ASSESSING THE VIABILITY OF A STRATEGIC NUCLEAR RENASSIANCE FOR

THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA’S ECONOMIC, ENVIRONMENTAL,

SOCIAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY

PREPARED BY: R Matthews

FINAL EXAMINATION 2010
GEMM 6000
COHORT 3

1|Page
 Expanded nuclear energy use is critical to the economic, environmental, social

and national security interests of the United States of America (U.S.). A U.S. nuclear

energy “renaissance” is imperative because of the reliability of supply of nuclear fuel,

the likely future affordability of that uranium fuel and because of nuclear’s environmental

benefits. Expanded capacity may not serve the U.S. as the primary energy source, but

can be an integral part of energy diversification policy. The following essay will: outline

how nuclear energy expansion affects France, Japan and China; discuss nuclear

energy’s reliability and affordability of supply; review technology advances; explore the

environmental opportunities and challenges of nuclear energy; and, conclude by

assessing the overall security benefits of nuclear energy expansion in the U.S.

Countries like France and Japan rely on nuclear energy for roughly 79% and

33% of their total electricity capacity respectively. [ CITATION Wor10 \l 1033 ] France enjoys

a safe degree of self-sufficiency and is a net exporter of energy to its European

counterparts, while Japan seeks to increase nuclear power’s share of the energy mix

because of the promise of greater energy independence. Similarly, China, a growing

and energy hungry nation, is realizing the benefits of nuclear power as a vital asset to

its energy diversification strategy. The Chinese Government forecasts growing nuclear

capacity of 8.9% per year through 2030 and growing uranium stockpiles and domestic

uranium production. [ CITATION Chi10 \l 1033 ] Overall, these countries look to increase

nuclear energy capacity and are positively affected by its expansion because of the

energy security it provides, negligible emissions and low social costs compared to fossil

fuels, all points that are relevant to consider with U.S. nuclear energy expansion.

2|Page
 Uranium fuel used in nuclear reactors comes from stable and allied countries,

Australia and Canada, who provide reliable and affordable supplies and account for

44% of world production. As it relates to U.S. security interests, Australia holds 24% of

known recoverable resources, while Canada holds 9% and the U.S. holds 7%, all

supporting long term U.S. supply reliability. [ CITATION Wor07 \l 1033 ] Concerning

production capacity and price, countries like Kazkahstan and China are looking to

dramatically increase their domestic production capacity while uranium prices that once

spiked to record highs in 2007 of around $140 per pound have been declining steadily.

[ CITATION inf10 \l 1033 ] Although the EIA does not forecast long term uranium prices,

increasing global production combined with falling prices can support U.S. security

interests as greater uranium availability may help to keep prices stable and supplies

plentiful as nations look to expand their nuclear power capacity over the next 20 years.
[ CITATION Jul09 \p 3 \l 1033 ]

Promising to sustain both reliability of supply and affordability of price are new

technologies and mindsets that may elongate the useful life of nuclear energy.

Advances in fast breeder reactors could dramatically increase the useful life of nuclear

power plants and stretch reserves of uranium by a factor of more than ten, creating a

supply that would enable nuclear energy’s use, at today’s levels, for more than 200

years. [ CITATION PAn06 \l 1033 ] Also, changing mindsets are affecting the reprocessing of

spent nuclear fuel. Active and bipartisan governmental support is beginning to show the

commitment to and viability of nuclear energy and uranium fuel as a long term solution

to the U.S.’s energy future and security. [ CITATION Rya05 \l 1033 ]

3|Page
 One important environmental aspect of nuclear reactors is their low direct

greenhouse gas emissions, which can be favorable when compared with coal and

natural gas fired power plant emissions. [ CITATION MIT09 \p 3 \l 1033 ] Activists raise

concerns involving waste disposal and the security of individual power plants. While

these issues are real, they are being addressed. For example, the Yucca Mountain

repository may help ease the waste issue for the U.S., even though the project is on

hiatus. [ CITATION MIT09 \p 2 \l 1033 ] It is likely that the repository’s moratorium will be

lifted in coming years or that similar waste disposal approaches may be taken, while

plant security is now being actively addressed by the Obama administration. [ CITATION

NEI09 \l 1033 ] Low emissions, increasing environmental solutions to waste disposal and

new plant level security plans that mitigate large scale environmental risks position

expanded nuclear energy capacity as a critical element in increasing U.S. energy

security and independence.

Ultimately, expanding nuclear power generation capacity could increase U.S.

security interests. Nuclear energy provides economic security incentives including

competitive pricing when compared to fossil fuels. Environmental security is observed in

that traditional fuel sources are seeing increasing policies aimed at curbing emissions.

[ CITATION Wor10 \l 1033 ] Reliable and affordable uranium supplies are being further

bolstered by advances in technology and changing mindsets that will allow this fuel

source to be stretched dramatically. Social security is met with the higher levels of

education and innovation that nuclear technologies bring [ CITATION Ell10 \l 1033 ] while

national security is achieved through further diversification into an energy source that

4|Page
can curb oil use as more motor vehicles have the prospect of going electric. [ CITATION
nor10 \l 1033 ]

APPENDIX: TABLES, FIGURES AND CHARTS

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 19 \l 1033 ] – The table depicts the anticipated growth rate of electricity
in the regions listed.

– The chart shows the projected growth scenario for nuclear

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 3 \l 1033 ]
energy in the developing (industrialized) world as well as developing (industrializing)
nations.

5|Page
 – The diagram shows one potential burn use of nuclear
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 30 \l 1033 ]
fuel projected through 2050, also depicting the tonnage of spent fuel.

– The diagram shows a secondary potential burn use of

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 30 \l 1033 ]
nuclear fuel projected through 2050, also depicting the tonnage of spent fuel and the
reprocessing capabilities of the PUREX system is adopted.

6|Page
 – The diagram shows a third potential burn use of nuclear
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 31 \l 1033 ]
fuel projected through 2050, also depicting the tonnage of spent fuel and the
reprocessing capabilities of the Pyroprocessing system and the reduction in waste
materials.

7|Page
 – This chart compares nuclear fuel costs to electric
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 42 \l 1033 ]
generation alternatives at an 85% capacity factor.

– This chart compares nuclear fuel costs to electric

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 42 \l 1033 ]
generation alternatives at a 75% capacity factor.

8|Page
 – This chart compares nuclear fuel costs to electric
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 43 \l 1033 ]
generation alternatives and assesses the basic operational assumptions of those
comparisons.

– This chart shows possible factors that may further reduce

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 7 \l 1033 ]
the costs of generating nuclear power and creating a more economic incentive to
develop nuclear power plants.

9|Page
 – This chart shows the electricity consumption of the
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 112 \l 1033 ]
world’s developed countries and projects consumption through 2050 with high and low
nuclear power use percentages also being factored into the energy mix of each country.

– This artist’s rendering shows the safety level and

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 160 \l 1033 ]
operational functionality of the proposed U.S. Yucca Mountain nuclear waste disposal
and storage facility in Yucca Mountain, Nevada.

10 | P a g e
 – This chart shows the characteristics of nuclear fuel used
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 32 \l 1033 ]
in different operating environments, showcasing the ability to derive more energy from
the fuel source using different methodologies.

11 | P a g e
 – This chart compares once through low burn up and once
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 33 \l 1033 ]
through high burn up fuel cycle parameters of annual 1500GWe deployments.

– This chart shows plans from leading countries for the

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 158 \l 1033 ]
disposal and/or storage of high level nuclear waste.

– This chart shows the costs of competing fuels with carbon

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 7 \l 1033 ]
credit costs being factored in.

12 | P a g e
 – This chart shows the varying technology costs from
[ CITATION MIT09 \p 7 \l 1033 ]
leading U.S. nuclear energy technology providers.

[ CITATION MIT09 \p 153 \l 1033 ] – This graph shows the declining price trend of uranium
from 1972 through 2002.

13 | P a g e
 – This graph shows the declining price trend of uranium from a
[ CITATION inf10 \l 1033 ]
price spike in 2007 through January 2010.

WORKS CITED

 China Daily. China to build 28 more nuclear power reactors by 2020. March 23,
2010. http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2010-03/23/content_9629907.htm
(accessed March 30, 2010).

 Infomine.com. Spot and Multivariate Charting. January 2010.

http://www.infomine.com/investment/charts.aspx?c=uranium&r=15y#chart
(accessed March 30, 2010).

 Karam, P. Andrew. How do fast breeder reactors differ from regular nuclear
power plants? July 17, 2006. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?
id=how-do-fast-breeder-react (accessed March 29, 2010).

 MIT. The Future of Nuclear Power - An Interdisciplinary Study. 2009.

http://web.mit.edu/nuclearpower/ (accessed March 30, 2010).

 Nanay, Julia. The Impact of China’s Economic and Security Interests in

Continental Asia on the United States - Panel on “Continental Asia in China’s
Global Energy Strategy”. Testimony before the U.S.-China Economic and
Security Review Commission, Washington DC: PFC Energy, 2009.

14 | P a g e
 NEI. Nuclear Power Plant Security - Nuclear Energy Institute. August 2009.
http://www.nei.org/keyissues/safetyandsecurity/factsheets/powerplantsecurity
(accessed March 30, 2010).

 Norgenews. Energy Dept. infuses bold, new energy projects with $100M more.
March 2, 2010. http://norgenews.blogspot.com/2010/03/energy-dept-infuses-
bold-new-energy.html (accessed March 30, 2010).

 Scott, Ellen. DOE to Enhance Nuclear Energy Education. March 25, 2010.
http://www.executivegov.com/2010/03/doe-to-enhance-nuclear-energy-
education/ (accessed March 30, 2010).

 Tracey, Ryan. The Stanford Review - Bush's Logical Alternative . January 28,
2005. Bush's Logical Alternative (accessed Macrh 30, 2010).

 World Nuclear Association. The Economics of Nuclear Power. January 2010.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf02.html (accessed March 30, 2010).

 Uranium Mining. March 2007. http://www.world-nuclear.org/education/mining.htm

(accessed March 29, 2010).

15 | P a g e