It does appear that the Trump administration is seeking to address this issue and source far more domestically before his term is up, or at least have that in process
I don't think Trump is focused on uranium specifically but more on minerals in general. Either way, uranium wins.
At one time, the US had a reasonable supply of uranium through the "swords to plowshares" program which I think was a Reagan-era program. I know Nebraska's nuclear plant has operated on uranium recycled from weapons. Do you, or anyone else out there in Bloggo-land know if this or any similar program is still working?
"In the USA, no civil reprocessing plants are now operating, though three have been built. The first, a 300 t/yr plant at West Valley, New York, was operated successfully from 1966-72. However, escalating regulation required plant modifications which were deemed uneconomic, and the plant was shut down after treating 650 tonnes of used oxide and metal fuel using the Purex process. The second was a 300 t/yr plant built at Morris, Illinois, incorporating new technology based on the volatility of UF6 which, although proven on a pilot-scale, failed to work successfully in the production plant. It was declared inoperable in 1974. The third was a 1500 t/yr Purex plant at Barnwell, South Carolina, which was aborted due to a 1977 change in government policy which ruled out all US civilian reprocessing as one facet of US non-proliferation policy. In all, the USA has over 250 plant-years of reprocessing operational experience, the vast majority being at government-operated defence plants since the 1940s.
The main one of these is H Canyon at Savannah River, which commenced operation in 1955. It historically recovered uranium and neptunium from aluminium-clad research reactor fuel, both foreign and domestic. It could also recover Np-237 and Pu-238 from irradiated targets. H Canyon also reprocessed a variety of materials for recovery of uranium and plutonium both for military purposes and later high-enriched uranium for blending down into civil reactor fuel. In 2011 reprocessing of research reactor fuel was put on hold pending review of national policy for high-level waste, but recommenced in 2016.
In 2014, H Canyon completed reprocessing the long-stored uranium-thorium metal fuel from the 20 MWt Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE), which had a high proportion of U-233. The sodium-cooled graphite-moderated SRE operated in California over 1957-64 and was the first US reactor to feed electricity to a grid. The uranium and actinides will be vitrified."
You write that "There are opportunities to bolster U.S. domestic supplies of uranium while recycling nuclear waste into usable fuel. Spent nuclear fuel still contains 95 percent of its potential to produce electricity, and certain types of reactors can use spent fuel after some recycling steps, though commercial-scale recycling isn’t yet economical."
I believe spent fuel to be the long-term source of reactor fuels. Is the Trump Administration doing anything to revitalize reprocessing, or engage in an exchange program with France? More importantly, why haven't some of the NGOs who are so opposed to mining thrown their support to this option? Does the word "nuclear" still stick in their craw, so to speak?
I think that it's that the same people who oppose more mining also oppose nuclear for the reasons of "nuclear disasters" and "nuclear waste." Nuclear has a PR problem. It's not barrels of oozing radioactive waste in public parks a la The Simpsons, but that's what so many people think of first.
My understanding is domestic centrifuges to enrich uranium ore are almost non-existent in the USA. There is one startup that is slowly expanding, but we really can't process it if we mined it. In addition if we had used fuel reprocessing, we have enough spent fuel sitting in pools that could be cleaned up to keep us in operation for decades.
It looks like US production of uranium plummeted right after Three Mile Island. Sad.
Excellent point!
Like everything else associated with nuclear power. Thank you, Hanoi Jane and Jimmy Carter.
It does appear that the Trump administration is seeking to address this issue and source far more domestically before his term is up, or at least have that in process
I hope it begins soon!
amen to that!
I don't think Trump is focused on uranium specifically but more on minerals in general. Either way, uranium wins.
At one time, the US had a reasonable supply of uranium through the "swords to plowshares" program which I think was a Reagan-era program. I know Nebraska's nuclear plant has operated on uranium recycled from weapons. Do you, or anyone else out there in Bloggo-land know if this or any similar program is still working?
So, you sen[t] me down some google searching. I don't think it's happening in the U.S. anymore due to concerns about proliferation. https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/nuclear-fuel-cycle/fuel-recycling/processing-of-used-nuclear-fuel
"In the USA, no civil reprocessing plants are now operating, though three have been built. The first, a 300 t/yr plant at West Valley, New York, was operated successfully from 1966-72. However, escalating regulation required plant modifications which were deemed uneconomic, and the plant was shut down after treating 650 tonnes of used oxide and metal fuel using the Purex process. The second was a 300 t/yr plant built at Morris, Illinois, incorporating new technology based on the volatility of UF6 which, although proven on a pilot-scale, failed to work successfully in the production plant. It was declared inoperable in 1974. The third was a 1500 t/yr Purex plant at Barnwell, South Carolina, which was aborted due to a 1977 change in government policy which ruled out all US civilian reprocessing as one facet of US non-proliferation policy. In all, the USA has over 250 plant-years of reprocessing operational experience, the vast majority being at government-operated defence plants since the 1940s.
The main one of these is H Canyon at Savannah River, which commenced operation in 1955. It historically recovered uranium and neptunium from aluminium-clad research reactor fuel, both foreign and domestic. It could also recover Np-237 and Pu-238 from irradiated targets. H Canyon also reprocessed a variety of materials for recovery of uranium and plutonium both for military purposes and later high-enriched uranium for blending down into civil reactor fuel. In 2011 reprocessing of research reactor fuel was put on hold pending review of national policy for high-level waste, but recommenced in 2016.
In 2014, H Canyon completed reprocessing the long-stored uranium-thorium metal fuel from the 20 MWt Sodium Reactor Experiment (SRE), which had a high proportion of U-233. The sodium-cooled graphite-moderated SRE operated in California over 1957-64 and was the first US reactor to feed electricity to a grid. The uranium and actinides will be vitrified."
Nice essay, ma'am. Thank you.
You write that "There are opportunities to bolster U.S. domestic supplies of uranium while recycling nuclear waste into usable fuel. Spent nuclear fuel still contains 95 percent of its potential to produce electricity, and certain types of reactors can use spent fuel after some recycling steps, though commercial-scale recycling isn’t yet economical."
I believe spent fuel to be the long-term source of reactor fuels. Is the Trump Administration doing anything to revitalize reprocessing, or engage in an exchange program with France? More importantly, why haven't some of the NGOs who are so opposed to mining thrown their support to this option? Does the word "nuclear" still stick in their craw, so to speak?
I have not seen any announcements about reprocessing in particular. I know Chris Wright is very excited about nuclear. https://www.energy.gov/articles/secretary-chris-wright-delivers-welcome-remarks-doe-staff
I think that it's that the same people who oppose more mining also oppose nuclear for the reasons of "nuclear disasters" and "nuclear waste." Nuclear has a PR problem. It's not barrels of oozing radioactive waste in public parks a la The Simpsons, but that's what so many people think of first.
My understanding is domestic centrifuges to enrich uranium ore are almost non-existent in the USA. There is one startup that is slowly expanding, but we really can't process it if we mined it. In addition if we had used fuel reprocessing, we have enough spent fuel sitting in pools that could be cleaned up to keep us in operation for decades.
This is very important! Reprocessing would be an ample supply for hundreds of years!
Biden tried to put a lot of US uranium off limits.
Absolutely!