nuclear waste recycling is a critical avenue of energy innovation

The Persistent Challenge of Nuclear Waste in US Energy Policy

The issue of nuclear waste remains a central and unresolved problem in American energy and environmental policy, arguably surpassing even the complexities of climate change in its difficulty to address.

Understanding the Scope of the Problem

Currently, nuclear power facilities across the United States generate approximately 2,000 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel annually. This material, due to its radioactive properties, requires careful and secure storage at designated locations nationwide.

The federal government bears the responsibility for managing this waste, with power plant operators having contributed over $40 billion to the Nuclear Waste Fund for this purpose. The initial plan involved a deep geological repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, but political obstacles have prevented its implementation, despite $15 billion already invested in its evaluation.

Consequently, the waste continues to accumulate. Recent data indicates that around 80,000 metric tons of spent fuel – comprising countless fuel assemblies and millions of fuel rods – awaits a permanent disposal solution.

Legal Battles and Financial Implications

Interestingly, nuclear plant operators initiated legal action against the government for breach of contract, and secured a favorable ruling in 2013. As a result, the U.S. Treasury now disburses several hundred million dollars annually to these operators through settlements and judgments, with the total exceeding $8 billion.

This situation presents a seemingly paradoxical scenario: the U.S. government amassed billions to manage nuclear waste, invested heavily in a feasibility study, and now faces substantial financial payouts due to its inability to resolve the issue.

The Potential of Fuel Recycling

Although the accumulated waste occupies a limited area and temporary storage is available, the lack of urgency often hinders decisive action by policymakers. However, a promising avenue lies in exploring the recycling of this “waste” into usable fuel.

This concept isn't new; a significant portion of nuclear fuel remains unconsumed during electricity generation. Recycling proponents advocate for reactors capable of utilizing “reprocessed” spent fuel, extracting energy from the approximately 90% that remains after initial burn-up.

While the technical feasibility of recycling is generally acknowledged, debates center on its economic viability and potential security concerns.

Emerging Reactor Technologies: Generation IV

Generation IV reactors represent a diverse range of designs, some of which have been conceptualized for decades. However, conventional light-water reactors have historically dominated the nuclear energy landscape due to political, economic, and strategic factors.

For instance, the twin pressurized water reactors under construction by Southern Company in Georgia each have a capacity exceeding 1 gigawatt, aligning with the standard Westinghouse AP1000 design.

In contrast, next-generation plant designs are typically smaller in scale and may employ alternative cooling systems. Examples include NuScale Power’s 77-megawatt small modular reactor, General Atomics’ 50-megawatt helium-cooled fast modular reactor, and Kairos Power’s 140-megawatt molten fluoride salt reactor, each tailored to specific business and policy goals.

Recent Developments and Investments

Many Gen-IV designs are inherently capable of recycling used fuel, or can be adapted to do so. TerraPower, backed by Bill Gates, GE Hitachi, and the State of Wyoming, recently announced plans to construct a demonstration facility for the 345-megawatt Natrium design, a sodium-cooled fast reactor.

Natrium possesses the technical capacity for fuel recycling. Oklo has also secured an agreement with Idaho National Laboratory to operate its 1.5-megawatt “microreactor” using recycled fuel. Elysium Industries and Flibe Energy are developing reactor designs that specifically utilize spent nuclear fuel as their preferred fuel source.

Incentivizing Recycling Through Policy

The success of advanced reactors isn’t contingent on resolving the nuclear waste impasse, but incentivizing waste recycling would undoubtedly enhance their economic prospects.

This “incentivize” translates to financial support; policymakers should explore mechanisms to make fuel recycling more profitable for power plants than importing fuel from countries like Canada, Kazakhstan, Australia, and Russia.

Government Support and Future Funding

Political backing for advanced nuclear technology, including recycling, is surprisingly robust. Dr. Rita Baranwal, a materials scientist, was confirmed as the Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy at the Department of Energy (DOE) in 2019 and became a strong advocate for recycling initiatives.

The Biden administration has continued this bipartisan support, proposing a nearly $350 million increase in funding for the DOE’s Office of Nuclear Energy in its Fiscal Year 2022 Budget Request. This includes increased funding for reactor concept research ($32 million), fuel cycle R&D ($59 million), advanced reactor demonstration ($120 million), and a tripling of funding for the Versatile Test Reactor ($45 million to $145 million).

Furthermore, ARPA-E announced a $40 million program in May to support research focused on optimizing waste management and disposal from advanced reactors, explicitly acknowledging that the current lack of a nuclear waste solution presents a challenge to the future of Gen-IV reactors.

The Broader Context of Recycling

The debate surrounding nuclear waste recycling serves as a reminder that recycling, in general, is a complex undertaking. It is a chemically, mechanically, and energy-intensive process that inevitably generates new waste streams. Given the active government involvement in recycling other materials, a similar commitment to nuclear waste recycling is warranted.