Greening_IEW_2007

Spent Nuclear FuelSpent Nuclear Fuel
Disposition and The MarketDisposition and The Market
Viability of Nuclear EnergyViability of Nuclear Energy
Lorna A. GreeningLorna A. Greening
International Energy WorkshopInternational Energy Workshop
Stanford UniversityStanford University
June 26, 2007June 26, 2007

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Nuclear/GreeningNuclear/Greening
Caveats and AcknowledgementsCaveats and Acknowledgements
The conclusions and opinions presented are myThe conclusions and opinions presented are my
own.own.
All errors of commission or omission are mine,All errors of commission or omission are mine,
and the usual caveats apply.and the usual caveats apply.
I owe a tremendous debt to over 200 individualsI owe a tremendous debt to over 200 individuals
who provided data and expertise in specializedwho provided data and expertise in specialized
areas of energy technology, supply, andareas of energy technology, supply, and
consumption over a two year period. Withoutconsumption over a two year period. Without
thisthis ““grass rootsgrass roots”” community contribution, effortcommunity contribution, effort
and support, this work would not have beenand support, this work would not have been
possible.possible.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
TodayToday’’s Discussions Discussion
Framing of the issues and the questions.Framing of the issues and the questions.
What technologies could replace existing nuclear capacity, andWhat technologies could replace existing nuclear capacity, and
be used to meet growing electricity demand? And at what cost?be used to meet growing electricity demand? And at what cost?
Will the resource base be sufficient to support the replacementWill the resource base be sufficient to support the replacement
capacity required?capacity required?
Is there a strategy for nuclear capacity development thatIs there a strategy for nuclear capacity development that
minimizes spent nuclear fuel (including theminimizes spent nuclear fuel (including the ‘‘legacylegacy’’) to levels) to levels
within the current statutory limit of 63,000 metric tons for Yucwithin the current statutory limit of 63,000 metric tons for Yuccaca
Mountain?Mountain?
Discussion of the means of analysis:Discussion of the means of analysis:
Overview of LAOverview of LA--US MARKAL;US MARKAL;
Depiction of the nuclear fuel cycle.Depiction of the nuclear fuel cycle.
Some results.Some results.
Factors that could alter this forecast.Factors that could alter this forecast.
Some general conclusions from this analysis.Some general conclusions from this analysis.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Issues for US Nuclear Electricity GenerationIssues for US Nuclear Electricity Generation
In 2001, approximately 20.5% of the electricity generated in theIn 2001, approximately 20.5% of the electricity generated in the USUS
was provided by nuclear generation.was provided by nuclear generation.
Economics, reliability and safety have improved substantially ovEconomics, reliability and safety have improved substantially overer
the last 20 years for nuclear electricity generation facilities.the last 20 years for nuclear electricity generation facilities.
Much new technology exists andMuch new technology exists and EPActEPAct 2005 provides financial2005 provides financial
guarantees, but new nuclear generation capacity is not being buiguarantees, but new nuclear generation capacity is not being built.lt.
Currently, well over 31,000 metric tons ofCurrently, well over 31,000 metric tons of ““legacylegacy”” spent nuclearspent nuclear
fuel resides in cooling or interim dry storage. By the expiratiofuel resides in cooling or interim dry storage. By the expiration ofn of
the majority of nuclear licenses in 2020, 1.5 Yucca Mountains withe majority of nuclear licenses in 2020, 1.5 Yucca Mountains will bell be
required to store the waste for 10,000 years.required to store the waste for 10,000 years.
Replacement of the existing nuclear technology with other sourceReplacement of the existing nuclear technology with other sourcess
will require substantial investments in new generation capacity,will require substantial investments in new generation capacity, andand
should result in increases in prices of competing fuels.should result in increases in prices of competing fuels.
The spent nuclear fuel will still to be be dealt with, and a potThe spent nuclear fuel will still to be be dealt with, and a potentiallyentially
useful energy resource will be lost.useful energy resource will be lost.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Comparison of Nuclear in LA US MARKAL withComparison of Nuclear in LA US MARKAL with
Other FrameworksOther Frameworks
US MARKAL contains all of the steps in the nuclear fuel cycleUS MARKAL contains all of the steps in the nuclear fuel cycle
including waste disposal. This is more complete than NEMSincluding waste disposal. This is more complete than NEMS
(EIA), or any model of this type since(EIA), or any model of this type since JoskowJoskow and Baughman,and Baughman,
1976.1976.
Depiction of reprocessing, and permanent disposal captureDepiction of reprocessing, and permanent disposal capture
differences indifferences in radiotoxicityradiotoxicity and heat of materials. This allows theand heat of materials. This allows the
determination of the benefits (e.g., reduced emissions, energydetermination of the benefits (e.g., reduced emissions, energy
security) of reprocessing, waste partitioning and transmutation,security) of reprocessing, waste partitioning and transmutation,
and reduced volume andand reduced volume and radiotoxicityradiotoxicity disposal strategies fordisposal strategies for
spent nuclear fuel.spent nuclear fuel.
Longer forecast horizon than other models allows the evaluationLonger forecast horizon than other models allows the evaluation
ofof ““new generationnew generation”” nuclear technologies and the developmentnuclear technologies and the development
of interim strategies for waste disposal in the face of legal caof interim strategies for waste disposal in the face of legal capsps
on permanent disposal depositories.on permanent disposal depositories.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Attributes of Model of LAAttributes of Model of LA--MARKALMARKAL
All sources of energy represented.All sources of energy represented.
Expanded technology choice set of over 4000 technologies.Expanded technology choice set of over 4000 technologies.
Nine different emissions types (CONine different emissions types (CO22, SO, SO22,, NONOxx, N, N22O, CO, VOC,O, CO, VOC,
CHCH44, particulates, and mercury) tracked through the economy,, particulates, and mercury) tracked through the economy,
along with depiction of regulations, and mitigation techniques.along with depiction of regulations, and mitigation techniques.
Inclusion of demand response to prices and incomesInclusion of demand response to prices and incomes
incorporates a response that results in a lower total cost ofincorporates a response that results in a lower total cost of
satisfying energy demand.satisfying energy demand.
Electricity and steam: Representation of centrally dispatched,Electricity and steam: Representation of centrally dispatched,
distributed generation, and combined heat and powerdistributed generation, and combined heat and power
(including consumption of direct heat and steam).(including consumption of direct heat and steam).
See article in IAEE Newsletter, Fourth Quarter 2003See article in IAEE Newsletter, Fourth Quarter 2003
(pages12(pages12--19),19), www.iaee.orgwww.iaee.org. Table 1 provides a summary. Table 1 provides a summary
comparison with NEMS (EIA).comparison with NEMS (EIA).

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Electricity: Central GenerationElectricity: Central Generation
Over 90 centrally dispatched electricity generationOver 90 centrally dispatched electricity generation
technologies are characterized.technologies are characterized.
Fuel/technology types represented include:Fuel/technology types represented include:
Fossil (oil, natural gas, coal, MSW) steam.Fossil (oil, natural gas, coal, MSW) steam.
Combined cycle (natural gas, coal, biomass).Combined cycle (natural gas, coal, biomass).
Conventional and advanced turbines (fossil and methanol).Conventional and advanced turbines (fossil and methanol).
RenewablesRenewables including solar, wind, biomass, and waste.including solar, wind, biomass, and waste.
Nuclear (light water reactors and MOX), andNuclear (light water reactors and MOX), and ““next generationnext generation”” including HTGR, HTGRincluding HTGR, HTGR--MOX,MOX,
HTGRHTGR--TRU, FastTRU, Fast--spectrum TRU, CRspectrum TRU, CR--1, and MOX burners, and Accelerator1, and MOX burners, and Accelerator--driven TRU anddriven TRU and
MA burners.MA burners.
Carbon sequestration is depicted where appropriate.Carbon sequestration is depicted where appropriate.
Varying annual and daily load profiles are segmented by timeVarying annual and daily load profiles are segmented by time
of day and loadof day and load--type with competition among appropriatetype with competition among appropriate
technology types (e.g., basetechnology types (e.g., base--load may be satisfied by nuclearload may be satisfied by nuclear
or steam and CC).or steam and CC).
Connection to endConnection to end--use sector specific grids foruse sector specific grids for
CHP/distributed generation resulting in competition betweenCHP/distributed generation resulting in competition between
sources of electricity.sources of electricity.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Nuclear Technologies and Materials FlowsNuclear Technologies and Materials Flows
High Heat Release
(HHR) FP
Transuranics
(TRU)
Minor Actinides
(MA)
US Surplus
Weapons Grade Pu
Reactor Grade Pu
(3 vectors)
Natural U as UF6
US Surplus
HEU
LEU from Russian
Surplus HEU
Recovered
Irradiated LEU
Depleted U
Natural U
Mining / Milling
(3 cost steps)
Imports
UF6 to UO2
UO2 to UF6
Gaseous
Diffusion
Gas Centrifuge
Laser Isotope
UOX Fabrication
MOX Fabrication
Other Fuel Forms:
Metal, (An)N, (An)C, ..
Present-day LWR
(B ~ 38 MWd/kg)
ALWR-UOX
(B ~ 55 MWd/kg)
ALWR-MOX
(B ~ 49 MWd/kg)
Thermal GCR
Fast Reactor
ConceptsOn-site wet
On-site dry
Off-site interim
SF storage
PUREX
UREX/UREX+
TRUEX or
similar
Aqueous separation
of Cs, Sr, I, Tc
Pyrometallurgical
separations
HEU downblending
(UNH process)
HLW
vitrification
SF conditioning /
encapsulation
Separated actinide
and FP storage
Materials credit at
end of forecast
Yucca Mountain
Resources
Materials Conversion Enrichment Fabrication
Irradiation
SF Storage
Reprocessing
Waste Management
Planned / Possible
Implemented
Transport costs
assessed but
not shown.
Gray boxes
represent level of
resolution of
previous MARKAL
model.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Disposal Costing Model Based UponDisposal Costing Model Based Upon
Repository Heat Load LimitationsRepository Heat Load Limitations
Unit repository disposal costs for spent fuel, lessUnit repository disposal costs for spent fuel, less
transportationtransportation--related charges, are currently estimated byrelated charges, are currently estimated by
OMB as ca. $440/kgIHM.OMB as ca. $440/kgIHM.
Disposal costs includeDisposal costs include vitrificationvitrification –– thethe glassificationglassification ofof
highhigh--level radioactive waste (HLW) in an inert matrixlevel radioactive waste (HLW) in an inert matrix –– asas
well as emplacement of this waste in Yucca Mountain.well as emplacement of this waste in Yucca Mountain.
The capacity of Yucca Mountain is governed not by theThe capacity of Yucca Mountain is governed not by the
mass of material emplaced, but rather by themass of material emplaced, but rather by the total decaytotal decay
heat productionheat production of that material.of that material.
Comparing the heat production for high level waste ofComparing the heat production for high level waste of
various compositions to that of spent nuclear fuel, one canvarious compositions to that of spent nuclear fuel, one can
estimate anestimate an ‘‘effectiveeffective’’ repository capacity and thus arrive atrepository capacity and thus arrive at
a cost estimate.a cost estimate.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Disposal Cost as a Function of WasteDisposal Cost as a Function of Waste
ContentContent
TheThe ‘‘equivalentequivalent’’ heat loadheat load--based repository utilization ofbased repository utilization of
HLW is the amount [in kg] of the ca. 63000HLW is the amount [in kg] of the ca. 63000 tonIHMtonIHM YuccaYucca
Mountain capacity used by HLW of a given compositionMountain capacity used by HLW of a given composition
originating from 1originating from 1 kgHMkgHM..
This figure, as well as the derived volume of HLW glass,This figure, as well as the derived volume of HLW glass,
allows the disposal cost to be formulated based upon:allows the disposal cost to be formulated based upon:
$300,000/m$300,000/m33
HLW unitHLW unit vitrificationvitrification cost (Source:cost (Source:
Hanford HLWHanford HLW vitrificationvitrification program),program),
$332 per$332 per ‘‘equivalentequivalent’’ kg HLW repository disposalkg HLW repository disposal
cost, representing $440/kg less the YM costcost, representing $440/kg less the YM cost
component relating to waste package fabrication.component relating to waste package fabrication.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Example Disposal Cost ComparisonExample Disposal Cost Comparison
Waste
Composition
Unit
vitrification
cost
[$/kg waste]
Unit
disposal
cost
[$/kg waste]
Total
[$/kglHM]
‘Effective’
capacity
[kglHM]
All Spent Fuel N/A 440 440 63000
Transuranics
(TRU and FP)
3231 6436 498 63000
TRU, Low Heat
Rel. FPs (LHRFP)
922 4087 238 107700
Minor Actinides
(MA), LHRFP
757 3484 161 158100
MA, all FP 3686 7052 451 70600
LHRFP 480 897 50 636300

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Example of Reprocessing: Existing U38Example of Reprocessing: Existing U38
Mass (kgIHM) of SNF
going to YUCCA
Mountain

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Resource Impacts of Selected NuclearResource Impacts of Selected Nuclear
TechnologiesTechnologies
00
00
[19.7[19.7 tonnetonne DU forDU for
CR 1 nearCR 1 near--breeder]breeder]
232232
[0 for TRU burner][0 for TRU burner]
[20.5[20.5 tonnetonne depleteddepleted
uranium (DU)]uranium (DU)]
234 to 198234 to 198
Uranium ResourceUranium Resource
ConsumptionConsumption
[ton[ton UUnatnat / GW/ GW--yr (e)]yr (e)]
--114011407.6 to 4.57.6 to 4.5
[150 to 250[150 to 250 MWdMWd/kg]/kg]
AcceleratorAccelerator
Driven SystemDriven System
00 [CR 1][CR 1]
--450450 [CR 0.5][CR 0.5]
21.6 to 4.821.6 to 4.8
[CR 1 to CR 0.5][CR 1 to CR 0.5]
Fast SpectrumFast Spectrum
ReactorReactor
167167 [U fuelled][U fuelled]
--759759 [TRU burner][TRU burner]
6.4 to 1.76.4 to 1.7
[120 to 470[120 to 470 MWdMWd/kg]/kg]
HTGR (ThermalHTGR (Thermal
Spectrum)Spectrum)
--38938922.222.2
[49[49 MWdMWd/kg]/kg]
MOX FuelledMOX Fuelled
LWRLWR
343 to 257343 to 25729.8 to 19.829.8 to 19.8
[38 to 55[38 to 55 MWdMWd/kg]/kg]
LWRLWR –– UraniumUranium
FuelFuel
NetNet TransuranicTransuranic
ProductionProduction
[kg TRU /[kg TRU / GWheGWhe]]
SNF ProductionSNF Production
[[tonnetonne SNF / GWSNF / GW--yr (e)]yr (e)]

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Further Gains fromFurther Gains from ‘‘Advanced NuclearAdvanced Nuclear
TechnologiesTechnologies’’
Technology Efficiency of
generation
Coolant Outlet
Temperature (o
C)
LWR: 38 MWd /kg
(present)
33% 200-300
LWR: 49 to 55
MWd/kg
34% 200-300
HTGR: 121 to 470
MWd/kg
48% 800-900
Fast-spectrum: 127 to
185 MWd/kg
42% 500-1000
Accelerator-driven:
150 to 250 MWd/kg
40%a
500-800
a. Less ~10% of net electric power required to drive the accelerator.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Construction Costs are UncertainConstruction Costs are Uncertain
HighestHighest
EstimateEstimate
OECDOECDLowest EstimateLowest Estimate
47004700
88
21002100
44
14501450
33
FRFR
23002300
88
21302130
44
10001000
33
HTGRHTGR
40004000
1212
17001700
44
10001000
33
LWRLWR
Overnight Costs [$ /Overnight Costs [$ / kWekWe];]; Construction Time [yr]Construction Time [yr]
Of the major generation technologies in use today, constructionOf the major generation technologies in use today, construction costs forcosts for
new nuclear facilities are the most difficult to quantify. In anew nuclear facilities are the most difficult to quantify. In a survey ofsurvey of
nuclear industry executives, the perceived risk associated withnuclear industry executives, the perceived risk associated with
construction costs and times was rated asconstruction costs and times was rated as ‘‘very highvery high’’ –– far higher thanfar higher than
plant O&M, fuel cycle costs, or disaster preparedness:plant O&M, fuel cycle costs, or disaster preparedness:

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Forecast of Electricity DemandForecast of Electricity Demand
(by Generation Fuel)(by Generation Fuel)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090 2095 2100
Year
Coal Petroleum Natural Gas Nuclear Power Renewable Sources
BillionkWh

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Forecast of Nuclear Capacity by TypeForecast of Nuclear Capacity by Type
GW
0
50
100
150
200
250
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 2070 2075 2080 2085 2090 2095 2100
Existing U38
HTGRS
/Conventional
Fuel
Advanced
‘PWRS’
Transmutation/Accelerators

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Comparison of Our Capacity Forecast with EIAComparison of Our Capacity Forecast with EIA
Advanced Nuclear, AEO 2006Advanced Nuclear, AEO 2006
GW
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
2005
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
EIA
Current Fleet
Advanced PWRs
HTGRs – Driver /
Transmuter Fuel
HTGRs –
UOX Fuel

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
CommentaryCommentary
For this scenario, repository capacity is constrained and, afterFor this scenario, repository capacity is constrained and, after thethe
repository opens in 2018, the duration of SF interim storage isrepository opens in 2018, the duration of SF interim storage is
limited.limited.
Therefore, two paths for nuclear power are available:Therefore, two paths for nuclear power are available:
1) adopt technologies that close the fuel cycle, or1) adopt technologies that close the fuel cycle, or
2) phase out nuclear power.2) phase out nuclear power.
Under these constraints, the model choseUnder these constraints, the model chose HTGRsHTGRs with two fuelwith two fuel
forms:forms:
-- low enriched uranium oxide fuel (about 75% of HTGR thermallow enriched uranium oxide fuel (about 75% of HTGR thermal
energy production);energy production);
-- soso--calledcalled ““deep burndeep burn”” driver and transmutation fuel consisting ofdriver and transmutation fuel consisting of
transuranictransuranic oxides (25% of thermal energy production)oxides (25% of thermal energy production)11
..
1. See C. Rodriguez et. al., “Deep Burn Transmutation of Nuclear Waste,” in Proceedings of the
Conference on High Temperature Reactors, Petten, NL, April 22-24, 2002.
Available: http://www.iaea.org/inis/aws/htgr/fulltext/htr2002_207.pdf

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Factors That Could Affect Outcome:Factors That Could Affect Outcome:
Political/Regulatory FactorsPolitical/Regulatory Factors
Risk Factor
(+ = Factor increases
likelihood of outcome relative
to reference case)
(- = Factor decreases
likelihood)
(o = Factor does not strongly
affect likelihood)
Nuclear
Phaseout
Constrained
Repository
Unconstrained
Repository
Constrained
Repository,
Advanced
Fuel Cycle
Unconstrained
Repository,
Advanced Fuel
Cycle
Delay in Opening of Yucca
Mountain
+ o - + -
Regulatory Delays in Licensing
of Interim Storage or
Expanded Cooling Storage
+ + - + -
Opposition to Licensing or
Operation of Reprocessing
Facilities
+ + + - -
More Stringent Repository
Performance Criteria
+ o - + +
More Efficient NRC Site and
Facility Licensing
- o + + +
Implementation of Carbon
Taxes or Emission Permits
- o + + +

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
ConclusionsConclusions
Inclusion of the issue of spent nuclear fuel results in aInclusion of the issue of spent nuclear fuel results in a
different technology mix.different technology mix.
Limited permanent disposal capacity requires the use ofLimited permanent disposal capacity requires the use of
reprocessing and transmutationreprocessing and transmutation--oriented nuclearoriented nuclear
generation technologies.generation technologies.
HTGR technologies provide greater flexibility byHTGR technologies provide greater flexibility by
accepting a greater range of outputs from reprocessing.accepting a greater range of outputs from reprocessing.
HTGR generation is conservatively priced at 21% moreHTGR generation is conservatively priced at 21% more
in overin over--night costs thannight costs than LWRsLWRs; but; but HTGRsHTGRs provide theprovide the
potential for recycling ofpotential for recycling of transuranicstransuranics from previouslyfrom previously
generated SNF.generated SNF.
Advanced nuclear generation technologies provide aAdvanced nuclear generation technologies provide a
sustainable power source through reduction of thesustainable power source through reduction of the
quantities of spent nuclear fuel.quantities of spent nuclear fuel.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
BackupBackup

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Embedded Assumptions in LinearEmbedded Assumptions in Linear
ProgrammingProgramming
A linear program is a linear program . . .is a linear program!!A linear program is a linear program . . .is a linear program!!
Embedded economic paradigm in a cost minimization framework.Embedded economic paradigm in a cost minimization framework.
The economic paradigm includes:The economic paradigm includes:
Homogeneous, linear cost functions.Homogeneous, linear cost functions.
Assumption of perfect competition, i.e., large number ofAssumption of perfect competition, i.e., large number of
economic agents and everybody is aeconomic agents and everybody is a ““price taker.price taker.””
Ease of entry and exit.Ease of entry and exit.
All markets are in equilibrium, i.e., market clearing assumed,All markets are in equilibrium, i.e., market clearing assumed,
with perfect foresight.with perfect foresight.
Factors that drive energy use or consumption areFactors that drive energy use or consumption are ““energy only.energy only.””
Bias introduced through choice of decision variables (e.g.,Bias introduced through choice of decision variables (e.g.,
technologies) for inclusion in the model.technologies) for inclusion in the model.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Electricity: Distributed Generation/CHPElectricity: Distributed Generation/CHP
Each endEach end--use sector has a sectoruse sector has a sector--specific electricity andspecific electricity and
steam grid which is connected to the main grid with thesteam grid which is connected to the main grid with the
option of selling (i.e., interoption of selling (i.e., inter--sector trade).sector trade).
Each sector or endEach sector or end--use has over 40 CHP/DGuse has over 40 CHP/DG
technologies using natural gas ortechnologies using natural gas or renewablesrenewables or otheror other
fossil fuels.fossil fuels.
Industrial CHP:Industrial CHP: ““passpass--outout”” turbines (flexible heat/power ratios), wind,turbines (flexible heat/power ratios), wind,
and fuel cells.and fuel cells.
Commercial and residential:Commercial and residential: microturbinesmicroturbines, fuel cells, reciprocating, fuel cells, reciprocating
engines, and photovoltaic.engines, and photovoltaic.
Transport: structured for the addition ofTransport: structured for the addition of ““mobilemobile”” generation sources.generation sources.
DG and CHP are depicted as theDG and CHP are depicted as the ““marginalmarginal”” producer inproducer in
the base case, i.e., these technologies compete in athe base case, i.e., these technologies compete in a
market niche with central generation and more efficientmarket niche with central generation and more efficient
endend--use technologies.use technologies.

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Distributed Electricity Generation (DG)Distributed Electricity Generation (DG) versusversus
Central Electricity Generation (CG)Central Electricity Generation (CG)
Dispatched
Central
Generation
Small Distributed Generators
Distributed
Generation
Clearinghouse
Local-Use
Distributed
Generation
To Grid To Grid
Transmission
Losses
Transmission
Losses
Central
Generation
Consumption
Distributed
Generation
Consumption
from Grid
Total
Consumption
from Grid
Total
Consumption
from DG
Total Electricity Consumption

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Market FactorsMarket Factors
Risk Factor
(+ = Factor increases
likelihood of outcome
relative to reference case)
(- = Factor decreases
likelihood)
(o = Factor does not
strongly affect likelihood)
Nuclear
Phaseout
Constrained
Repository
Unconstrained
Repository
Constrained
Repository,
Advanced Fuel
Cycle
Unconstrained
Repository,
Advanced Fuel Cycle
Increased Fossil Fuel
Price Volatility
- o + + +
Scarcity of Uranium
Resource
+ - - o -
Delay in Availability of
Advanced Technologies
o o o - -
Increased Disposal Cost
Volatility
+ - - + +
Aggregate Electricity
Demand Growth Greater
than Expected
- o + + +
Aggressive Growth in
Demand for Hydrogen
o o o + +

June 26, 2007June 26, 2007
Security FactorsSecurity Factors
Risk Factor
(+ = Factor increases likelihood
of outcome relative to reference
case)
(- = Factor decreases likelihood)
(o = Factor does not strongly
affect likelihood)
Nuclear
Phaseout
Constrained
Repository
Unconstrained
Repository
Constrained
Repository,
Advanced Fuel
Cycle
Unconstrained
Repository,
Advanced Fuel
Cycle
Nuclear Materials Dispersed at
Generation and Interim Storage
Facilities
+ o - + +
Transportation of SNF + o - - -
Security of Separated Actinides + + + - -
Propagation / Dispersion of
Advanced Reprocessing or
Enrichment Technologies
+ + + - -
Repository Becomes a ‘Plutonium
Mine’
o - - + +

Greening_IEW_2007

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (19)

Similar to Greening_IEW_2007

Similar to Greening_IEW_2007 (20)

Greening_IEW_2007