29.07.2014 Views

The FuTure oF nuclear Fuel cycle - MIT Energy Initiative

The FuTure oF nuclear Fuel cycle - MIT Energy Initiative

The FuTure oF nuclear Fuel cycle - MIT Energy Initiative

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter 1 — <strong>The</strong> Future of the Nuclear<br />

<strong>Fuel</strong> Cycle — Overview, Conclusions, and<br />

Recommendations<br />

In 2003 <strong>MIT</strong> issued the report <strong>The</strong> Future of Nuclear Power. <strong>The</strong> focus for that report was<br />

the role of <strong>nuclear</strong> power as an important option to avoid greenhouse gas emissions. A major<br />

conclusion of the report was that “In deregulated markets, <strong>nuclear</strong> power is not now cost<br />

competitive with coal and natural gas. However, plausible reductions by industry in capital<br />

cost, operation and maintenance costs, and construction time could reduce the gap. Carbon<br />

emission credits, if enacted by government, can give <strong>nuclear</strong> power a cost advantage.” <strong>The</strong><br />

primary recommendation was that the U.S. Government should provide assistance for the<br />

construction of the first few new <strong>nuclear</strong> plants. <strong>The</strong> recommendation was based on the<br />

need to operate within an untested regulatory regime, the failure of government to initiate<br />

spent <strong>nuclear</strong> fuel removal from reactor sites, and the public interest in understanding the<br />

economics of new <strong>nuclear</strong> power plants in the U.S. as part of a climate change risk mitigation<br />

strategy. <strong>The</strong>re would be an opportunity to reduce or eliminate a substantial financing<br />

risk premium if the capability to build plants on schedule and within budget was demonstrated.<br />

Since 2003 the urgency to address climate change has increased. <strong>The</strong> U.S. Congress has indeed<br />

adopted a set of incentives to aid the construction of the “first mover” <strong>nuclear</strong> plants<br />

and the Administration has proposed to expand the incentives. <strong>The</strong>re has been a worldwide<br />

increase in projected growth of <strong>nuclear</strong> power and a large growth in the start of construction<br />

of new <strong>nuclear</strong> power plants in a few countries such as China. We undertook this study<br />

on the Future of the Nuclear <strong>Fuel</strong> Cycle to address two overarching questions in the context<br />

of the potential for significant growth in <strong>nuclear</strong> energy.<br />

p What are the long-term desirable fuel <strong>cycle</strong> options?<br />

p What are the implications for near-term policy choices?<br />

Our analysis has led to three broad conclusions, the basis for which will be presented in this<br />

chapter and in the body of the report.<br />

conclusion<br />

For the next several decades, light water reactors using the once-through fuel<br />

<strong>cycle</strong> are the preferred option for the U.S.<br />

Chapter 1 — <strong>The</strong> Future of the Nuclear <strong>Fuel</strong> Cycle — Overview, Conclusions, and Recommendations 1

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!