| ID | 177412 |
| Title Proper | Spent nuclear fuel storage |
| Other Title Information | What are the relationships between size and cost of the alternatives? |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Rothwell, Geoffrey |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | Irradiated or Spent Nuclear Fuel (SNF, where it could be “used nuclear fuel” if reprocessing facilities are available) is periodically removed from nuclear power reactors and allowed to decay in suitable storage facilities. This paper attempts to calculate the relationships between sizes and costs of wet/dry and onsite/offsite SNF storage. The methodology is (1) to propose cost models based on publicly available data and (2) to estimate cost equations to compare the various storage costs. When the fuel pool nears capacity, the cheapest alternative is to transfer SNF to onsite dry storage. Once a nuclear power plant has been decommissioned, and only the onsite dry storage facility remains, there appears to be little economic reason (from the nuclear power plant owner/operator’s viewpoint) to move the SNF to consolidated facilities because of extra monetary and non-monetary costs. Unless there are explicit national policies and funded programs to manage SNF, there are likely to be legacy sites with stranded SNF. On the other hand, there is a consensus that consolidated facilities (1) would be more safe and secure than dispersed onsite storage locations, (2) would facilitate final disposal, and (3) might reduce the risks perceived by local communities of storing SNF. |
| `In' analytical Note | Energy Policy Vol.150; Mar 2021: p.112126 |
| Journal Source | Energy Policy 2021-03 150 |
| Key Words | Scale Economies ; Spent Nuclear Fuel ; Nuclear Energy Policy ; Used Nuclear Fuel |