Cost analysis of the US spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility
The US Department of Energy is actively seeking ways in which to delay or obviate the need for additional nuclear waste repositories beyond Yucca Mountain. All of the realistic approaches require the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. However, the US currently lacks the infrastructure to do this an...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Energy economics 2009-09, Vol.31 (5), p.627-634 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 634 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 627 |
container_title | Energy economics |
container_volume | 31 |
creator | Schneider, E.A. Deinert, M.R. Cady, K.B. |
description | The US Department of Energy is actively seeking ways in which to delay or obviate the need for additional nuclear waste repositories beyond Yucca Mountain. All of the realistic approaches require the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. However, the US currently lacks the infrastructure to do this and the costs of building and operating the required facilities are poorly established. Recent studies have also suggested that there is a financial advantage to delaying the deployment of such facilities. We consider a system of government owned reprocessing plants, each with a 40 year service life, that would reprocess spent nuclear fuel generated between 2010 and 2100. Using published data for the component costs, and a social discount rate appropriate for intergenerational analyses, we establish the unit cost for reprocessing and show that it increases slightly if deployment of infrastructure is delayed by a decade. The analysis indicates that achieving higher spent fuel discharge burnup is the most important pathway to reducing the overall cost of reprocessing. The analysis also suggests that a nuclear power production fee would be a way for the US government to recover the costs in a manner that is relatively insensitive to discount and nuclear power growth rates. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.eneco.2008.12.011 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_58824157</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0140988309000097</els_id><sourcerecordid>1801275211</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c613t-dedca3f906aec31bfdda1b13b9ab257fa2fb00d41dbbad1e1f192315e1ee69873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU-LFDEQxYMoOK5-Ai9B0Fu3qaSTTh8EZfAvCx50zyGdrrgZerrHpHthvv3WOMsePLgGXurye0VVPcZegqhBgHm7q3HCMNdSCFuDrAXAI7YB26rKgIXHbCOgEVVnrXrKnpWyE0Joo-2Gvd_OZeF-8uOxpMLnyJdr5Fc_eDngtPBpDSP6zOOKI894yHPAUtL0i0cf0piW43P2JPqx4Iu7esGuPn38uf1SXX7__HX74bIKBtRSDTgEr2InjMegoI_D4KEH1Xe-l7qNXsZeiKGBoe_9AAgROqlAIyCajha5YG_OfWmG3yuWxe1TCTiOfsJ5LU5bKxvQD4OqBSuF_A-waWVnu-5BUApL9xRA4Ku_wN28ZrotMQAGtDaKIHWGQp5LyRjdIae9z0cHwp3SdDv3J013StOBdJQmub6dXRQChnsL0pvwBN845RXQdySRs6OSSJp0IBnZOqMad73sqdnruzl9CX6M2U8hlfumElq6vZDEvTtzSMHeJMyuhIRTwCFlDIsb5vTPoW8BeDLOeQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>211615563</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cost analysis of the US spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility</title><source>RePEc</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><source>PAIS Index</source><creator>Schneider, E.A. ; Deinert, M.R. ; Cady, K.B.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schneider, E.A. ; Deinert, M.R. ; Cady, K.B.</creatorcontrib><description>The US Department of Energy is actively seeking ways in which to delay or obviate the need for additional nuclear waste repositories beyond Yucca Mountain. All of the realistic approaches require the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. However, the US currently lacks the infrastructure to do this and the costs of building and operating the required facilities are poorly established. Recent studies have also suggested that there is a financial advantage to delaying the deployment of such facilities. We consider a system of government owned reprocessing plants, each with a 40 year service life, that would reprocess spent nuclear fuel generated between 2010 and 2100. Using published data for the component costs, and a social discount rate appropriate for intergenerational analyses, we establish the unit cost for reprocessing and show that it increases slightly if deployment of infrastructure is delayed by a decade. The analysis indicates that achieving higher spent fuel discharge burnup is the most important pathway to reducing the overall cost of reprocessing. The analysis also suggests that a nuclear power production fee would be a way for the US government to recover the costs in a manner that is relatively insensitive to discount and nuclear power growth rates.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0140-9883</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6181</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.eneco.2008.12.011</identifier><identifier>CODEN: EECODR</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Applied sciences ; Cost ; Cost analysis ; Costs ; Discount rates ; Economic data ; Electricity generation ; Energy ; Energy economics ; Exact sciences and technology ; General, economic and professional studies ; Industrial structure ; Infrastructure ; Measurement ; Nevada ; Nuclear energy ; Nuclear fuel cycle ; Nuclear fuel cycle Spent nuclear fuel Reprocessing Energy economics ; Nuclear fuels ; Nuclear power plants ; Public infrastructure ; Radioactive wastes ; Reprocessing ; Spent nuclear fuel ; Studies ; U.S.A ; Waste disposal in the ground ; Waste management</subject><ispartof>Energy economics, 2009-09, Vol.31 (5), p.627-634</ispartof><rights>2008 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Sep 2009</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c613t-dedca3f906aec31bfdda1b13b9ab257fa2fb00d41dbbad1e1f192315e1ee69873</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c613t-dedca3f906aec31bfdda1b13b9ab257fa2fb00d41dbbad1e1f192315e1ee69873</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2008.12.011$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,4008,27865,27866,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=21792302$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeeeneeco/v_3a31_3ay_3a2009_3ai_3a5_3ap_3a627-634.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schneider, E.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deinert, M.R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cady, K.B.</creatorcontrib><title>Cost analysis of the US spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility</title><title>Energy economics</title><description>The US Department of Energy is actively seeking ways in which to delay or obviate the need for additional nuclear waste repositories beyond Yucca Mountain. All of the realistic approaches require the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. However, the US currently lacks the infrastructure to do this and the costs of building and operating the required facilities are poorly established. Recent studies have also suggested that there is a financial advantage to delaying the deployment of such facilities. We consider a system of government owned reprocessing plants, each with a 40 year service life, that would reprocess spent nuclear fuel generated between 2010 and 2100. Using published data for the component costs, and a social discount rate appropriate for intergenerational analyses, we establish the unit cost for reprocessing and show that it increases slightly if deployment of infrastructure is delayed by a decade. The analysis indicates that achieving higher spent fuel discharge burnup is the most important pathway to reducing the overall cost of reprocessing. The analysis also suggests that a nuclear power production fee would be a way for the US government to recover the costs in a manner that is relatively insensitive to discount and nuclear power growth rates.</description><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Cost</subject><subject>Cost analysis</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Discount rates</subject><subject>Economic data</subject><subject>Electricity generation</subject><subject>Energy</subject><subject>Energy economics</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>General, economic and professional studies</subject><subject>Industrial structure</subject><subject>Infrastructure</subject><subject>Measurement</subject><subject>Nevada</subject><subject>Nuclear energy</subject><subject>Nuclear fuel cycle</subject><subject>Nuclear fuel cycle Spent nuclear fuel Reprocessing Energy economics</subject><subject>Nuclear fuels</subject><subject>Nuclear power plants</subject><subject>Public infrastructure</subject><subject>Radioactive wastes</subject><subject>Reprocessing</subject><subject>Spent nuclear fuel</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>Waste disposal in the ground</subject><subject>Waste management</subject><issn>0140-9883</issn><issn>1873-6181</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU-LFDEQxYMoOK5-Ai9B0Fu3qaSTTh8EZfAvCx50zyGdrrgZerrHpHthvv3WOMsePLgGXurye0VVPcZegqhBgHm7q3HCMNdSCFuDrAXAI7YB26rKgIXHbCOgEVVnrXrKnpWyE0Joo-2Gvd_OZeF-8uOxpMLnyJdr5Fc_eDngtPBpDSP6zOOKI894yHPAUtL0i0cf0piW43P2JPqx4Iu7esGuPn38uf1SXX7__HX74bIKBtRSDTgEr2InjMegoI_D4KEH1Xe-l7qNXsZeiKGBoe_9AAgROqlAIyCajha5YG_OfWmG3yuWxe1TCTiOfsJ5LU5bKxvQD4OqBSuF_A-waWVnu-5BUApL9xRA4Ku_wN28ZrotMQAGtDaKIHWGQp5LyRjdIae9z0cHwp3SdDv3J013StOBdJQmub6dXRQChnsL0pvwBN845RXQdySRs6OSSJp0IBnZOqMad73sqdnruzl9CX6M2U8hlfumElq6vZDEvTtzSMHeJMyuhIRTwCFlDIsb5vTPoW8BeDLOeQ</recordid><startdate>20090901</startdate><enddate>20090901</enddate><creator>Schneider, E.A.</creator><creator>Deinert, M.R.</creator><creator>Cady, K.B.</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20090901</creationdate><title>Cost analysis of the US spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility</title><author>Schneider, E.A. ; Deinert, M.R. ; Cady, K.B.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c613t-dedca3f906aec31bfdda1b13b9ab257fa2fb00d41dbbad1e1f192315e1ee69873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Cost</topic><topic>Cost analysis</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Discount rates</topic><topic>Economic data</topic><topic>Electricity generation</topic><topic>Energy</topic><topic>Energy economics</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>General, economic and professional studies</topic><topic>Industrial structure</topic><topic>Infrastructure</topic><topic>Measurement</topic><topic>Nevada</topic><topic>Nuclear energy</topic><topic>Nuclear fuel cycle</topic><topic>Nuclear fuel cycle Spent nuclear fuel Reprocessing Energy economics</topic><topic>Nuclear fuels</topic><topic>Nuclear power plants</topic><topic>Public infrastructure</topic><topic>Radioactive wastes</topic><topic>Reprocessing</topic><topic>Spent nuclear fuel</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>Waste disposal in the ground</topic><topic>Waste management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schneider, E.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deinert, M.R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cady, K.B.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Energy economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schneider, E.A.</au><au>Deinert, M.R.</au><au>Cady, K.B.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cost analysis of the US spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility</atitle><jtitle>Energy economics</jtitle><date>2009-09-01</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>31</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>627</spage><epage>634</epage><pages>627-634</pages><issn>0140-9883</issn><eissn>1873-6181</eissn><coden>EECODR</coden><abstract>The US Department of Energy is actively seeking ways in which to delay or obviate the need for additional nuclear waste repositories beyond Yucca Mountain. All of the realistic approaches require the reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. However, the US currently lacks the infrastructure to do this and the costs of building and operating the required facilities are poorly established. Recent studies have also suggested that there is a financial advantage to delaying the deployment of such facilities. We consider a system of government owned reprocessing plants, each with a 40 year service life, that would reprocess spent nuclear fuel generated between 2010 and 2100. Using published data for the component costs, and a social discount rate appropriate for intergenerational analyses, we establish the unit cost for reprocessing and show that it increases slightly if deployment of infrastructure is delayed by a decade. The analysis indicates that achieving higher spent fuel discharge burnup is the most important pathway to reducing the overall cost of reprocessing. The analysis also suggests that a nuclear power production fee would be a way for the US government to recover the costs in a manner that is relatively insensitive to discount and nuclear power growth rates.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.eneco.2008.12.011</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0140-9883 |
ispartof | Energy economics, 2009-09, Vol.31 (5), p.627-634 |
issn | 0140-9883 1873-6181 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_58824157 |
source | RePEc; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete; PAIS Index |
subjects | Applied sciences Cost Cost analysis Costs Discount rates Economic data Electricity generation Energy Energy economics Exact sciences and technology General, economic and professional studies Industrial structure Infrastructure Measurement Nevada Nuclear energy Nuclear fuel cycle Nuclear fuel cycle Spent nuclear fuel Reprocessing Energy economics Nuclear fuels Nuclear power plants Public infrastructure Radioactive wastes Reprocessing Spent nuclear fuel Studies U.S.A Waste disposal in the ground Waste management |
title | Cost analysis of the US spent nuclear fuel reprocessing facility |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T13%3A02%3A02IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cost%20analysis%20of%20the%20US%20spent%20nuclear%20fuel%20reprocessing%20facility&rft.jtitle=Energy%20economics&rft.au=Schneider,%20E.A.&rft.date=2009-09-01&rft.volume=31&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=627&rft.epage=634&rft.pages=627-634&rft.issn=0140-9883&rft.eissn=1873-6181&rft.coden=EECODR&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.eneco.2008.12.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1801275211%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=211615563&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0140988309000097&rfr_iscdi=true |