Japan Atomic Energy Commission’s Subcommittee Evaluates Three Policy Options for Recycling Spent Nuclear Fuel |
By Sachiko Onose, Atoms in Japan, 21 May 2012. On May 16, the Technical Subcommittee on Nuclear Power, Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Etc., under the Japan Atomic Energy Commission (JAEC), summarized its discussions in the form of a report proposing three recycling policy options, evaluating each against four different assumed levels of reliance on nuclear power in 2030: 35% reliance, 20%, 15% and 0%. The report finds the option of reprocessing all spent nuclear fuel and reusing the recovered uranium and plutonium to be the most expensive. At the same time, it says that if the current level of nuclear power is maintained or increased, it would be the most effective in respect of management and storage of spent nuclear fuel, as well as the area required for radioactive waste disposal, and the conservation of resources. Potential issues that might be faced in carrying out this option include the stable operation of the Rokkasho Reprocessing Plant and the practical availability of fast breeder reactors (FBRs). The option of direct disposal—namely, the burial of all spent nuclear fuel underground after a period of storage—would be the cheapest, but there are many potential issues surrounding it. A change in policy would make it more difficult to obtain understanding from local municipalities. There would also be nowhere to dispose the spent nuclear fuel if Rokkasho were to be closed. Furthermore, it would cost more to resume development if it was later determined that reprocessing was again desirable. Additionally, direct disposal technology will have to be established in order to implement that option, along with a safety net to deal with the discontinuance of the Rokkasho reprocessing business. The report gives the most support to a approach that combines reprocessing and direct disposal concurrently. That would offer flexibility in light of the indefinite nature of Japan’s future reliance on nuclear power, and would be less harmful than direct geological disposal, although there would be potential issues arising from the policy changes. Other implementation issues include redefining the political significance of interim storage and possible review of a comprehensive agreement under the U.S.-Japan Nuclear Cooperation Agreement. At present, uncertain elements in selecting a future policy option include the country’s future reliance on nuclear power, the program to use MOX (plutonium-uranium mixed oxide) fuel, and the operation of Rokkasho. Until the basis for making a decision on policy options becomes clearer, the subcommittee recommended two courses of action: either (1) continuing the current nuclear fuel cycle policy with some conditions attached, or (2) freezing current activities, including Rokkasho and the program to use MOX fuel. The report will be presented at the Council for a New Framework for Nuclear Energy Policy on May 23, and later to the government's Energy and Environment Council via the Japan Atomic Energy Commission (JAEC). |