To generate power, nuclear reactors produce spent nuclear fuel (SNF) as a result of nuclear fission. Intensely radioactive and thermally hot, SNF must be isolated for thousands of years to prevent harm. However, advocates of reprocessing, the extraction of uranium, plutonium, and certain other elements from the SNF to be reused as nuclear fuel, argue that SNF could serve
as a novel source of fuel for nuclear power generation.Â
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) released a report in the past months; Considerations for Reprocessing Spent Nuclear Fuel. In the report, the CRS provides an overview of reprocessing “in the context of the nuclear fuel cycle and provides general considerations regarding U.S. policy, nonproliferation, the regulatory framework, waste management and disposal, environmental concerns, and economics.”Â
Reprocessing is currently carried out in France, Russia, and a few other countries; however, there are no current commercial reprocessing operations in the United States. The U.S. had developed technology for the reprocessing of SNF during World War II and operated a reprocessing plant from 1966 to 1972 in West Valley, NY, to separate uranium and plutonium for commercial reactor fuel. However, commercial reprocessing activities
in the United States ended during the 1970s and early 1980s because of rising costs and policy concerns about nuclear weapons proliferation.Â
According to the CRS, reprocessing advocates cite two major potential benefits:
- Materials necessary for fission could be extracted from SNF, allowing for the remaining material to be used as fuel
- The long-lived radioactivity of some nuclear waste could be
reduced, opening a wider variety of disposal options
The CRS also addresses other considerations important to reprocessing:Â
- Plutonium separated via reprocessing is one of two materials that can be used to make a nuclear weapon. This requires international controls on reprocessing to ensure nonproliferation of nuclear weapons.
- The report notes that alternative reprocessing methods could avoid
creating weapons-grade material.
- Reprocessing may not be a viable, cost-effective alternative to storage and disposal of SNF.Â
- Reprocessing of SNF produced high-level waste (HLW), which produces its own technical, legal, and policy considerations regarding long-term management and disposal
- Reprocessed uranium and plutonium currently can be recycled only once into new fuel for current reactor designs, as additional recycling would require fast neutron
reactors.
The CRS report also covers recent congressional action involving reprocessing, high-level waste management, and advanced reactors. CRS demonstrates that Congress has been supportive of reprocessing through various measures it has taken:
- Congress has supported the Department of Energy’s reprocessing research and development program in recent years through a funding authorization in the Energy Act
of 2020 (Division Z of P.L. 116-260) and subsequent annual appropriations.Â
- The Energy Act of 2020 and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA; P.L. 117-58) authorized and appropriated more than $2 billion for demonstrations of advanced reactors, including fast neutron reactors that could indefinitely recycle SNF plutonium.
- In the 118th Congress, hearings on nuclear waste management and recycling were held in the House Energy and Commerce and Senate Energy and
Natural Resources Committees, and the House Appropriations Committee in report language called for commercialization of reprocessing by 2033 (H.Rept. 118-580).
The full report by CRS can be read here.
