The Future of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: An Interdisciplinary MIT Study, Summary Report
<strong>This is a summary report. The full report is <a href="https://curie.ornl.gov/content/future-nuclear-fuel-cycle-interdisciplin…;
<strong>This is a summary report. The full report is <a href="https://curie.ornl.gov/content/future-nuclear-fuel-cycle-interdisciplin…;
"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.
"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.
This Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) provides an analysis of the potential
environmental impacts of the proposed Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) program,
which is a United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) program intended to support a safe,
secure, and sustainable expansion of nuclear energy, both
domestically and internationally. Domestically, the
GNEP Program would promote technologies that support
economic, sustained production of nuclear-generated
electricity, while reducing the impacts associated with
The Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Program, a United States (U.S.) Department of
Energy (DOE) program, is intended to support a safe, secure, and sustainable expansion of
nuclear energy, both domestically and internationally. Domestically, the GNEP Program would
promote technologies that support economic, sustained
production of nuclear-generated electricity, while
reducing the impacts associated with spent nuclear fuel
disposal and reducing proliferation risks. DOE envisions
changing the U.S. nuclear energy fuel cycle1 from an
Following the proposals for nuclear fuel assurance of International Atomic Energy
Agency (IAEA) Director General Mohamed ElBaradei, former Russian President Vladimir V.
Putin, and U.S. President George W. Bush, joint committees of the Russian Academy of
Sciences (RAS) and the U.S. National Academies (NAS) were formed to address these and other
fuel assurance concepts and their links to nonproliferation goals. The joint committees also
addressed many technology issues relating to the fuel assurance concepts. This report provides
Goal: Secure the Benefits, Limit the Risk
The extent to which nuclear power will be a broadly accepted option for meeting future global energy needs depends upon cost, safety, waste management and the ability to limit the associated proliferation risks. While all four considerations are important, this report exclusively examines proliferation risks.
The Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology Subcommittee was formed to respond to the charge—set forth in the charter of the BRC—to evaluate existing fuel cycle technologies and R&D programs in terms of multiple criteria.
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.
The Reactor and Fuel Cycle Technology Subcommittee was formed to respond to the charge—set forth in the charter of the Blue Ribbon Commission—to evaluate existing fuel cycle technologies and R&D programs in terms of multiple criteria.