Environmental Impacts, Health and Safety Impacts, and Financial Costs of the Front End of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Carlsen, Brett W; Phathanapirom, Urairisa; Schneider, Eric C.; Collins, J. S. A.; Eggert, Roderick G.; Jordan, Brett W.; Smith, Bethany L.; Ault, Timothy; Croff, Alan G.; Krahn, Steven; Halsey, W.G.; Sutton, Mark A.; Easterly, C.E.; Manger, R; McGinn, C.W.; Fisher, S.E.; Dixon, Brent; Yacout, Latif

doi:10.2172/1149026

Cited by 1 publication

(6 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The front-end of the fuel cycle includes mining of uranium ore, milling of the ore to produce yellowcake, conversion of yellowcake to UF 6 , enrichment of U-235, and de-conversion of depleted uranium (DU). Sources of information for this analysis include Rotty [1975], Lenzen [2008], and Schneider [2010], in addition to the recent evaluation of environmental impacts, health and safety impacts, and financial costs of the front end of the fuel cycle by Carlson [2012], which includes the evaluation of energy inputs.…”

Section: Front-end Of the Fuel Cyclementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rotty [1975] studied the Honeywell Metropolis Works in Metropolis, Illinois, which uses the dry process. Values reported in Carlson [2012] represent energy intensities for the more energy-efficient wet process. Because the construction energy required for the conversion process is more detailed in Rotty [1975], and the dry process and wet process construction requirements are likely similar, Rotty's construction energy values are chosen as representative of the system in this study.…”

Section: Conversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because the construction energy required for the conversion process is more detailed in Rotty [1975], and the dry process and wet process construction requirements are likely similar, Rotty's construction energy values are chosen as representative of the system in this study. The wet process is a more modern and less energy intensive method of uranium conversion; therefore the operation energy intensities reported in Carlson [2012] are used in this study.…”

Section: Conversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Energy intensities for the operation of the deconversion plant are reported in the recent Carlson [2012] study and show a negative value of total final energy (i.e., net energy gain). The energy intensity for deconversion of UF6 tails includes energy costs for lime, ammonia, potassium hydroxide and nitrogen used in the process, but also includes an energy credit for HF, a by-product of the process that can be reused in the conversion step of the fuel cycle.…”

Section: Deconversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using the unit energy costs in Carlson [2012], Table 4.5-1 shows the deconversion energy intensities for the representative fuel cycle in Figure 3-1. The values in Table 4.5-1 include the multiplier of 9.33 MT of DU per MT of enriched U fuel.…”

Section: Deconversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Nuclear Energy Return on Energy Investment

Smith¹,

Blink²,

Fratoni³

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This report provides a methodology and requisite data to assess the potential Energy Return on (Energy) Investment (EROI) for nuclear fuel cycle alternatives, and applies that methodology to an example "oncethrough" fuel cycle using low enrichment uranium (LEU) in conventional light water cooled reactors (LWRs). Within the DOE Office of Nuclear Energy Science and Technology -Fuel Cycle Technologies program, the Fuel Cycle Options Campaign "performs integrating analyses of nuclear energy and fuel cycle systems to inform fuel cycle R&D, programmatic decisions, strategy formulation, and policy development". Campaign objectives include development of relevant fuel cycle metrics, and development of tools and associated data for analysis of fuel cycle systems. This study represents an extension of a prior evaluation of EROI as a metric for fuel cycle facilities, processes and technologies. That prior study [Simon 2011] addressed the energy return on the addition of fuel recycle to an existing nuclear energy system. Limited to just the addition of fuel recycle, that study did not include all the energy investments required to create, operate and decommission the underlying nuclear fuel cycle, such as uranium mining, fuel fabrication, reactor construction, and used fuel disposition. This extension of the prior work adds these remaining pieces of the fuel cycle to provide a basic evaluation framework and initial data to enable evaluation of EROI for nuclear energy in general. It is intended as a basis for evaluation of alternative fuel cycle options in the future with the addition of pertinent details for other fuel cycle scenarios.In the prior work, a spreadsheet tool was constructed for the specific purpose of this energy input/output analysis of nuclear fuel cycle facilities. This tool allows the user to enter the parameters of the nuclear fuel cycle and assumptions about energy use in reprocessing. In the current analysis, energy consumption for an entire nuclear energy enterprise is considered, including facility construction, materials, facility operation, and decommissioning. The analysis tool has been extended to include the entire fuel cycle for a representative scenario of a once-through LWR nuclear energy system. Energy content data have been developed for an initial representation. In many cases where there is a valid range of plausible energy content, the range is discussed and a representative value selected for demonstration of the evaluation methodology. In this analysis, energy produced is the energy output of power reactors within the fuel cycle. The spreadsheet calculates both Primary EROI and Final EROI for the fuel cycle entered. The EROI is the ratio of the output energy divided by the consumed energy.The intent for this study was to develop the methodology and analysis tool for a complete fuel cycle. It is not the intent of the study to fully explore the wide range of potential energy intensities, or to reconcile the disparate values found in the literature. Representative numbers were used in this ...

show abstract

Section: Front-end Of the Fuel Cyclementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Deconversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Deconversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations