[cdn-nucl-l] U.S. Moves Closer to MOX Nuclear Plants

[Adam McLean <adam.mclean@utoronto.ca>]

Posted on the Lycos Environment News Service on January 23, 2002 and at:
http://ens.lycos.com/ens/jan2002/2002L-01-23-06.html

Adam

--------------

U.S. Moves Closer to MOX Nuclear Plants

By Cat Lazaroff

WASHINGTON, DC, January 23, 2002 (ENS) - The Department of Energy has decided 
to dispose of 34 metric tons of surplus, weapons grade plutonium by turning it 
into fuel for nuclear reactors. The move overturns a decision by the previous 
administration to use a portion of the plutonium as fuel, while permanently 
immobilizing the remainder in glass to prevent its potential use in nuclear 
weapons. 

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin crafted 
an agreement in June 2000 for each country to dispose of 34 metric tons of 
surplus weapons grade plutonium (Photo by David Scull, courtesy The White House)
The controversial proposal is sure to bring a storm of criticism from anti-
nuclear activists, who warn that the longer the plutonium remains in its 
current form, the more likely it is that terrorists could steal enough of the 
radioactive material to make a nuclear bomb. 
MOX fuel is a mixture of about three percent plutonium oxide with about 97 
percent uranium oxide, which can be used in nuclear reactors to produce 
electricity. Such fuel is routinely used for power generation in Belgium, 
France, Germany and Switzerland. 

The decision to turn the plutonium into mixed oxide fuel (MOX) for nuclear 
reactors follows an "exhaustive" review of nuclear nonproliferation programs, 
the Energy Department (DOE) said today. 

"Today's announcement is central to enhancing our national security and 
advancing our nonproliferation goals," said Energy Secretary Spencer 
Abraham. "This path forward is a workable, technologically possible, and 
affordable solution, that meets our commitments to environmental improvement, 
energy and national security, and the nuclear nonproliferation policies agreed 
to by the United States and Russia." 

In September 2000, the United States and Russia signed the Plutonium Management 
and Disposition Agreement, committing each country to dispose of 34 metric tons 
of surplus plutonium. The agreement did not specify how the nations were to 
eliminate their plutonium stockpiles, and both countries have been studying the 
possibility of using the material as fuel. 

A MOX pellet press at the Melox facility in Marcoule, France (Photo courtesy 
Cogema)
Under the Clinton administration, the U.S. endorsed a dual track approach to 
dispose of the plutonium, including turning some of the material into MOX 
reactor fuel and immobilizing the remaining plutonium in radioactive glass logs 
for long term storage. 
Today, the DOE announced that eliminating the immobilization option will save 
the U.S. almost $2 billion, decrease plutonium storage costs, and hasten the 
closure of the agency's former nuclear weapons complex sites. 

"There is an increased urgency to move forward with the elimination of surplus 
weapons grade material like plutonium," Abraham said. "Focusing on proven 
technologies to eliminate this material, reducing costs in the process, and 
keeping our commitment to national security and the clean up of former weapons 
sites is the right path to follow," Abraham added, noting that European 
countries have used MOX fuel in their reactors for over 20 years. 

But the track record of European MOX production has been spotty at best, marred 
by allegations of data falsification and hints of environmental catastrophe. 

The entrance to Cogema's MOX fuel fabrication plant at Cadarache (Photo 
courtesy Commissariat l'Énergie Atomique)
France's MOX plant in Cadarache, run by nuclear firm Cogema, is under 
increasing pressure to shut down since a study by France's nuclear safety 
institute showed that the plant is at risk of serious damage from a major 
earthquake. The plant has also been plagued by allegations of gaps in its 
safety records. 
The United Kingdom's (UK) Sellafield MOX plant in Cumbria began incorporating 
plutonium just last month, five years after the plant was finished. Operator 
British Nuclear Fuels Ltd. (BNFL) fought an increasingly bitter battle to win 
operating approval since its commercial reputation was savaged in 1999 by a 
data falsification scandal related to the size of MOX pellets it produced. 

Ireland claims the Sellafield plant will lead to an unacceptable increase in 
radioactive discharges into the Irish Sea as well as posing security risks. It 
also argues, as do British environmental groups, that the UK government has 
bent European Union law to approve the plant. 

Bryony Worthington, energy campaigner at Friends of the Earth, has called MOX 
fuel "unpopular, unsafe and uneconomic." 

The Nuclear Control Institute (NCI), a Washington DC based nonproliferation 
group, released a study in 1999 which concluded that using MOX fuel in a 
nuclear power plant raises the cancer risks associated with containment failure 
or core meltdown accidents at such plants. 

More deaths would result because the quantities of plutonium and other highly 
radiotoxic elements in the cores of MOX fueled plants are significantly greater 
than in plants fueled only with conventional low enriched uranium, the NCI 
study says. 

Sellafield Nuclear Plant on the Cumbrian coast of the Irish Sea. There are 
3,500 radiation sources on the site kept in 171 special buildings. (Photo 
courtesy BNFL)
Today, NCI Executive Director Tom Clements said the DOE's plan to rely on the 
MOX fuel option for plutonium disposal "runs headlong into a minefield of legal 
and economic hurdles, as well as posing safety and security risks." 
"The Bush Administration has summarily rejected the cheapest, safest and most 
secure option - the 'immobilization' approach of mixing plutonium with highly 
radioactive waste for direct, final disposal," said Clements. "Over eight years 
of DOE research documenting the feasibility and cost effectiveness of 
immobilization has been thrown out the window in deference to pro-plutonium 
forces in the nuclear industry and bureaucracy. This decision was formulated 
behind closed doors and is a full reversal of earlier DOE policy on plutonium 
disposition, a policy developed through an open public process." 

The approach is inconsistent with the DOE's January 2000 Record of Decision on 
plutonium disposition, and thus faces major hurdles under the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the NCI said. 

"DOE's reversal also complicates efforts to meet deadlines specified in the 
September 2000 U.S.-Russian plutonium disposition agreement," Clements 
added. "The resulting lengthy delays will require indefinite storage of 
plutonium at the Savannah River Site in a facility not designed for secure, 
long term plutonium storage." 

Federal budget legislation bars constructing and operating a plutonium MOX fuel 
fabrication plant in the U.S. if Russia does not also construct and operate a 
MOX plant, Clements noted. The DOE said today that the Departments of State and 
Energy will work with their counterparts in Russia to achieve the disposition 
of Russian surplus plutonium through the MOX process. 

But "Russia's plutonium disposition program is going nowhere," Clements pointed 
out. "The Russian government cannot begin to shoulder the enormous costs 
involved, and despite years of fund raising efforts by DOE, Western governments 
have proven unwilling to foot the bill." 

The McGuire Nuclear Power Plant in Georgia is one of two that would be 
converted to burn MOX fuel (Photo courtesy NRC)
Numerous hurdles remain to securing licenses for the various aspects of the MOX 
program. Opposition by public interest groups has led to the scheduling of 
public hearings by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for October 2002. 
The groups also plan to challenge the license amendment required for use of MOX 
in Duke Power's Catawba and McGuire reactors. 
NCI also questioned the DOE's projected costs for the MOX project. The agency 
said today that the MOX conversion process is expected to cost $3.8 billion 
over 20 years, including the construction of two new conversion facilities at 
the Savannah River Site, including disassembly and fuel fabrication facilities. 

Last year, the DOE estimated that the MOX disposition program would cost $4.6 
billion, with cost of the "dual track" program at $6.6 billion. Given that 
almost $700 million has already been sunk into the program, only $3 billion is 
left for remaining development, construction and operational costs, a figure 
which Clements called "pure fantasy." 

"DOE must explain to Congress and the public why they anticipate that it will 
now cost about 20 percent less to manufacture about 25 percent more MOX," 
Clements insisted. "After the Enron scandal, the American economy has already 
experienced enough 'stupid accounting tricks' for one year." 

More information on plutonium disposition and the risks of MOX fuel are 
available on the NCI website at: http://www.nci.org/nci-wpu.htm