DOE OSTI2019
The purpose of the reported effort is the development of a conceptual process for conversion of used nuclear fuel (UNF) from light water reactors (LWRs) to a fluoride salt form to facilitate its use for power generation in a Mu*STAR Accelerator-driven Subcritical Reactor (ADSR). This document evaluates potential processes for converting UNF into a fluoride salt, evaluates the costs/benefits of using enriched lithium in the carrier salt, and analyzes comparable costs of similar facilities to make a rough order of magnitude estimate for the cost to design, construct, and commission a Mu*STAR ADSR fuel conversion facility. This document also makes a high-level comparison of the Mu*STAR ADSR fuel cycle with other important fuel cycles. The results of the cost analysis show that the Mu*STAR ADSR fuel conversion facility will cost more than $100M, possibly up to around $1B, to design and construct. The cost will depend on the size of the hot cell required, which will depend on the processing options chosen for converting the UNF to a molten salt. Operations and maintenance of the facility will be on the order of $10M per year. The design, fabrication, and installation of the remote process equipment to support the fuel conversion will be an additional cost of more than $50M. Cost surveys of Department of Energy hot cell designs and previous Department of Energy hot cell construction suggest that the cost variance may be large, and the risk of escalating costs may be high in the regulation-mandated atmosphere of nuclear facility design and construction. The molten salt for the Mu*STAR ADSR contains all of the nonvolatile isotopes in the UNF, and there is never a separation of the plutonium from the fission products. This makes this conversion process much more proliferation resistant than the reprocessing options used for other closed fuel cycles. When normalized to the amount of electricity produced, the Mu*STAR ADSR fuel cycle’s expected cost might be less than any reprocessing fuel cycle and possibly less than the once-through cycle now used. Simulations show that once the conversion to fluoride is made, that up to seven times as much energy can be extracted from the UNF than was produced by the LWR while making it [Bowman, 2010]. Using once-only, on-site conversion to fluoride means no mining, no enrichment, no manufacturing of fuel rods, and no transportation costs. Typically, the UNF was produced over a 40-year period in an LWR; it can potentially be used for 280 years in Mu*STAR, producing the same power as the LWR did, ultimately requiring disposal of approximately the same volume of material as the LWR generated. Mu*STAR burns most of the higher actinides, which could reduce both the cost of disposal and significantly reduce the longevity of its radiotoxicity. Mu*STAR ADSR’s ability to demonstrate unique and valuable peripheral benefits are additional arguments for this technology, including (1) turning UNF into a valuable commodity (thus, its disposal will not be such an immediate problem, so continued operation of existing LWRs will be more acceptable); (2) burning fissile or fertile fuel including excess weapons-grade plutonium in subcritical mode; and (3) providing high-temperature process heat to convert natural gas to synthetic diesel fuel, water to hydrogen, or for other process-heat applications.
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗