycle, its economics and its proliferation aspects. INFCE showed that effective measures can and should be taken both at the national and international levels and agreements worked out to minimize the danger of proliferation of nuclear weapons - without jeopardizing energy supplies or the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The results of the INFCE, many of which are still valid today, were published in eight Working Group papers. Some 20 years have elapsed since this study was carried out. During this period further "new realities" have emerged, which could not be foreseen, and it seems appropriate again to consider various aspects of different nuclear fuel cycle options.