House Report 97-491, Part 1, “Report to Accompany H.R. 3809" Pg 44
House Report 97-491, Part 1, “Report to Accompany H.R. 3809" Pg 44
This report accompanies the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. Only page 44 is included in this PDF.
This report accompanies the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982. Only page 44 is included in this PDF.
"This study analyzes what would be required to retain nuclear power as a significant option for reducing greenhouse gas emissions and meeting growing needs for electricity supply. Our analysis is guided by a global growth scenario that would expand current worldwide nuclear generating capacity almost threefold, to 1000 billion watts, by the year 2050. Such a deployment would avoid 1.8 billion tonnes of carbon emissions annually from coal plants, about 25% of the increment in carbon emissions otherwise expected in a business-as-usual scenario.
"In 2003 MIT published the interdisciplinary study The Future of Nuclear Power. The underlying motivation was that nuclear energy, which today provides about 70% of the “zero”-carbon electricity in the U.S., is an important option for the market place in a low-carbon world. Since that report, major changes in the U.S. and the world have taken place as described in our 2009 Update of the 2003 Future of Nuclear Power Report. Concerns about climate change have risen: many countries have adopted restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions to the atmosphere, and the U.S.
"Nuclear power has long been controversial; consequently, the debate about its reemergence requires a fresh assessment of the facts about the technology, its economics and regulatory oversight, and the risks and benefits of its expansion. In the past year, the Keystone Center assembled a group of 27 individuals (see the Endorsement page for a list of Participants) with extensive experience and unique perspectives to develop a joint understanding of the “facts” and for an objective interpretation of the most credible information in areas where uncertainty persists.
This document contains policy recommendations related to energy developed by the National Commission on Energy Policy, a project of the Bipartisan Policy Center, a Washington DC based think tank. Topics covered include Fossil Fuel resource security, climate change, energy efficiency, nuclear energy and renewables.
This document is the result of a three year study performed by a think tank group, the National Commission on Energy Policy. It provides energy policy recommendations that include recommendations regarding nuclear power.
This is a section of the Federal Budget for 2015.
The Strategy for the Management and Disposal of Used Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste is a framework for moving toward a sustainable program to deploy an integrated system capable of transporting, storing, and disposing of used nuclear fuel1 and high-level radioactive waste from civilian nuclear power generation, defense, national security and other activities.
From the Introduction: "Our strategy for development of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM) transportation program is to collaborate with our stakeholders.
In July, 2016, the Electric Power Research Institute and industry partners performed a field test at the Maine Yankee Nuclear Site, located near Wiscasset, Maine. The primary goal of the field test was to evaluate the use of robots in surveying the surface of an in-service interim storage canister within an overpack; however, as part of the demonstration, dust and soluble salt samples were collected from horizontal surfaces within the interim storage system.
In July, 2014, the Electric Power Research Institute and industry partners sampled dust on the surface of an unused canister that had been stored in an overpack at the Hope Creek Nuclear Generating Station for approximately one year. The foreign material exclusion (FME) cover that had been on the top of the canister during storage, and a second recently-removed FME cover, were also sampled. This report summarizes the results of analyses of dust samples collected from the unused Hope Creek canister and the FME covers.
Potentially corrosive environments may form on the surface of spent nuclear fuel dry storage canisters by deliquescence of deposited dusts. To assess this, samples of dust were collected from in-service dry storage canisters at two near-marine sites, the Hope Creek and Diablo Canyon storage installations, and have been characterized with respect to mineralogy, chemistry, and texture. At both sites, terrestrially-derived silicate minerals, including quartz, feldspars, micas, and clays, comprise the largest fraction of the dust.
The report, Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel and High-Level Radioactive Waste Inventory Report(FCRDNFST- 2013-000263, Rev.4), provides information on the inventory of commercial spent fuel, referred to in this report as used nuclear fuel (UNF), as well as Government-owned UNF and High Level Waste (HLW) in the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complex. Inventory forecasts for commercial UNF were made for a few selected scenarios of future commercial nuclear power generation involving the existing reactor fleet including one scenario involving reactors under construction.
This report provides an evaluation of the cost implications of incorporating a consolidated interim storage facility (ISF) into the waste management system (WMS). Specifically, the impacts of the timing of opening an ISF relative to opening a repository were analyzed to understand the potential effects on total system costs.
This report evaluates how the economic environment (i.e., discount rate, inflation rate, escalation rate) can impact previously estimated differences in lifecycle costs between an integrated waste management system with an interim storage facility (ISF) and a similar system without an ISF. The costs analyzed in this report are based on the document entitled Cost Implications of an Interim Storage Facility in the Waste Management System, a systems study comparing the “constant dollar” future lifecycle costs of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) management system scenarios.
This report documents the work of one of the most successful Federal advisory committees in the history of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) was established by EPA on September 30, 1993 to provide independent advice to the EPA Administrator on broad, cross-cutting issues related to environmental justice.
The US Department of Energy (DOE) has since established the IWM, which builds on the work begun by NFST, to develop an integrated waste management system for spent nuclear fuel (SNF)a, including the development of a large-scale transportation system for the safe transport of SNF to storage or disposal facilities.
This handbook was prepared by Energy Communities Alliance (ECA) with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy, under Cooperative Agreement DE-NE0000006. It does not represent the views of the Department of Energy, and no official endorsement should be inferred. This handbook is an update to the version originally released in March 2012. The authors are Kara Colton, Allison Doman and Seth Kirshenberg of ECA.
In October 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (Board or NWTRB) published Survey of National Programs for Managing High-Level Radioactive Waste and Spent Nuclear Fuel. For each of the 13 national programs studied, the report catalogued 15 institutional arrangements that had been set in place and 15 technical approaches that had been taken to design repository systems for the long-term management of high-activity radioactive waste.
The goal of this report is to communicate high-level recommendations to the U.S. Department of
Energy (DOE), which if adopted, the U.S. Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board (Board)
members believe will support the creation of a robust, safe, and effective nuclear waste
management capability for the nation, including laying the groundwork for a successful geologic
repository. The DOE nuclear waste management program encompasses the management and
disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW), in addition to the
This report discusses the status of the commercial spent nuclear fuel (SNF) inventory in the United States, at both decommissioned and operating commercial nuclear power reactor sites; summarizes the contractual arrangement the government and utilities have under the Standard Contract for Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel and/or High-Level Radioactive Waste (10 CFR Part 961) (Standard Contract), related litigation, and the financial liabilities resulting from the Department’s delay in performance under these contracts; provides a history of interim storage policy as it relates to commercial SN
The United States makes decisions regarding the domestic uses of nuclear energy and the nuclear fuel cycle primarily based economic considerations, domestic political constraints, and environmental impact concerns. Such factors influence U.S. foreign policy decisions as well, but foreign policy decisions are often more strongly determined by national security considerations, including concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation and nuclear terrorism.
This report, commissioned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), provides a comprehensive set of cost data supporting a cost analysis for the relative economic comparison of options for use in the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI) Program. The report describes the AFCI cost basis development process, reference information on AFCI cost modules, a procedure for estimating fuel cycle costs, economic evaluation guidelines, and a discussion on the integration of cost data into economic computer models.
Over the past few years a number of important studies have been executed to identify and define the necessary nuclear energy research, development and demonstration (RD&D) infrastructure that must be sustained or developed.
The amount of spent fuel stored on-site at commercial nuclear reactors will continue to accumulate—increasing by about 2,000 metric tons per year and likely more than doubling to about 140,000 metric tons—before it can be moved off-site, because storage or disposal facilities may take decades to develop. In examining centralized storage or permanent disposal options, GAO found that new facilities may take from 15 to 40 years before they are ready to begin accepting spent fuel. Once an off-site facility is available, it will take several more decades to ship spent fuel to that facility.