Managing Wastes With and Without Plutonium Separation

This study examines whether reprocessing and plutonium recycle will make radioactive waste management more effective and economical. It compares the wastes generated in three alternative nuclear fuel cycles. The first cycle is low-enriched uranium in once-through mode LEU-OT, which is the choice followed by the great majority of the civilian nuclear reactor operators in the world. The second cycle is mixed-oxide fuel in once-through mode MOX-OT, which reprocessing-pursuing countries currently prefer. The third cycle is self-generating recycle SOR where plutonium is reprocessed and recycled repeatedly in the reactor throughout its operating life. Although current cost picture and the cost trends make SOR unlikely, it is included so that one can see its advantages and disadvantages for potential use in the future. This study compares wastes from alternative fuel cycles that generate the same amount of electricity. Also, as opposed to focusing only on the back-end waste, this study estimates the wastes at various radioactive levels generated in every fuel cycle step uranium mining and milling, conversion, enrichment, fabrication, reactor operations, waste storage, reprocessing, high-level waste vitrification, and spent fuel encapsulation. It also uses total waste disposition cost as a proxy for evaluating whether reprocessing eases waste management-- the cheaper are the sum of the costs of conditioning and disposal of wastes generated in these steps, the easier is the waste managed.