Reactor and fuel cycle performance of light water reactor fuel with 235 U enrichments above 5%
Recent advances in nuclear fuel materials research, particularly on the topic of accident-tolerant fuels, have brought up potential opportunities for expanding the operating envelope of existing light water reactors. As many of the performance improvements offered by these technologies may be most fully realized by increasing fuel enrichment beyond the standard 5% limit, this paper examines the potential reactor performance and fuel cycle performance of low-enriched uranium oxide fueled light water reactors by generically considering pressurized water reactors with 235 U enrichment from 5 to 7%. Advanced cladding, including accident-tolerant cladding, has the potential to increase fuel burnup limits related to hydrogen in the cladding that coincide with those limits associated with end-of-life reactivity. Therefore, higher enrichment will be necessary in order to realize the higher fuel burnups. This work includes evaluation of the fuel cycle length, discharge burnup, reactivity coefficients, and fuel cycle performance, including radioactive waste and environmental impact metrics per unit energy generated. The analysis was performed using the evaluation metrics from the US Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Fuel Cycle Evaluation and Screening Study. The reactor performance and safety analysis show that enrichments between 5 and 7% would have similar fuel temperature and moderator temperature coefficients. However, the soluble boron coefficient would decrease in magnitude, requiring more corrosive boric acid in the coolant or other methods of reactivity control during the fuel cycle. At these higher enrichments the maximum burnup at the rim of the fuel pellet would increase by almost a factor of two, which is expected to impact the formation of high-burnup structure in the fuel and the corresponding thermo-mechanical fuel properties. The fuel cycle performance assessment shows that increasing enrichment reduces the quantity of high-level waste disposed per unit energy generated, but it increases the natural resource requirements normalized to a gigawatt-electricity-per-year basis. Another impact is the slightly higher discharge burnup, resulting in somewhat different activity levels of the spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste radioactivity at 100 and 100,000 years after fuel discharge. The environmental impacts—including land use, water use, carbon emission, and radiological exposure—are of the same magnitude per unit energy generated. Finally, however, the impacts are distributed differently. Less than 5% enrichment has marginally more impact on the back-end of the fuel cycle, and greater than 5% enrichment has marginally more impact on the front-end of the fuel cycle. Ultimately, no neutronic or reactor safety hindrances to employing light water reactor fuel with enrichments greater than 5% are identified; given the achievable reactor performance benefits with advanced fuels, further practical exploration of increased enrichment fuel is recommended.