nuclear undone
  • blog
  • about
  • contact

undo your thinking

listen to the facts

absorb new ideas

Disposing of weapons plutonium

7/1/2014

2 Comments

 
Picture
MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility construction in South Carolina
By Nicholas Thompson

One of the most controversial issues with nuclear energy is nuclear waste. In particular, disposing of plutonium in such a way that it doesn't lead to proliferation. The “Plutonium Disposition Alternatives” Panel at the American Nuclear Society 2014 Annual Meeting in Reno, NV set out to shed some light on the issue and possible solutions.

The United States and Russia made an agreement to get rid of 17,000 nuclear weapons worth of plutonium back in 2000 (Plutonium Management and Disposition Agreement or PMDA). There are a number of ways to dispose of plutonium, falling into two general categories:

  • consuming the plutonium in either reactors or accelerators
  • immobilizing it in a waste form and putting it into permanent storage 

On the reactor side, a number of reactors can be used; existing light water reactors with Plutonium/Uranium Oxide fuel (Mixed Oxide or MOX), high temperature gas reactors, and fast reactors are some examples. It should be noted that plutonium generated U.S. light water reactors is not high enough purity to be used in a weapon, this program is only for getting rid of weapons plutonium. On the direct disposal side, plutonium can be vitrified (put into glass) and stored in a deep geological repository.

While some of these technologies are closer to implementation than others, all of them are technically viable. Because there are so many options, making the choice between which path to take ends up being influenced more by sociopolitical issues than by technical issues.

In the earlier 2000’s, the United States made the decision to use MOX fuel in our current generation reactors to dispose of this weapons Plutonium. The MOX facility is being built, but it is over budget and not currently in the President's budget. Russia decided to go with a fast reactor, which is currently consuming their weapons plutonium. For the U.S. to fulfill it’s commitments in the PMDA, the MOX facility will need to be built or another path will need to be investigated and taken.

It’s important for the US to be able to deliver on reduction agreements in order to be taken seriously at future nonproliferation and nuclear security negotiations. Cutting funding to the MOX project now, even if it’s only for a year, would cause even bigger delays in its construction, and also delay the actual start of US Plutonium disposition. Cutting funding completely and moving to another disposition path would likely take another decade.

What disposition path should the United States have taken? 
What should the federal government do now?
2 Comments
Damon Bryson
7/1/2014 03:37:07 am

The federal government already studied the plutonium disposition options for many years before deciding on MOX. It was the correct decision, since it was the only option that fully meets our treaty obligations. The other options were watered-down disposal methods that did not meet all our obligations. Most were more expensive, in addition to not meeting requirements. All major construction projects have a tendency to go over budget due to various problems. Government construction projects also have political reasons to go over budget - namely delays in funding. Each time funding is delayed, the overall price will go up. I support completion of the MOX project and removal of plutonium from the weapons inventory.

Reply
John
9/15/2014 01:47:08 am

That's a reasonable attitude. I'd rather the US resumed development of the fast breeder reactor, and burned up all of its weapons plutonium, spent fuel and depleted uranium. Of course, I'm a foreigner, so it wouldn't be my taxes that paid for this!!

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Picture

    Archives

    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    August 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013

    Categories

    All
    American Nuclear Society
    Climate Change
    Diversity In Stem
    Energy
    Environmentalists
    Fuel Cycle
    I'm A Nuke
    International
    IYNC
    Navy
    Nonproliferation
    Nuclear Energy
    Nuclear Energy
    Nuclear Engineers
    Nuclear Technology
    Policy
    Radiation
    Reactors
    Science Education
    Sustainability
    UAE
    Women In Engineering

    RSS Feed


    Follow on Bloglovin
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.
Photos from Idaho National Laboratory, Jim.Richmond, Idaho National Laboratory, IAEA Imagebank