Reprocessing of nuclear fuel and plutonium breeder commercialization: implications of deferral

by Wayne D. Perry

Purchase Print Copy

 FormatList Price Price
Add to Cart Paperback64 pages $23.00 $18.40 20% Web Discount

Analyzes implications of deferred light water reactor (LWR) spent fuel reprocessing upon the availability and cost of plutonium needed for liquid metal fast breeder reactor (LMFBR) commercialization. The analysis is predicated upon the assumption that U.S. commercial reprocessing of nuclear fuel would not otherwise proceed, because of U.S. weapons antiproliferation policies or because of findings that the near-term economic benefits of reprocessing for recycle of uranium and fissile plutonium in LWRs are either small or nonexistent. As background, this paper reviews U.S. government policies on deferral of commercial-scale reprocessing and plutonium breeding reactors, and summarizes prior U.S. economic cost/benefit analyses, all of which indicate small benefits, if any, of investment in reprocessing for recycle in a LWR economy. The paper models the time and capacity of commercial-scale LWR reprocessing facilities and the associated minimum present discounted costs that would support a decision to proceed with U.S. LMFBR commercialization at a later time.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Paper series. The paper was a product of the RAND Corporation from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit www.rand.org/about/principles.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.