The South Korean program for reusing spent nuclear fuel directly.

[NNadir]

South Korea maintains a fleet of 20 nuclear reactors, more than half of which have been built since 1995. The rated power for the Korean reactor fleet is 16,840 MWe. In 2004, the Korean nuclear program produced 124.18 billion kilowatt hours or 0.47 exajoules, meaning that it ran a 84% of name plate capacity and produced 36.0% of Korean electricity. (Korean electrical power production was 1.24 exajoules)

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf81.htm

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/table63.xls

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/international/iealf/table27.xls

Eight new reactors are on order in Korea.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/reactors.htm

What is interesting about Korea's nuclear fleet is that it contains a mixture of standard pressurized light water reactors, as well as pressurized heavy water reactors, (PHWR) known as CANDU reactors.

For the last decade and a half, working with the United States, Korea has been working on the DUPIC (Direct Use of spent PWR fuel in CANDU reactors) spent fuel recycling strategy which is unique in that the fuel is subject to very little chemical separation, no plutonium is isolated, with the main fuel being unfissioned U-235 from the original enrichment, as well as any plutonium formed during the original irradiation in the light water reactor.

Such a scheme as the potential benefit of immediately transforming all of the world's so called "nuclear waste" into a resource that can be used to reduce the need for uranium mining by about 30%.

Some technical details are found here:


http://darwin.nap.edu/books/030909688X/html/112.html

and here:

http://eed.llnl.gov/ncm/session1/JangJin_Park.pdf#search=%22dupic%20%22

According to the first link, from the National Academy of Sciences, (pg 113) much work has been completed already including fabrication of fuel, and testing of the fuel in a reactor to ensure compatiability with CANUD reactors. The economic advantages of the program have been demonstrated as well, showing that the plan compares favorably with the once through fuel cycle.

Those with an interest in nuclear engineering will note that the minor actindes and many of the fission products are carried directly through in this system, maintaining the proliferation resistance of the highly radioactive fuel. Moreover, the reburning will result in a more diverse mix of plutonium isotopes, probably including a fair quantity of heat generating Pu-238.

Any country having a large quantity of spent fuel, simply by buying CANDU's can essentially have a ready supply of fuel for many decades to come, without having to buy any virgin uranium for use.

Korea apparently plans to move to an indigenous recycling program that will be different than any other recycling plan in the world.

[RC]

1. The CANDU reactor is a Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor developed initially

in the late 1950s and 1960s by a partnership between Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), the Hydro-Electric Power Commission of Ontario (now known as Ontario Power Generation), Canadian General Electric (now known as GE Canada), as well as several private industry participants. The acronym "CANDU", a registered trademark of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited, stands for "CANada Deuterium Uranium". This is a reference to its deuterium-oxide (heavy water) moderator and its use of natural uranium fuel. All current power reactors in Canada are of the CANDU type. Canada markets this power reactor abroad.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CANDU_reactor

So why is not the United States using this method?

[NNadir]

2. Originally it was anticipated that uranium would be a rare element

and that nuclear power would grow far more rapidly than it did.

It was discovered that uranium is a common element however, and nuclear power experienced a lot of negative press after Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and thus grew at one 1/10th the rate originally anticipated. (It still is the only new form of energy discovered within the last century to be industrialized to an exajoule scale, however.)

Within in the last decade, it has been recognized that while no energy technology will ever be risk free, nuclear energy is the lowest risk continuously available scalable form of energy. This realization has lead to a growing surge of interest in the use of nuclear energy, which has lead to a rise in the price of uranium fuel as countries around the world expand their commitment to nuclear energy. Still fuel is a very minor constituent of the cost of nuclear energy - even though prices have more than doubled, there is still very little cause to invest much in fuel development.

The primary motivation for fuel cycle advancement is not for the immediate future but for the long term.

The DUPIC fuel cycle has obvious advantages for the accumulation of spent fuel, however. Although so called "nuclear waste" is not much of a technical problem, it does draw a vast amount of (irrational) public interest. Since more energy can be realized through the use of this cycle per unit of fuel, less fuel will be required, and therefore less spent fuel accumulated. This I think is the primary South Korean motivation for developing this cycle. Note the US is a research participant in this program though.

The DUPIC fuel cycle is somewhat more difficult than once through cycles since the fuel is highly radioactive before it is placed in the reactor. This means that the fuel must be handled remotely. It is only in the last few decades that robotics has advanced enough to make this effectively possible at reasonable cost.

The United States cannot use the DUPIC cycle unless it partners with Canada. The US has no CANDU type reactors. It should build some, but right now it doesn't have any. Canada's nuclear reactors are exclusively CANDU's however.

Many other advanced fuel cycles are under development around the world, and DUPIC is just one of them. Others are fuel cycles such as CORAIL and APA and various thorium based fuel cycles such as the Radkowsky configuration. Most of these fuel cycles envision using reactors that operate using ordinary light water reactors (BWR and PWR) for the bulk of the fuel use.

Here is one discussion of some of the other types of fuel cycles.

http://www.oecdnea.org/html/pt/docs/iem/jeju02/session1/SessionI-14.pdf#search=%22corail%20plutonium%22

Probably at the end of the day, should humanity survive global climate change, many nuclear fuel cycles of different types will operate throughout the world. The best will have maximized probability of achieving the following goals: 1) To maximize the amount of energy obtained per kg of uranium or thorium mined. 2) To minimize proliferation concerns and to allow for the destruction of nuclear materials resulting from successes in nuclear disarmament. 3) To reduce the time for the radiotoxicity associated with nuclear power use to fall below that associated with natural uranium ores in less than 1000 years.

All three of these goals are achievable.