The objective of the present study is to compare the associated costs of long-term storage of spent nuclear fuel—open cycle strategy—with the associated cost of reprocessing and recycling strategy of spent fuel—closed cycle strategy—based on the current international studies. The analysis presents cost trends for both strategies. Also, to point out the fact that the total cost of spent nuclear fuel management (open cycle) is impossible to establish at present, while the related costs of the closed cycle are stable and known, averting uncertainties. 1. Introduction 1.1. State-of-the-Art The current demand of resources and the increasing and intensive energy consumption per capita have motivated development policies of efficient forms of energy in the electric generation area. Nuclear and renewable energies play an important role in our energy future, helping to meet increasing electricity demand while at the same time decreasing carbon dioxide emissions [1]. As a nation develops its nuclear strategies, it must consider various aspects of nuclear energy such as sustainability, environmental friendliness, proliferation resistance, economics, and technologies and evaluate all the possible nuclear fuel cycle options [2–5]. Over the last decade, numerous assessments [6–14] have been developed in order to compare the two main spent fuel strategies: strategy one which is the disposal of spent nuclear fuel generated by nuclear power plants operating in a “once-through” fuel cycle in a deep geologic repository and strategy two which is closing the fuel cycle by reprocessing and recycling the spent nuclear fuel. One of the latest economic analyses carried out by Ko and Gao [15] shows that the difference in the fuel cycle costs between recycling strategy and “once-through” strategy is negligible. Therefore, other factors such as the intangible asset play important roles in determining the future nuclear fuel cycle options. De Roo and Parsons [16] have developed the first methodology to calculate the levelized cost of electricity extended to the reprocessing strategy. H?gselius [17] gives an explanation of why the world’s nuclear power countries differ from each other with respect to their spent nuclear fuel (SNF) policies according to the five main broad explanatory factors: military ambitions and nonproliferation, technological culture, political culture and civil society, geological conditions, and energy policy. The UK’s nuclear energy landscape assessment [18] also considers the long-term strategy for storage, reprocessing or disposal of UK’s current and future
References
[1]
P. L. Joskow and J. E. Parsons, “The economic future of nuclear power,” Daedalus, vol. 138, no. 4, pp. 45–59, 2009.
[2]
B. H. Park, F. Gao, E.-H. Kwon, and W. I. Ko, “Comparative study of different nuclear fuel cycle options: quantitative analysis on material flow,” Energy Policy, vol. 39, no. 11, pp. 6916–6924, 2011.
[3]
R. Natarajan and B. Raj, “Fast reactor fuel reprocessing technology: successes and challenges,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Asian Nuclear Prospects (ANUP '10), pp. 414–420, October 2010.
[4]
L. Borges Silverio and W. D. Q. Lamas, “An analysis of development and research on spent nuclear fuel reprocessing,” Energy Policy, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 281–289, 2011.
[5]
M. Kotschenreuther, P. Valanju, and S. Mahajan, “Reprocessing free nuclear fuel production via fusion fission hybrids,” Fusion Engineering and Design, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 303–317, 2012.
[6]
OECD/NEA, The Economics of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle, OECD, Paris, France, 1994.
[7]
F. N. Von Hippel, “Plutonium and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel,” Science, vol. 293, no. 5539, pp. 2397–2398, 2001.
[8]
M. Bunn, S. Fetter, J. P. Holdren, and B. van der Zwaan, “The Economics of Reprocessing versus Direct Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel,” Harvard Kennedy School. Project on Managing the Atom.
[9]
The Future of Nuclear Power, An Interdisciplinary MIT study, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2003.
[10]
T. P. Lagus, “Reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel: a policy analysis,” Journal of Engineering and Public Policy, vol. 9, pp. 1–27, 2005.
[11]
BCG, Economic Assessment of Used Nuclear Fuel Management in the United States, 2006.
[12]
EPRI, “An Economic Analysis of Select Fuel Cycles Using the Steady-State Analysis Model for Advanced Fuel Cycles Schemes (SMAFS),” 1015387, Technical Update, EPRI Project Manager J. Hamel, 2007.
[13]
Y. Du and J. E. Parsons, “Update on the Cost of Nuclear Power,” Working Paper 09-004, Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research, 2009.
[14]
The Future of Nuclear Power, An Interdisciplinary MIT study, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2011.
[15]
W. Ko and F. Gao, “Economic analysis of different nuclear fuel cycle options,” Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations, vol. 2012, Article ID 293467, 10 pages, 2012.
[16]
G. De Roo and J. E. Parsons, “A methodology for calculating the levelized cost of electricity in nuclear power systems with fuel recycling,” Energy Economics, vol. 33, no. 5, pp. 826–839, 2011.
[17]
P. H?gselius, “Spent nuclear fuel policies in historical perspective: an international comparison,” Energy Policy, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 254–263, 2009.
[18]
S. Widder, “Benefits and concerns of a closed nuclear fuel cycle,” Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy, vol. 2, no. 6, Article ID 062801, 2010.
[19]
“A low carbon nuclear future: economic assessment of nuclear materials and spent nuclear fuel management in the UK,” Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment University of Oxford, 2011.
[20]
W. M. Nutt, Z. Duncan, and T. Cotton, “Prioritization criteria for the selection of used nuclear fuel for recycling,” in Proceedings of the WM Conference, Phoenix, Ariz, USA, 2011.
[21]
E. A. Schneider, M. R. Deinert, and K. B. Cady, “Cost analysis of the US spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility,” Energy Economics, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 627–634, 2009.
[22]
G. D. Recktenwald and M. R. Deinert, “Cost probability analysis of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel in the US,” Energy Economics, vol. 34, pp. 1873–1881, 2012.
[23]
Y. Zhou, “Why is China going nuclear?” Energy Policy, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 3755–3762, 2010.
[24]
Y. Zhou, “China's spent nuclear fuel management: current practices and future strategies,” Energy Policy, vol. 39, no. 7, pp. 4360–4369, 2011.
[25]
M. V. Ramana and J. Y. Suchitra, “Costing plutonium: economics of reprocessing in India,” International Journal of Global Energy Issues, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 454–471, 2007.
[26]
M. Chiguer, J.-L. Casabianca, and J.-P. Gros, “Recycling as an option of Used Nuclear Fuel Management Strategy for Europe”.
[27]
World nuclear Info, http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf69.html#R5.
[28]
M. Chiguer, J.-L. Casabianca, and J.-P. Gros, “Recycling as an option of Used Nuclear Fuel Management Strategy for Europe”.
[29]
International Atomic Energy Agency, Country nuclear fuel profiles 2005.
[30]
6th GRWP;C.II.1.3 Strategic action lines.
[31]
The Cost of High-Level Waste Disposal in Geological Repositories. An Analysis of Factors Affecting Cost Estimates. Nuclear Energy Agency. Organization for economic Co-Operation and Development, 1993.
[32]
M. Bunn, J. P. Holdren, S. Fetter, and B. Van der Zwaan, “The economics of reprocessing versus direct disposal of spent nuclear fuel,” Supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
Monographies DEN: une monographie de la Direction de l’énergie nucléaire Commissariat à l’énergie atomique, L’énergie nucléaire du futur: quelles recherches pour quels objectifs? (2005).