Parametric Study of the Total System Life Cycle Cost of an Alternate Nuclear Waste Management Strategy Using Deep Boreholes


Book Description

(Cont.) Assuming a 10% discount rate, the net present cost of the deep borehole strategy is 18% less than that of the mined geologic repository approach. Finally, the model illustrates the economic benefits of opening a centralized interim storage facility of significant capacity as soon as possible. For example, if a 40,000 metric tonne facility, comparable in scale to the proposed Private Fuel Storage Facility in Utah, was opened by 2020, and the mined repository was opened in the same year, the total life cycle cost would be reduced by $1.5B relative to the case with no interim storage. If, moreover, the opening date of the mined geologic repository were delayed until 2040 or 2060, the savings provided by interim storage increase dramatically, to $4.9 and $8.1B, respectively. The thesis concludes with a discussion of the political and strategic consequences of several key policy choices.




Analysis of the Total System Life Cycle Cost for the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program: Supporting information


Book Description

This report discusses the total-system life-cycle cost analysis for the Department of Energy's Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program, and whether the fee established by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 is adequate and consistent with program strategy and plans contained in the DOE's Draft Mission Plan Amendment.













Analysis of the Total System Life Cycle Cost for the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program


Book Description

The total-system life-cycle cost (TSLCC) analysis for the Department of Energy's (DOE) Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program is an ongoing activity that helps determine whether the revenue-producing mechanism established by the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982 -- a fee levied on electricity generated in commercial nuclear power plants -- is sufficient to cover the cost of the program. This report provides cost estimates for the sixth annual evaluation of the adequacy of the fee and is consistent with the program strategy and plans contained in the DOE's Draft 1988 Mission Plan Amendment. The total-system cost for the system with a repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, a facility for monitored retrievable storage (MRS), and a transportation system is estimated at$24 billion (expressed in constant 1988 dollars). In the event that a second repository is required and is authorized by the Congress, the total-system cost is estimated at$31 to$33 billion, depending on the quantity of spent fuel to be disposed of. The$7 billion cost savings for the single-repository system in comparison with the two-repository system is due to the elimination of$3 billion for second-repository development and$7 billion for the second-repository facility. These savings are offset by$2 billion in additional costs at the first repository and$1 billion in combined higher costs for the MRS facility and transportation. 55 refs., 2 figs., 24 tabs.







Geological Repository Systems for Safe Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuels and Radioactive Waste


Book Description

Geological disposal has been internationally adopted as the most effective approach to assure the long-term, safe disposition of the used nuclear fuels and radioactive waste materials produced from nuclear power generation, nuclear weapons programs, medical, treatments, and industrial applications. Geological repository systems take advantage of natural geological barriers augmented with engineered barrier systems to isolate these radioactive materials from the environment and from future populations.Geological repository systems for safe disposal of spent nuclear fuels and radioactive waste critically reviews the state-of-the-art technologies, scientific methods, regulatory developments, and social engagement approaches directly related to the implementation of geological repository systems.Part one introduces geological disposal, including multiple-barrier geological repositories, as well as reviewing the impact of nuclear fuel recycling practices and underground research laboratory activities on the development of disposal concepts. Part two reviews geological repository siting in different host rocks, including long-term stability analysis and radionuclide transport modelling. Reviews of the range of engineered barrier systems, including waste immobilisation technologies, container materials, low pH concretes, clay-based buffer and backfill materials, and barrier performance are presented in Part three. Part four examines total system performance assessment and safety analyses for deep geological and near-surface disposal, with coverage of uncertainty analysis, use of expert judgement for decision making, and development and use of knowledge management systems. Finally, Part five covers regulatory and social approaches for the establishment of geological disposal programs, from the development of radiation standards and risk-informed, performance-based regulations, to environmental monitoring and social engagement in the siting and operation of repositories.With its distinguished international team of contributors, Geological repository systems for safe disposal of spent nuclear fuels and radioactive waste is a standard reference for all nuclear waste management and geological repository professionals and researchers. - Critically reviews the state-of-the-art technologies, scientific methods, regulatory developments, and social engagement approaches related to the implementation of geological repository systems - Chapters introduce geological disposal and review the development of disposal concepts - Examines long-term stability analysis, the range of engineered barrier systems and barrier performance







The Future of Nuclear Fuel Cycle


Book Description

"In this analysis we have presented a method that provides insight into future fuel cycle alternatives by clarifying the complexity of choosing an appropriate fuel cycle in the context of the distribution of burdens and benefits between generations. The current nuclear power deployment practices, together with three future fuel cycles were assessed."--Page 227.