"How do we move nuclear energy into the future?" was the question asked and answered in a variety of ways during a fascinating speakers' session that followed this morning's opening plenary. Several expert speakers in a variety of fields provided frank and illuminating commentary on the condition of nuclear now, and on the things that have to change for nuclear energy to be vibrant in the decades to come.
Powder Metallurgy Facility, Sylvania-Corning Nuclear Corporation, Bayside, N.Y. From Will Davis' collection.
The era of the "first nuclear build" in the United States (from the Manhattan Project of the Second World War at the earliest, through the final commercial plant orders in 1978) was by nature one of nearly continuous "firsts" in its opening decades, as nuclear energy moved from being a thought to a possibility to a reality and took on many forms and nuances.
What's Next For Used Nuclear Fuel and Nuclear Waste Management Policy?
The nuclear energy industry is the only large-scale energy producer responsible for managing and storing (and paying for) all the wastes generated by the process [in contrast to, for example... dumping wastes into the atmosphere].
The 800 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity produced by the 104 nuclear reactors in the United States each year -- all while emitting no greenhouse gases -- is by far America's biggest source of green energy. And this abundant energy source can become even greener by recycling used nuclear fuel.
Integrating Storage, Transportation, and Disposal
The U.S. doesn't want to hear about it
On Thursday, June 28, the American Nuclear Society's Board of Directors formally adopted a position statement entitled U.S. Global Nuclear Leadership through Export-Driven Engagement. ANS position statements reflect the Society's perspectives on issues of public interest that involve various aspects of nuclear science and technology. The text of the June 2012 position statement is below, and the full list of ANS positions statements can be accessed via the ANS website by clicking HERE.
On Wednesday, June 6, Dr. Mark T. Peters appeared on behalf of the American Nuclear Society before the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific. Peters is the Deputy Laboratory Director for Programs at Argonne National Laboratory and testified at the invitation of the subcommittee.
An advanced reactor could be used to consume 112 tonnes of weapons grade material
Energy Secretary Chris Huhne delivers Mike Weightman's report to Parliament
The hunt is on in Vietnam, Turkey, and elsewhere
The American Nuclear Society issues a comprehensive spent fuel report
On May 13, the Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future released its draft conclusions and recommendations. Despite its more general sounding title, the commission's work mostly concerned the nuclear waste issue. It was created by President Obama's administration primarily to investigate alternatives to the proposed Yucca Mountain repository, after the administration moved to shut that program down. While the commission did release some recommendations on other issues such as advanced reactors and Fukishima, this post will focus on its recommendations concerning nuclear waste policy.
The time has come for the U.S. to recycle its spent nuclear fuel
The fuel cycle is a frequent topic in the nuclear blogsphere
This is the 40th Carnival of Nuclear Energy Blogs. The carnival features blog posts from the leading U.S. nuclear bloggers and is a roundup of featured content from them.
On Monday, January 3, 2011, China Central Television announced that scientists and engineers at the China National Nuclear Corporation's No. 404 Factory, located in the Gobi desert in Gansu province, had demonstrated their mastery of nuclear fuel recycling technology that would allow them to improve fuel utilization by a factor of 60 over the current once-through fuel cycle they are using. This means that a resource base that was projected to last between 50-70 years would now have the potential to last 3000-4200 years. For a country full of people who think in terms of millennia, I assume that this was very good news indeed.
Where does waste = external costs?