The Disposal Subcommittee of the Blue Ribbon Commission on America’s Nuclear Future (BRC) addressed a wide-ranging set of issues, all bearing directly on the central question: “How can the United States go about establishing one or more disposal sites for high-level nuclear wastes in a manner and within a timeframe that is technically, socially, economically, and politically acceptable?”
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 purpose of this study is to assist decision makers in evaluating the centralized interim
storage option. We explore the economics of centralized interim storage under a wide variety of
circumstances. We look at how a commitment to move forward with centralized interim storage
today could evolve over time. And, we evaluate the costs of reversing a commitment toward
centralized storage if it turns out that such a decision is later considered a mistake. We have not
Fundamentally, a nuclear energy system uses nuclear fission to create heat, which is then available for generating electricity or other applications, including seawater desalination, heating, and production of other fuels. The nuclear energy system as currently deployed in the United States, Figure 1, consists of a number of integrated components, beginning with the natural resources required for nuclear fuel, followed by fissioning of the fuel in reactors connected to electricity generation facilities, and ending with the disposition of all wastes, including used nuclear fuel (UNF).
This document summarizes DOE’s commercial nuclear energy RD&D program based on a R&D roadmap and on DOE/NE’s budget request for fiscal year 2011. The roadmap is written at a high level and is mostly qualitative in terms of activities, milestones and decisions to be made and does not contain budget information. The fiscal year 2011 budget request contains more specific and detailed information on activities, milestones, decisions, and budgets but only for fiscal year 2011 and the two preceding fiscal years.
o Request: The current balance of the Nuclear Waste Fund (NWF).
o Response: The balance of the Nuclear Waste Fund $24.56 billion as of November 2010. (Source: U.S. DOE OCRWM Annual Financial Report for Years Ended September 30, 2010 and 2009)
o Request: The NWF fee projections of future fee receipts.
The table is based on historical costs through 2006, which are shaded, and projected costs in the 2008 TSLCC. To convert to 2010$, multiply by 1.0586. The 2008 TSLCC assumes a single repository system capable of accepting and disposing of SNF and HLW equivalent to 122,100 Metric Tons of Heavy Metal (MTHM). This estimate includes all defense wastes currently destined for disposal at Yucca Mountain and projected discharges of SNF from commercial utilities, including the 47 nuclear power reactors that had received license extensions from the NRC as of January 2007.
This report evaluates the relative economics of alternative fuel cycles compared to the current
U.S. once-through fuel cycle, including concepts under consideration by the U.S. Department of
Energy’s (DOE) Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP). EPRI utilized a model developed
by the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA), Steady-state analysis Model for Advanced Fuel Cycle
Schemes (SMAFS), to evaluate fuel cycle alternatives. The report also evaluates potential
financing options for a fuel recycling facility. Please note that this report contains preliminary
An acceptable long-term solution for used (spent) fuel from nuclear power reactors has evaded all countries engaged in the civilian
nuclear fuel cycle. Furthermore, many countries are trying to develop interim storage solutions that address the shortage of storage in
the spent fuel cooling pools at reactors. The United States has a particularly acute problem due to its adherence to an open fuel cycle
and its large number of reactors. Two main options are available to address the spent fuel problem: dry storage on-site at reactors and
The management of spent fuel from nuclear power
plants has become a major policy issue for virtually every
nuclear power program in the world. For the nuclear industry, finding sufficient capacity for storage and processing or
disposal of spent fuel is essential if nuclear power plants are
to be allowed to continue to operate. At the same time, the
options chosen for spent fuel management can have a substantial impact on the political controversies, proliferation
risks, environmental hazards, and economic costs of the
