Full text of "ERIC ED257674: Atoms to Electricity."

See other formats

ED 257 6"74
TITLE*

INSTITUTION f
REPORT NO
PUB DATE-
NOTE

DOCUMENT RESUME

SE-045 770

Atoms to Electricity.

Department of Energy, Washington, D.C.

DOE/NE-0053

Nov 83

l£8p. ; ♦Photographs may not reproduce clearly ^^r-

AVAILABLE FROM BNERGY-DOE, P.O;- Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37830 (Single

PUB TYPE

EDRS PRICE
'DESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

Ibpies.)'.

Reports - General "(1*0)
MF01/PC03 Plus Postage.

Economics; ^Electricity; Energy Education; Foreign?
Countries; ^Hazardous Materials; *Nuclear Energy;
*Nuclear Power Plants ;* *Nuclear Technology; *Waste
Disposal; Wastes

♦Nuclear Reactors; Nuclear Wastes *

ABSTRACT

This booklet explains the basic technology of nuclear
fission power reactors, the nuclear fuel cycle, and the role of
nucleaqpenargy as 'one of the domestic energy resources being '
developed to meet the national energy demand. Major topic areas
discussed include: the role of nuclear power; the role of
electricity; generating electricity with the atom; nuclear power and
radiation; types of nuclear reactors (boiling-water,
pressuri zed-water, and high temperature gas-cooled .reactors); breede:
reactors; nuclear, fuel — mining to reactor;, nuclear fuel — reactor to
waste disposal; transporting radioactive materials; the economics of
nucl'ear power; and nuclear electricity in * other countries. A list of
selected books, reports and articles, and films is included. (JN)

********************************************

* Reproductions' .supplied by EDRS» are the best that can be made , *

* - from the original document. *
************************************************************************

ERIC

DOE/NE-0063
.NOVEMBER 1983 .

er|c

r U.S. ZXPAMTHtKT Of EOUCATKMi

*KATK)JMAt ttt&TITUTi OF C0OCAT1ON

tOUCATIQKAL RESOURCES INFORMATION*

/CENTER tERJC)
This docunwot h*s bmn fspAXkn-^d
f««fved from th* p»f*t>n of t*g*wH2aston
• 0#»Qii\8tt*ty it *

Mkkh cha/»g*» hnv# tMMMi nwk to «n0rov*

■ • - •■« ■ • •♦*..'.
positron of pofccy

ATOMS TO
ELECTRICITY

•5°'

j>0

) <

— < .

1 ;

ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY
OFFICE OF SUPPORT PROGRAMS

2 ^ •

ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR NUCLEAR ENERGY
OFFICE OF SUPPORT PROGRAMS '
WASHINGTON. D.C 20585

Contents

Introduction

• The Role of Nuclear Power 2

The Beginnings 2

The Growth of Nuclear Power 2

*> Nuclear Power Today and Tomorrow " 3

The Role of Electricity _ 7

Electricity and the Economy * 7

Electricity and the Consumer , . . * .»..;,..' : . '. 8

Fueling the Powerplants '.....). 9

Generating Electricity With the Atom 10

The F.ission Process . . 10

Uranium Isotopes \ 12

Nuclear Reactors • > 12

The Nuclear Electric Plant li

Nuclear Powerplant Safety 1€

■ Lrcensmg, Building and Operating a Nuclear Powerplant'. 20

Nuclear Power and Radiation A - 24

Types of Nuclear Reactors . 2%

Boiling-Water Reactors (BWR) , .25

Pressurized-Water Reactors (PWR) ? - .'26 '

High Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors (HTGR) , . . 27

Breeder Reactors 30

Nuclear Fuel: Mining to Reactor ^34

Mining and Milling * ^. ."^"34

Enrichment and Fuel Fabrication ." 37*

Nuclear Fuetc Reactor to Waste Disposal *. 40

Handling Spent Fuel 40 .

Reprocessed Wastes * 41

HanViirjgK'and Disposing of High-Level Wastes f. ..42 J

Handling and Disposing of Low-Level Wastes .44

Changes in Low-Level. Waste Policy 45,

Transporting Radioactive Materials , ... 47

Spent Fuel Shipments . '. ' 48

Transporting High- and Low-Level Wastes 51

Shipping Procedures and Regulatory Responsibilities . 51

ERIC . "4

The Economics of Nuclear Power f ' .... • 53

Nuclear Electricity in Other Countries „ ... .56

Conclusion * \ 9 . 59

Selected References and Resources 60

List of Illustrations

1. Experimental Breeder Reactor- 1 (EBR-1) 3^

2. Shippingport Atomic Power Station 4

'3. Commercial Nuclear Powerplants in the United States 5

4. Maine Yankee Nuclear Power Station 6

5. Electricity: From Its Source to You : 7

6. H.B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant • 8

s 7. The Components of an Atom r v 10

%. The Fission Process 11

9. Elements of a Nuclear Water-Cooled Reactor 13

10. Duane* Arnold Energy Center • . .-». 14

11- Steam Generator Transport ." 15

12. Safety Barriers in a Nuclear Powerplant 17

13. Shearon Harris Reactor Vessel 18

14. Containment Construbtfcn at Shearon Harris 19

15. Zion Nuclear PowerjeJ^ion .» 21

16. Environmental Mo*<fi»ng System at Crystal River Nuclear Plant ... 22
-17. ' Big Rock Point Nucwar Powerplant . . . .- 25

18. Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) ' 26*

19. Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) 27

20. Point Beach Nuclear Plant . . ~ ■ 28

21. High Temperature Gas-Cooied Reactor /HTGR) „ . . . .$£».' 28

22. Fort St. Vrain m 29

23. The Breeding Process * - 30

24. Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR) 31

25. Experimental Breeder Reactor-ll -32

26. > Fast Flux Test Facility 33

27. * Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant . . . : 33

28. The Schwartzwalder Mine 34

29. U.S. Department of Energy's Gaseous Diffusion

Enrichment Plant 36

30. Nuclear Fuel Pellets * 37

ERIC . 5

31. Fue(. Loading at the McGuire Nuclear Station 38

32. Underwater inspection of Spent Nuclear Fuel 40

33. The Nuclear Fuel Cycle 41

34. « The Climax Spent Fuel Storage Test ... 42

35. High-Level Waste Solidification " " " 43

36. Low-Level WasteShipment ... s ... , [\. . . . . i?.^ 45

Spent Fuel Rail Cask -. T " V ' 49

38. Durability Testing- of Spent Fuel Container at Sandia Laboratories ' 50'

39. Tihange-1 Nuclear Powerplant . i \ \ ' 55

40. Joyo Breeder Reactor in Japan J 53

List of Tables

■ -

1 . Typical Sources of Radiation Exposure In the United States 24

2. Comparative Fuel Requirements for Electric pQwerplants 35

3. Annual Shipments of Nuclear Materials in the United States . 47

4. Five-Year Total of Hazardous Materials Incident Reports in the United
States by Classification .• . 48

5. Nuclear Rowerplants Outside the United States '"' 57

introduction

By the mid 1970s the United
States and much of the rest of the
world found itself in a serious, long-
term energy crisis. Fuel cQsts had
become much more expensive than
they had ever been, largely
because the most easily recovered
oil and gas had already been
depleted. Moreover, a major portion
of the energy use in the United
States was based on a potentially
unreliable fuel source; imported oil.
* The security of the nation's
economy now depended on deci-
sions about energy prices and * ,
energy supplies made in other
countries thousands of rrtiles away.

Cutting back on U.S.
dependence on imported oil, most
experts agreed, required two
actions: first, conserving energy,
especially the use of oil, and n
second; relying more heavily on
energy resourqes available in the
United States. These changes have
brought a new level of importance
to the role of electricity in our
national economy.

^s Americans cut back on theft
direct use of oil, they turned to elec-
tric power to fill much of the' gap.
Electricity, which accounted for £5
percent of our national energy use
in 1970, increased its share to over
30 percent by 1980.*Many energy
projections expect it to account for
nearly 50 percent by the turn of the
century.

As electric power has grown in
importance, the number of potential
fuel sources to produce it have
declined. Large sites for hydroelec-
tric plants have essentially been
exhausted, and oil and gas have
become too expensive to consider

for new electricity generating sta-
tions. This, means that the nation

' must rely almost totally on two
energy sources— ,coaf and nuclear
energy— for new needs for electric-
ityover the next few decades.

This booklet explains the basic
technology of nuclear fissjon power
reactors, the Nuclear fuel cycle and
the role of nuclear energy as one of

' the domestic energy resources
being developed to help meet our
national energy demand. Nuqlear
power accoijnted for some 12 per-
cenjt df the U.S. electrip energy

-supply in 1982, In the 1990's, it js c

; expected -to become second only to 2
coal as a source of our electric
power, almost doubling its present
contribution to our national electric-
ity supply. . "~ " •

The Role of Nuclear Power

The Beginnings

On December 20, 1951, at a
government laboratory in Idaho,
man's abiKty to use an energy hid-
den in nature entered a new era.
An experimental plant called the
Experimental Breeder Reactor
(EBR-I) generated enough electricity
to light four 200-watt light bulbs
(Figure 1). With that success, man
had harnessed a new energy
source that was neither mechanical,
like the power of wind or failing
water, or chemical, like the burning
of coal, oil or gas. This electricity
was created by nuclear energy.

The impodRM^e of this
breakthrougfcnvafe evident to scien-
tists and energy experts around trie
world. . Nuclear fissipn energy—the
% heat» released when the nucleus of-
jan atom "fissions", or splits into
two small pieces — expanded human
potential beyond the limits of sjjch
fuefs as cbai t , oil, gas, and the
renewable energy of hydropower. It
offered the promise of abundant
electricity at relatively iow costs and
of providirfg power without th$
environmenta);eff6gts that accom-
pany the burning of fossil fuels.
Government officials, scientists, •
journalists, and industry leaders
alike saw this development as thp
beginning of a hew age— the ,
"atomic age".

The Growth of Nuclear Power

. During the 1950V there was no
shortage - of inexpensive fossil fuels
for electric generating plants, so
there was little obvious need to
develop an alternative-foe! source.

* The first few nuclear powerplants
were essentially demonstrations of
the technology, co-sponsored by
utilities and the U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission (Figure 2).

In 1960, I|owever, the first
nuclear powerplant financed entirely

- by a utility, the Dresden 1 plant of
Commonwealth Edison Company,
began operating near Chicago, In
the next six years 28 other utilities
followed suit with a total of 38 qew
nuclear units. They were turning to
nuclear for two reasons: to take
advantage of the cost savings made
possible by nuclear energy and, in
some cases, to conserve fossil
fuefs. By the early 1970s utilities
were announcing plans for new
nuclear plants as frequently as for

/coal-fueled stations.

/ . In the mid 1970s the rapid-

^growth era for new "nuclear
powerplants came to an end. The
United States responded to the
Mideast oil embargo and other
shocks to its economy by using less
energy than had previously been
, projected. The economic slpwdown
- of the late 19709 and early. 1980s

, further reduced energy deman'd.

• The 7 percent a year increase .in
electric power demand, which had
remained essentially constant for
over two decades, dropped to near

* zero in 1974,-V/Jttt minor fluctua-
tions, the average annual growth
since then has been about 3.5 per-
cent, or half the rate of earlier
years. Many utilities weVe hard- •
pressed to embark on large con-

• struction projects because of high
inflation rates and even higher
increases in fuel costs. Facing a
slowdown in the growth of Electricity

Figurm t. On December 20, 1951, ipur electric light bulbs at \the Atomic Energy Commission's
(AEC) National Reactor Testing Station Jn Idaho were powered by this generator (right) "which
operated on heat from Experimental Breeder Reactor (EBR-I). (Credit: Argonne National
Laboratory) . t I

demand, utilities began cutting back
on their pians for additipripf
generating units, both coal and

nuclear. c 1

Nuclear Power Today and
Tomorrow

Today more than 80 commer-
cial nuclear powerplants are
licensed to operate in the United
States (Figure 3). In 1982 nuclear
power provided over 12 percent of
the nation's electricity. Since elec-

tricity accounts for some 34 percent
of the energy use in the country,
nuclear power was the. source of
4.3 pecent of the energy produced
overall for the nation. The capacity
o^ today's nuclear plants — about 65
million kilowatts— is equal to the
size d(f the entire U.S. electric
capability in the mid-1 940's.

Tne role of nuclear powiar is
particularly important in many
regions of the cpuntry with high
fossil fuel costs. In New England,
wher^lthe principal alternative to

Figure 2T; The 60,0OG4(W SfUppmgport Atomic Power Station, Shipplngport. Pennsylvania, was
the first targe-scale central-station nuclear powerpfant in the United States and the first plant of
such size in the world operated safely to produce electric power. The plant a pint project of the
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission and Duquesne Light Company, began operating in 1957.
(Credit\Department of Energy) %

nuclear power is imported oil,
nuclear energy provided nearly 35*
percent of the total electricity
generated in ^1982 (Figure 4). in
Virginia, nuclear power accounted
for 46 percent; in New Jersey, 45
percent; in Nebraska, 48 percent; in
Minnesota, 36 percent.

About 60 other nuclear units
are under construction or being
planned by the nation's investor-
pwned, government-owned and
consumer-owned utilities. Assuming
.that they are completed in the

1990's, nuclear power vyill provide
enough^ electricity to meer the elec-
trical needs of about 20 percent of
the U.S. population.

Beyond the approximately 140 ,
plants operating or under construc-
tion, the outlook for nuclear power
in the United States remains uncer-
tain. The number of additional U.S.
nuclear powerplants built in the next
few decades will depend upon
several factors:

• the overall need for new
electric generating stations

10 -

Nuclear Generating Unit Capacity

fl U— »— 1 Py mC To Ofm**

•too

140.0

Tn$k*mUnOr*tm 3 wd QrirtdO^M . wttfofy m of A

ft. 1, 1M3

1 9t if*om HwMiiam, tymfcoto do not iHti i prod M fa—o n * .

U.S. D«p*(4moM of Enorgv

U BEST COPy AVAILABLE

Figura 3. Commercial Nuclear Powerpiants In the United States

ERIC

■ \

*
*

Figure 4. Ma/fle Yankee Nucteai Power Station set a record in July 1978 for the longest con-
tinuous operation of a nuclear powerpiant: 392 days. During that run it generated 7 billion
kilowatt hours of electricity, which is the equivalent of 13 million bmrels. of oil. The plant has the
capacity to produce 825,000 kilowatts of electricity. (Credjt: Maine Yankee)

" as a resuft of electrical
demand growth as we!! as
the n£ed to replace old

• plants;

• the degree to which electric
power will be used to
substitute for oil and oth^r J

> fossil fuels;

• the ability of other
resources — Mke ft cQal, solar
energy or other new
technologies— to meet future
energy demand; and,

• changes in the nuclear
regulatory climate.

* With 140 plants already in
operation or under co n s t ru ct ion,
nuclear power clearly represents a
major energy source. It will be

ERLC

~ important to the U.S. economy for.
at least a generation into the
future— and, perhaps for much
longer, defending on future energy
and economic policies.

The Role of Electricity

£ver since IMichael Faraday
invented an'etecfric operator in the
early 1800s* tire indjjitfialized world
has, been using an increasing
amofont of its energy 4n the form/of
electricity.* Faraday demonstrated
that a wire loop that is rotating in a
magnetic field will generate
elecfricity— that *s, the mechanical
energy of its rotation can be „
transformed into, electrical energy,
The electrical energy can be f
transmitted to a motor that will
reverse the process, transforming
the .electricity back into a useful
fnechanical energy.
/ Electricity, then, is not a source
of energy, but a form of energy. It
relies on basic energy sources — Jike
falling water or heat from the bun>
ing of coal or other fuels — to spin a
turbine (Figure 5). The turbine pro-
vides the mechanical energy that a
generator converts into electricity.

The eiectribity is "shipped" or
r distributed through transmission 4
> lines to homes, schools, hospitals, "
factories, office buildings' aqdqther
custonters.

Because electricity can easily
be shipped considerable distances
By transmission lines to^bigsjjties,
small towns, and farm' communities,
and because the consumer finds
electricity convenient for many pur-
poses, the use of electricity has
steadily increased. In fact, as a
rule, it has grown far more rapidly
in the past few decades than the
overall use of energy.

Electricity and the Economy

Over a period of several
decades, the development of the
U.S. economy has been closely
linked with the usage of electric
power. Electricity demand steadily

Stum

Heat Source

□ a an

Transmission Towar

Industry and Comnwu

Horn*

Figura 5. Electricity: From Its Source To You

ERIC

Flgum 6. 77>e a/a. Robinson Stem Electric Plant near Hartsvitte, S.C., produces electricity from
both a nuclear unit (left) and coal-fired unit (right). (Credit: Carolina Power and Light Co.}

increased much faster than the
national economy-^by some 7^ to
80 percent— until our energy usage,
patterns began to change drastically
in the early 1970s, Conservation
programs and rising prices made
Americans, much more careful about
their energy use. But ever since
then, while the use of other energy
forms has declined, the demand for
electricity has continued to grow
' faster than the national economy by
some 25 to 50 percent,

Electricity and the Consumer

Approximately one-third of the
energy used in the United States
goes into the generation of electric ,
power. Of that electricity, about 40

percent is used in industry, about
36 percent in households, and 25
percent in stores and offices. All
three segments of bur economy
have cut back on their use of every
other energy form in the past,
decade, but they have inqreased
their demand for electric power.

Trends in housing h$ve
' dramatized this steady shift toward
electricity. Until 1970 less than 8
percent of U.S. households were
heated electrically. Since then the
electric heat pump has increased
the efficiency of electric heating and
lowered the cost to the point that
more than 50 pfercent of all the new
homes in the past decade have ,
been built with electric heating
systems.

ERLC

> Many recent developments that
we now tajte for granted depend on
electricity^-ielevision, air-
conditioners, stereo systems, com-
puters and calculators, movies,
home appliances, and even
elevatdTI*, which made modern
cities possible. Together they con-
tributed to a demand for electric ^
power that increased by some 50
percent even during the
conservation-minded decade of the
1970s. With a growing emphasis on
computer and other innovative
technologies, the United States, like
much of the industrialized world, is
moving ahead into a new world of
increased electrification.

Fueling the Powerpiants

As recently as 1973, oil and
natural gas were providing 35 per-
cent of our national electric power
supply. Over the past 10 years they
have become increasingly valuable
-tor other energy needs and increas-
ingly expensive; their share of our
electric power has declined to 20 '
percent. Our amount of hydroelec-
tric power has remained essentially
•the same, and its shafaof electric
generation over the last cjecade hasp*
declined slightly from 15/io 14 per-
cent. The amount of coal that we
are burning in powerpiants has in-
creased significantly,. bringing coat's
share of our electricity supply up to
more than 53 percent.-The source
and fuel that has helped coal meet
this rising electrical demand-
growing in importance from four
percent in 1973 to over 12 percent
in 1982— is nuclear energy from
uranium. (Figure 6)

Generating Electricity With the Atom

In concept a nuclear
powerpiapt operates essentially the
same way as a fossil fuel plant, wlthr
one basic difference: the source of
heat. The reactor of the nuclear
plant performs the same function as
the burning of fossil fuel in other >
types. of electric plants— it
generates heat. The process. that
produces the heat in a nuclear plant
is the fissioning or splitting of
urapium atoms. That heat boils
water to make the steam that turns
the turbine-generator , just as in a
fossil fuel plant. The part of the -
plant* where the heat is produced is
qalled toe reactor core.

V The Fission Process

.What Is the fission process' that
produces the heat in nuclear power
plants? It starts with the uranium
atom.

Atoms are made up of three
major particles. (Figure 7)

• Inside the nucleus, 'Which is
the center of the atom,
n there are positively charged
protons. The number of
protons ii\ the nucleus
determines whic^ f&mily or
etement the atom belongs
to: all hydrogen atoms have
1 proton, carbon has 6,
uranium has 92, etc.
* • The nucleus also contains
uncharged particles known
as neutrons, the number of
neutrons in the nucleus
identifies the specific
member of the atom's
family^~or isotope. Different
isotopes of the same
element are designated by
' - numbers after the element
flame that describe the total

Figure 7. The Components. Of An Atom

o 1 "
ERIC

Fragment

Fission Fragment $gn%
/

Nucleus
Neutron

gjeelon Fragment

Nucleus A

Free Neutrons

Frsgment

figure 8. The Fission Process

number of protons and
neutrons inside the nucleus.
The carbon-12 atom, for
example, contains six pro-
tons (which 'make it carbon)
and six neutrons in the
nucleus; the carbon-14 atom
j has six protons and eight
* ^-neutrons. Though aii .
isotopes of an element
* behave the same chem-
%v icaliy, they can vary in other
properties. Carbon-1^ for
exafriplejsjadioactive,
' making m a radioisotope.

• Circling Vound the nucleus
Qf each atbcn are tiny
negatively charged elec-
trons. There are normally *
the same number qf elec-
trons as there are protons in
the nucleus; otfrerwi^p the
atom has a positive or

negative charge and is said
to be ionized.

Because the protons have a -
positive charge, they could be
expected to repel each other. In
- fact, hovyever, the particles in the
nucleus are held together by what
scientists call "nuclear binding
energy/'

It is possible to overcome that
))inc|ing energy in some large
'atoms, such as uranium, causing
them to split apart or fission. The
fission process occurs, when a
neutron enters the ndcleus of a fis-
sionable atom (Figure 8). The
nucleus immediately becomes
unstable, vibrates and tfren splits
into two fissioft fragments that are
propelled apart at a high speed.
The 'kinetic energy (energy of mo-
tion) of these fragments is
transformed into heat as the fission

ERIC

fragments collide with surrounding
atorris and molecules. This com-
pletes the nuclear fission process:
the binding energy of the nucleus *
was released when the nucleus ab-
sorbed a free neutron, it was
transformed into kinetic energy that
propelled apart the two fission
fragments, and -their collisions with
surrounding atoms. transformed the
kinetic energy into heat, *

The process of mass actually
turning into energy was anticipated
by- Professo^ Albert Einstein. His
formula, E~mc 2 , predicts that a
small amount of mass (m) can be
transformed into a large amount of
energy (E), and that the amount of
energy can be calculated by
multiplying the mass times the
square of the speed of fight (c 2 ).

Ift addition to the fission
fragments and heat, a fissioning
nucleus also frees two or three ad-
ditional neutrons. Some of these
neutrons can strike other fissionable
atonjp, which release still other^y
neutrons. These neutrons can, in
turn, hit other fissionable atoms and
continue the chain reaction. The -
rate at which these "free" neutrons
are emitted Is the key to sustaining
and controlling a nuclear chain
reaction.

Uranium Isotopes

The most common fissionable
atom is an isotope of uranium
known as uranium-235 (or U-235),
which is! the fuel used in most types
of nuclear reactors that are being
built today. Though uranium is quite
common in nature, about 100 times
more common than silver, for exam-

pie, U-235 is relatively rare. When
uranium is mined, it contains two
isotopes: 99.3 percent is the isotope
U-238 and only 0.7 percent is the
isotope U-235. Before the uranium
r can be used as fuel in a nuclear
powerplant, however, the 0.7 per-
cent concentration of U-235 must
be enriched to around a 3 percent
concentration.

The most common uranium
isotope, U-238, is not fissionable
Under most conditions, interestingly,
jhough, ft Is fertile—which means
Jhat when it absorbs a neutron, in-
stead of fissioning, it is transformed
into an atom that is itself fis-
sionable. As neutrons from other fis-
sions are absorbed by U-238, they
cause nuclear reactions that convert
U-238 to plutonium-239 (Pu-239),
which is fissionable and can be *
used as fuel the same as U-235. As
puclear reactors operate, then, they
are both using fuel by burning
U-235 and creating fuel by trans-
forming otherwise useless U-238
into Pu-239. As plutonium builds up,
some of the fissions in a reactor
come from the plutonium, when it in
turn absorbs another neutron.

Nuclear Reactors .

; ^ ■ A .

Nuclear reactors are^basicaliy
machines that contain and control
jchain reactions while releasing heat
w &La controlled rate (Figure 9). In
* electric powerplants the reactors
supply the he&t to turn water into
steam which drives the turbine-
generator. The reactor core is
basically composed of the following
four elements:

• The fuel The nuclear fuel is

£ffi£ » S£ S

***** *« #» **>w*
**
«•»

'ITT

Steam

R Met or Pr*m*ur* V*mmml

Reactor Core
(Fuel Rods)

Water

(Coolant & Moderator)

Control Rods

Figure 9. Elements of a Nuclear Water- Coated Reactor

the heart of the reactor. In
most U.S. reactors the fuel
consist^ of pellets of
ceramic uranium dioxide
(U0 2 ) less than Vfc inch in
diameter and Vi inch long
that are sealed in thousands
of zirconium alloy tubes
about 12 feet long. These
tubes or "fuel rods" are
. afranged in a precise
geometric pattern and
placed vertically at the
center of the reactor (FiguTe
10).

The control rods. These rods
have cross-shaped blades
containing materials that ab-
sorb neutrons and are used
to regulate the rate of the
chain reaction. If they are
pulled out of the core, the
reaction speeds up, If they "

are inserted, they capture a
larger fraction of the free
neutrons and the reaction
slows. The control rods are
interspersed among the fuel
assemblies in the core.
Boron is a widely used
absorber rpateriaL

The coolant A coolant,
usually water, is pumped
through the reactor to carry
away the heat produced by,
the fissioning of the fuel.
This is comparable to the
water in the cooling system
of a car which carries away
the heat built up in the
engine. In large reactors ^s
much as 330,000 gallons of
water flow through the reac-
tor core every minute to
carry away the heat. Most
U.S. reactors are called tight

Figure 10. The first fuel bundle at the [Suane Amok! Energy Cente^being lowered Into the
nuclear reactor February 27, 1974. The 600-pound bundifis supported by a cable in the center.
The cartridge-tike posts ringing the reactor are the bolts for fastening the reactor vessel head
in place. (Credit (owe Electric)

water reactors (LWRs)
because they are cooled by
ordinary or light water.
The moderator. Neutrons
have p better chance of
causing an atom to fission if
they move considerably
slower than their initial
speed after being emitted by
a fissioning nucleus. The
material used to slow the
neutrons down -is called the

moderator. Fortunately for
reactor designers, water
itself is an excellent
moderator, so reactors can
be moderated by the same
water that serves as a
coolant. The moderator is
essential to maintain a chain
reaction; if water Is lost from
the core, the chain reaction
stops (though the residual
heat must still be removed).

Figure 11. A 500-ton steam generator positioned on a barge for shipment to Arkansas Power
and Ught's nuclear power plant qutskfe Little Rock, The barge trip covered 1,065 miles and took
about two weeks. (Credit: Combustion Engineering)

Although engineering designs
are quite complex, these four
elements—the fuel, the control rods,
the coolant and the moderator— are
the basic components of a nuclear
reactor. When the control rods are
withdrawn, the uranium fuel begins
to fission and release extra
neutrons, the neutrons are slowed
by the moderator so that they will
continue the chain reaction, and the
heat is carried away by the coolant.

The Nuclear Electric Plant

The reactor is the on$ unique
element of the nuclear powerplant.
The rest of the buildings and equip-
ment are similar to other electric
powerplants. Summarizing the
process:

• Heat from the fission pro-
cess turns water into steam;

• The steam flowS into the

turbine and turns a shaft to
spin the generate* and
generate electricity, losing
some of Its heat and 9
pressure in the process
(Figure 11);

• The steam then moves to
the condenser, where water
flowing through cooling
pipes chilis it and con*
denses it back into water.
This water — called "conden-
sate" —is preheated, to
make use of a bit more of
the heat in the low-pressure ■
steam, and fed back into .
the reactor to begin the
cycle once again.

The water flowing through the
cooling pipes, totally separate from *
the "condensate," is handled dif-
ferently. Cooling water is necessary
for all electric powerplants that
make steam from a heat source,
not just nuclear^ plants, For that
reason, electric plants of many
kinds are typically located near a
river, lake or other body of water.
The cooling water for the plant is
pumped from the body of water
through pipes to the plant where it
cools the steam. In the process of
cooling the steam, the temperature
of the cooling water jtself rises a
bit. To dissipate this left over heat
in the cooling water, many electric
powerplants pump the water
through a cooling tower 6r a
specially-built pond. Then the water
is fed back into the source it came
from originally. At no time does the
cooling water come into contact
with the nuclear reactor or with
ridioactive materials.

Nuclear Powerpfant Safety

In decisions to license, tuiild
and operate aH nuclear \
powerplants, the subject 6f safety is
of major importance. Operators of
nuclear powerplants must
demonstrate to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRG)— the
independent Federal agency
.responsible for licensing and - /
regulating nuclear fadlities— Jhat
each plant is designed and con-
structed with stringent safety >
features. Most of these safety
features have one overall objective:
to prevent or minimize the
accidental release of radioactive
material from the plant. Additionally,
the routine operation of nuclear
powerplants must also meet
stringent safety requirements.

Since matters of safety are
treated so seriously during the
design, construction and operation
of a nuclear electric plant by the
utility, the nuciear industry and
government regulators, experts con-
sider it quite unlikely that any
radioactive release could occur that '
would seriously affect public health
and 'safety. Further, nuclear
explosions are'physically impossi-
ble: the uranium fuel with only a 3
percent concentration of fissionable
atoms is in a form that cannot ex-
plode. While other kinds of equip-
ment failure or operator errors are
possible, radioactive materials
would almost! certainly be
contained.

As of the end of 19S2, the ;
United States had accumulated over
700 reactor-years of operating ex-
perience with commericiai nuclear

ERLC

v. '

Corrtainm«(it Building j
3 Rtlnforo^d Concrtt* w

\ ' ,i V, }

Staal Containment , {
Lining f .4 , »

R«£tQrVaaaai

'»4

FuaiRod, Langth 12' Oiamatar

Containing a Stacks
Ceramic Uranium Pallet*
SaakkUn a Zircaloy Tuba

fctyur* 12. S&f^ty Barriers in s Nuclear Powerpl&nt\

p^Werpiants without a single tass of s
life* Jo a member\of the publi&V '

* Several barriers to trap ?nti
contain radioactive material arW
dqsjgned into &v0ry nuclear, < |
potoerplant (Figure 12). They \
include:-* v - ;

• Cera^ic^Ajel pellets. The
uranium oioxide fuel /

' material & pressed into !
pellets to* provide a stable

form.. 4

• Zircaloy fuel rods. The
;&jbes, or fuel rods, which
Hold the uranium fuel pellets
are made out of a strong
alloy of zirconium and tin
called Zircaloy. They pre-

« f vent solid and gaseous
fission products from
spreading through the reac-
tor system.

ERIC

fleaetor vessel. Surrounding
the core of fuel rdds is a
reactor vessel, made of car-
bon steel some 8-1 Q J inches
thick and lined witty! .
stainlesaj steel: Rea&br
vesselkweasure abqut 40
feet in Might and up to 16
feet ins^m^ter, and they
typicaHy wteigh Some \
400-800 tons (Figure 1$.

Ci^inment buitcfa&r As a
finafWasure of projection,
the env &reactbr is sur-
rounded By a massive cpn^
crete and steel containment
buildiM'Jt h^s the single \ \
purpose of preventing I\.'A
radioactive materials from t l*
reaching tbeienvironment
the event th^t piping
^ystems inside^ niould lea^

1 >

Figure 14. Workers install rainforcement steel on the containment liner df Unit 1 of the Shearer
Harris Nuclear Powerplant mar New HIM, Worth Carotin*. (Credit Carolina Power and Ught)

* or break. The concrete in
the containment is typically
5 about three feet thick, lined
with 3/4 of an inch of steel
(Figure 14). The contain-
ment building is designed to
protect the reactor from
being damaged by a direct
hit by a large aircraft or tor-
nado winds up to 300 mph.

In addition to these physical
barriers? nuclear powerplants are
designed and built with several

safety systems and backup safety
systems. The safety systems are to
guard against malfunctions, .
mistakes and potential accidents.
For example, the most extensively
studied accident is called a "loss of
coolant". It tfte reactor core is not
constantly cooled, its tremendous
rate of heat generation could melt
parts of the core. Even after the
control XQds shut the reactor down
there is still "decay heat" that re-
quires some constant cooling. To
protect against a loss of coolant,

ERLC

nuclea? plants contain several back-
up cooling systems that can be
called on to cool the core if the
primary cooling system should stop
functioning.

With o^r 80 commercial
nuclear plams licensed to operate
in the 7 United States, some for more
than 15 years, there has never -
been an accident that has released
a significant amount of radioactive
materials to the environment. Re-
cent scientific studies confirm that
reqord, even for the 1979 Three
Mile Island accident. That accident
provided a considerable amount of
information about the adequacy of
nuclear power safety systems.
Though the back-up cooling
systems worked as designed and
no radiation escaped through the
reactor containment building (some
was released from a nearby aux-
iliary building), the accident pin-
pointed that improvements were
needed in operator training and in
information displays in the control
rooms. New Federal regulations and
improved training and monitoring
practices by the nuclear industry
should help prevent a recurrence of
the type of accident that occurred
at Three Mile Island.

Further safety precautions are
taken in the immediate vicinity of all
licensed nuclear plants. For exam^ t
pie, no homes are permitted within
the boundaries of the site of the
plant, which typically covers several
hundred acres. Access to the site is
also controijed, These security
measures are tq protect individuals
from exposure to radiation or *
radioactive materials and to keep
unauthorized persons outside the area

Besides restricted public ac- "
cess to the site, pubt& health is
protected by programsMhat <check
for radiation releases. At the site
boundary, monitoring and
surveillance instruments are set up
to measure whether any airborne
radioactive materials are£eing
released from the plant in the form
of dusts, fumes, mists, vapors, or
gases. These ongoing monitoring
programs assure that indications of
radiation levels remain within the '
public health standards and that
corrective actions would be taken
before the safety of the public is
jeopardized.

Licensing, Building and
Operating a Nuclear Powerplant

Only after receiving both a con-
struction permit and an operating
license from the NRC can a nuclear
powerplant be brought into service
in fhe United States. To issue these
licenses, the NRC conducts detailed
technical reviews of utility applica-
* tions and must find that:

• constructing and operating
the plant will not present

• undue risk to public health
and safety;

• licensing the plant will not
be harmful to national
defense and security;

• the utility is technically ,
qualified to design, con-
struct and operate the pro-

^ posed facility; and *

• the project complies with
tt\e National Environmental
Policy Act.

Figuf* 15. Zhn Nuc^%m»,^bn is on Uto MJchfQan. (Credit: Commonwealth Edison Co.)

The complete licensing and
construction of a nuclear powerpiarit
requires a lengthy series of licenses
and permits frqm Federal^ state and
focal government agencies. These
permits and licences determine
where the plant can be located,
whether the power is needed, and
how excavation anlf construction
will be carried out. They also en-
sure the protection of local plant'

• and animal life, and the preserva-
tion of land, air, and water from
pollution (Figure 15).

Notices about legislation,
regulations, and rules that affect
nuclear*powerplants are published
in a government document called
The Federal Register. These notices
describe the type of action that is

* proposed and the government *
agency responsible for t(ie action.

" Notices invite members of the

public to comment^ and they identify
^contact who win provide additionai
i reformation upon request. Copies pf
The Fecfera/ Register can usually be
found In local libraries. * *

Utilities provide the NRC with
extensive environment^ and safety
information as part of their license 1 v
applications. They also are required
to submit annu^ reports about the
operation of the plants and speciaJ
reports on occurrences out of the
ordinary (Figure 16). These studies
and reports are available for
reading in the NRC's publig docu-
ment roorns in Washington, D.C 4
and other locations across the
country, Including at least one
public document room \t\ the area *
of every nuclear plant. + • . x

At important milestones in the
planning and construction of new
nuclear po^erpJants there are " ' * *

it?

Rgum 16. 4 technician takes a reading from
fl/vw Atoctav Pte/rf ^ Ftooda. (Crsdit: Florida

opportunities for members of the
public to voice their views and raise
their questions and even to become
a full participant as an "intervenbr"
in the pj$ceedings. As an intervener
one is provided copies of ali reports *
and applications and has the right
to testify and question the govern-
ment and industry witnesses before
the Atomic Safety and Licensing
Board, which conducts the
hearings.

Building a nuclear powerpfant
requires a large number of
specialists and skilled laborers. A
project construction team includes
nuciear engineers (spatially trained
to design and build the plant), civil,
mechanical and electrical
engineers, boilermakers, weiders,
pipefitters, carpenters and others.
At the peak of construction -activity
more than 2500 workefs are typical-

the environmental monitoring system at the Crystal
Power and Light)

ly employed and high standards of
quality are required.

Nuclear powerpiants are , '
designed and built to operate for
30-40 years. After the plant begins
operating, more than 200 workers
handle,, its everyday operation and
maintenance. These workers in-
clude nuclear operators and super-
visors, mechanical maintenance
crews, instrument technicians,
electricians, laborers, experts in 1
radiation protdctidn called health
physicists, and a security guard
force. When the plant shuts down
once a year for refueling and major
maintenance, this workforce may be
supplemented for about two months
with up to 500 workers.

The nuclear plant operators, K
working rouffcfethe-clock shifts, are
responsible Jor the safe operation of
the plant. To qualify as a nuclear

ERLC

plant operator, a person must go
through extensive training ami pass
a detailed written examination.
Those who qualify are issued a
license by the NRC. The qualifica-
tion process is much like the
rigorous' training one would undergo
to become an airline pilot.

Nuclear powerpiants that are
being built today are considerably
targef than those constructed in the
early days of nuclear development.
Electric generating stations are
rated by the amobnt of electricity
thdy can generate at their peak
levels — usually expressed in terms
of the kilowatt, which is 1,000 watts.
The early demonstration plants
were rated befWeen 200,000 and
300,000 kilowatts. Most nuclear
power units that have been com-
pleted in the past few years have a

unit on a single plant site. A typical
1 -million kilowatt powerpiant will
generate enough electricity to meet
the commercial and residential
needs of a city of some 560,000
people.

ERIC

Nuclear Power and Radiation

Nuclear powerpiants are permit-
ted by license to release to the at-
mosphere small amounts of radioac-
tive materials which are virtually
undetectable beyond the reactor
site boundaries by even the most
-sensitive instruments. These small
quantities are relatively insignificant
when compare^ to the natural radia-
tion tf^t has always been a part of
the earth's environment,

1 Natural radiation come$ in the
form of cosmic rays from the sun,

and from naturally radioactive
elements like potassium, radon,
radium, and uranium that are scat-
tered throughout our soil, building
materials, food, even our air and
water (Table 1). The average
American receives about 100
millirems— a standard unit or radia-
tion measurement— each year from
natural radiation. In addition adult
Americans receive an average of
about .90 millirems a year from
medical and dental X-rays and £om
other medical procedures.

Table 1. Typical Sources of Radiation Exposure in the Untied States

Source of Radiation

Medial X-rays

Cosmic rays from the sun
(depending on altitude)

Naturally radioactive elements
to air, water, and food

Naturally radioactive elements
in soli and [ocks

Medicines with radioisotopes

Fallout from weapons tests

Naturally radioactive elements
in building materials

Dental X-rays

Luminous clocks

Nuclear powerpiants and
associated activities

Avenue R^i&k(!> Exposure Per Person

per Year)

26
14
5

5
1

^0.5
0,3

Source: The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of ionizing Radiation", Com-
mittee on the Biological Effects of ionizing Radiation, National Academy of Sciences,
Washington, D.C., 1980.

ERIC

Types of Nuclear Reactors

(Figure 17). In a BWR the water
that is heated by the core turns
directly to steam ih the reactor
vessel, and the same steam is used
to power the turbine-generator.

The water in a BWR is piped
around and through the reactor
core and is transformed into steam
as it flows up between the elements
of the nuclear fuel The steam
leaves the reactor through a pipe at
the top, turns the turbine-gpnerator,
is condensed back to water, and is
pumped back into the reactor
vessel, beginning the process again
(Figure 18).

Normally water turns to steam
at a temperature of 212° Fahrenheit
(100° Celsius). But at such a low
temperature, steam— like a boiling
tea kpftle— contains too little energy
to be used in a turbine-generator.
To raise the temperature and the

Figure 17. Big Rock Point Nuclear Pow&plant, a boiiing-wat&r mactor (BWR) plant In Michigan. 0
(Credit: Consumers Power Company)

Just as there are different
approaches to designing and
buitding airplanes and automobiles,
' - engineers have developed different
types 'of nuclear powerplants.
Several types are used in the
United States: Boiling-Water Reac-
tors (BWR), Pressurized-Water-
Reactors (PWR), and High
Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors
(HTGR). PWRs and BWR? are
genetically called Light-Water Reac-
tors (LWR). The electric generation
process is essentially the same for
all of them; the principal differences
lie inside the reactor that produces
the heat.

i I

Boiling-Water Reactors (BWR)

About 30 of the nuclear plants
in operation in the United States
are boiling-water rtfactors, or BWR3

ERLC

. Transmission
CcntalnmsortiuUding Unss

Control Rods

_ Turbfna-
g«nsrstor

Cooling
Water

Pump

Figure 18. BcSffng Water Reactor (BWR)

energy content, the water in a BWR
is kept at a pressure of 1000
pounds per Square inch (psi), in-
stead of the normal atmospheric
pressure of about t5 psi. Because
of this added pressure, the water
does not boil and turn to steam un-
til it reaches a temperature of about
545° Fahrenheit (285° C). This
higher tempe{ature adds to the
energy value* of the steam in turning
the turbine.

Pressurized-Water Reactors
(PWR)

In a pressurized : water reactor
(PWR) the water passing through
the core is kept under sufficient
press t^eihaf it does not turn to
steam at all— it remains liquid *
(Figure 19). Steam to drive the tur-
bine is generated in a separate
piece of equipment.

ERIC

The PWR system is known as a
double-loop because it involves two
separate circuits of water — or
loops— which never physically mix
with each other. One is a primary
loop; the other is called a secon-
dary loop. The water that flows
through the reactor, known as the
"primary" loop, is pressurized to
about 2250 psi. It heats to about
600°F (315°C) without boiling and
leaver the reactor as a hot liquid. It
is pumped through tubes in the
steam generator. After transferring
its heat in the steam generator to
the secondary loop, the highly'pres-
surized water in the primary loop is
pumped back to the core to be
reheated and continue with the pro-
cess. The secondary water cir-
culates around the tubes in the
steam generator, picking up or "ex-
changing" heat from the primary
' loop. This .heat exchange turns the

-Containment Building Transmission

Pressure
Vessel —

Primary

Witor Loop

r Pump

TUrbine
Generator

| ^^^a£5 £ Cooling

Fiquf 19. Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR)

secondary water to steam which
fiows toward* the turbineat a
temperature of about 5w*F
(260°C).

About 50 of the nuclear
powerplants operating in the United
States are pressurized-water reac-
tors (Figure 20). PWRs are also us-
ed in nuclear submarines and other
naval appiications.

High Temperature Qas-Cooled
Reactors (HTGR)

High temperature gas-cooled
reactors (HTGRs) are also double-
loop systems. (Figure 21). The prin-
cipal difference is that the coolant
in the primary loop — which fiows
through the core to carry away the
heat— is not water, but a g&s.

The gas used is helium, which
is circulated through pipes in the
primary loop by huge blowers. The

gas, kept under a pressure of
several hundred pounds per square'
inch, can achieve much higher
temperatures' than water. In some
designs the gas can be heated to
as much as 1400°F (760°C). As a
result, the steam produced from
water in the secondary loop, which
powers the turbines, can have
temperatures as high as 100O°F
(538 °C), This higher temperature
leads to improved thermal
efficiency— that is, more electric
power is generated for the same
amount of heat from the fuel.

Another major difference be- ;
tween gas-cooled reactors and
water-cooled reactors is the
moderator. As was explained
previously in the description of reac-
tor core elements, in water-cooled
reactors the water serves as a
moderator to slow neutrons and in-
crease the likelihood of atoms fis-

ERIC

•* Figure 20. Point Beach NucJe$r Plant at Two Crse&s, Wisconsin. The plant has two

4Q7-r?}G<}aw8tt prassurize&water reactors (PWRs). Unit 1 began operation In 1970, Unit 2 in
1972. (Credit: Wisconsin Eiectrfc Power Co,)

- Figure 22. Fort St. Vrain in Colorado is the first commercial high-temperature gas-cooked reactor
(HTGR) to be built In the United States. It is also the first to use a progressed concrete pressure
vessel, (Credit: 'Public Service of Colorado)

sioning. Gas, however, is not a
satisfactory moderator because it is
so, much less dense. Therefore
another materia! must be included
in the core. The moderator in gas-
cooled reactbrs is graphite, which
can withstand the high
temperatures of these systems. The
fuel, uranium carbide particles, is

distributed throughout the graphite
in the core of an HTGR.

In the United States one gas-
cooled reactor, Peach Bottom 1 ,
operated as a demonstration plant
in Pennsylvania for seven years. A
commercial HTGR, Fort St. Vrain,
has been operating in Colorado
since 1979 {Figure 22).

Breeder Reactors

Scientists and engineers have
been working for ov§r three
decades on breeder reactor
! technology. Breeder reactors are
being developed which will greatly
multiply the energy obtained from
uranium by converting that finite
energy resource into virtually an in-
exhaustible energy supply.

All nuclear powerpiants pro-
duce new fuel while they are
operating — extra neutrons are ab-
sorbed by U-238 atoms, which are
then transformed Into fissionable
plutoniufn (Figure 23). Some reac-
tors are designed to do this so effi-
ciently that they actually produce
more fuel than they consume and
are catied "breeder" reactors.

Breeder reactors are able to
multiply the amount of energy,
available from uranium resources.
By using the U-238— vyhich exists in

great quantities as an otherwise,
useless leftover from the uranium
enrichment process — a breeder
reactor will get 60 times as much
usable energy, from natural uranium
as today's nuclear powerpiants. '

Severe!' reactor types have the
potential for breeding. The one that
has been developed most
thoroughly through experimental
reactors and actual operating plants
is cooled by circulating a liquid
metal (sodium) through it. It is call-
ed the liquid metal fast breeder ,
reactor, or LMFBR (Figure 24).

These reactors are different
from the other designs discussed in
this booklet in several ways:

• the neutrons released in the
fission process are "fast,"
meaning they are not
moderated, so they remain
at high speed;

Fission Fragments

/ Fission

I Transmutation

{

^ Breeding
Pu-239 S Reaction

{

FleeJon
Reaction

Pu-239

Figure 23. The Breeding Process

* ■

Containment Building

Plutonium
FuaJ — -

racHoectfva ^
Sodium w
Primary , ^

Sodium

Ttanamlaafexi '
' Unit A »
Staam Jpj^ *V t

TUrbina
Ganarator

'Raactor

Sodium

HMt

Exchange

22 Cooling
W«t«r

Primary Sodium Loop intermediate \ \ Water Loop

Sodium Loop \

Figure 24. Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR)

• the coolant Is sodium in the
form of a liquid metai— like
mercury in a thermometer;

• the fuel is normally
plutonium-^39; and

• the design of the reactor in-
corporates uranium-238 as
the fertile material.

Sodium is used as a coolant in
the LMFBR because: it is an ex-
cellent heat transfer agent; it is in-
expenstye and.available in high
purity; it is not subject to irradiation
damage; it is compatible with many
construction materials; and it is
easy to pump at the reactor
operating temperature, •

The liquid metal fast breeder
powerplant is a, three-loop system.
Sodium would undergo a rapid
chemical reaction if it comes into
contact with water or st$am. To

_keep the sodium t impasses
through the core (jwhjch becomes
radioactive) from any" potential con-
tact with water, an intermediate
heat-transfer loop also containing
sodium separates the primary loop's
radioactive sodium coolant from the
water/steam loop. »

In a liquid metal cooled
breeder, sodium is circulated
through the core and heated to
about 1000°F (538 *C). This sodium
passes through a heat exchanger to
transfer its heat to an intermediate
sodium loop. The sodium in this
secondary loop then moves to the
steam generator where it heats
water in a third loop to steam at
about 900°F (482°C),

Several experimental breeder
reactors have operated in the
^nited States, in fact, the EBFM
produced the' world's first electricity

ERIC

Figure 25. The Experimental Breeder Reactor-It (EBR II), located at Idaho Falls, Idaho, has been
in operation since 1963. (Credit Department of Energy) ,

generated by nuclear power in
Idaho in 1951,. fts successor, EBR-
II, is still operating as a test reactor
after almost 20 years, testing ad-
vanced reactor fuels and materials
(Figure 25). A developmental com-
mercial LMFBR, the Enrico Fermi
Atomic Power Plant, operated in
Michigan in the 1960's. Fuel failure
caused the pknt to be shutdown
temporarily in 1966. After repairs,
the plant resumed operations. High

fuel cycle costs caused the plant to
shut down in 1972, but not before
its operation had helped to train
personnel from France, Russia and
Japan, who were later to develop
fast reactor programs in their own
countries. In 1980, the Fast Flux
Test Facility (FFTF), a 400,000
kilowatt (thermal), sodium cooled,
fast neutron flux reactor designed
for irradiation testing of fuels and
materials for the LMFBR program,

ERIC

F*eurt2f. The Fast Fkuc Tspt FmMy is designed spectticaUy tor the testing of breeder fuel and
component*. It began operation In February 1980. (Credit; Department of Energy)

Fiftura 27. ArcMectural concept of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Want (Credit:
Department of Energy)

began operating at the DOE Han-
ford Engineering Development
Laboratory (HEDL) site in Richland,
Washington, (Figure 26). A 375,000
kilowatt demonstration plant called
the Clinch River Breeder Reactor
(CRBR) has been under develop-
ment in eastern Tennessee for
several years with a combination of
private and public funding (Figure 27).

France, the Soviet Union and
Great Britain each have operating

breeder reactors and are planning
commercial-size 1 million kilowatt '
.breeders in the near future. The
French "Super Phenix" breeder
(1 ,2 million kilowatts) is well along
in construction and is expected to
begin operating by 1984. The
largest breeder now operating is the
600,000 kilowatt Beloyargk plant in
the Soviet Union. Breeders are also
being developed in West Germany,
India, Italy and Japan.

Nuclear Fuel: fining to Reactor

Unlike fossil fuels, which can
be burned in a power plant in vir-
tually the same form in which they
exist underground, uranium must go
through a series of complex
changes to become an efficient fuel
for electricity generation. By the
time it reaches the reactor the
uranium fuel has been mined,
chemically processed, isotopically
enriched, and fabricated into fuel
pellets, and in the process being

4 *

transformed from a salt, to a
powder, to a gas and finally to a
dense ceramic.

Mining and Milling

Uranium is a fairly abundant
element It exists throughout much
of the earth's crust and is even
found in the world's oceans. The
largest deposits of uranium ore that
have so far been discovered are in

Figure 28. Uranium ore is being darted from the Schwertzwaider underground mine in Golden
Colorado, (Qedft: Cotter Corporation)

^RIC

Table 2. Comparative fue/ R*qwmm&it$ for &ectrk: Pow*rplant$*

Fuel

uranium 4
coal ;. * 41
Oil.

natural ga$
£oJar ceils
garbage* ,
wood „

EngUah Units "

33 tons '
2,300,000 tons * „
10,000,000 barrel*
64,000,000,000 cubic feet
25,000 acres
7,000,000 tons
2-4.000,000 cords

Metric Units

30 metric tonnes
2,100,000 metric tonnes >
1,600,000 ci^»c metefs
1,600,000 cubic meters
10,125 hectares
6,200,000 metric tonnes
4S~9,800.0Q0 metric-tonnes

•Note: A 1 -million kilowatt plant generates enough electricity for a city of 560,000 people.

•The annual fuel requirements of a 1 -million kilowatt powerplant operating at 75 percent of its
theoretical annual capacity.

the western United States,
Australia, Canada, South Africa,
and several other countries in Africa
and South America (Figure 28). *
^ , UrartiQm in nature, however, is
, quite dilute, combined in small pro- ,
portion^ with other elements to
make up such minerals as pitch-
blende and carnotite; Natural
uranium exists in an .oxide form (i.e.
chemically combined with the ele-
ment oxygen) and typically amounts
\o only 0.1 to 0.2 percent of the raw
ore. This means that a, ton of ore
mined from the ground yields- at
most only two to four pounds of
uranium. But, uranium is more effi-
cient than other fuel types (Table 2).

A crude uranium oxide is
extracted from the* ore at uranium ;
rftiUs thatare geftecally located n$ar
the mihes\Tha mills concentrate « „>',
the uranium oxide by crushing^the
oje into fine sand-like particles
which are then put through 'such
separation arid concentration pro-

cesses as screening, flotation and
gravity separation. The milling pro-
cess leaves a large residue of liqujd
sludge called "tailings" which is .<
allowed to dry $nd collected in piles
within enclosures. The tailings con-
tain the elements thorium and
radium which are mainly by-
products of the decay of U-238.
Tailingsjare no mote radioactive •
than the ore that was removed from
the earth; but since the material has
been brought to tbe surface and/
•concentrated, it can pose a hazard
unless covered by flsyers of earth or
other forms of shielding to contain
and stabilize it. '

The uranium oxide extracted
from the milling operation is further
refined and purified in other
ch&rfcat processes. This material,
called yellow cake, is then com-
bined with fluorine gas to be
transformed into uranium hexv
afluoride gas (UF 6 ). In this form it is
ready for enriching.

Figure 29. in the U.S. Department oi Energy's gaseous diffusion enrichment plant in Tennessee,
uranium in the form of uranium hexafkjorid* gas (UFt) is passed in stages through many porous
Barriers. More than 1,200 stages are needed to produce uranium enriched to 3.0 percent U-235.
(Credit: Department of Energy)

:RIC

Ft fl Uf * * tochnkw is working tfvougft a laboratory glove box to make precise
^suwmrits of nucJw fuel pethts. The pallets are then Inserted in pendHNn tubes. (Credit-
L/eperuyent of Energy)

Enrichment and Fuel
Fabrication

^ In the process of extracting the
few pounds of uranium oxide that
were present in the original ton of
ore, impurities that would interfere
with the fission process are
chemically removed. But the

uranium contains the natural pro-
portion of isotopes: more than 99
^percent is nonfissionable U-238,
and only about 0.7 percent is the
U-235 that can be used as fuel.
Since a light-water reactor (LWR)
requires that its uranium fuel con-
tain about 3.0 percent U-235, the
refined uranium must' be enriched in
its fissionable isotope.

ERIC

Large-scale enrichment of
uranium, which is one of the keys
to most uses of nucSear energy, was
made possible by the development

x of the gaseous diffusion process.
Large gaseous diffusion plants own-
ed by Ihe U.S. Government make
use.of the fact that a U-238 atom is
about 1 percent heavier than a
U-235 atom because it contains

/three more neutrons (Figure 29).

To enrich uranium, the gaseous
form (UF 6 ) is piped into a gaseous
diffusiop plant and pumped through
Carriers that have microscopically
small holes, less than 1 -millionth of
a centimeter in diameter. Because
the U-235 is slightly lighter than
U-238, the U-235 passes through
the holes more readily. Therefore,
the gas that passes through a bar-
rier in the diffusion plant has slight-

v ly more U-235 than natural uranium;
the gas left behind has slightly less.

> After being pumped through a
series of thousands of barriers, the
end-product .gas teaches the 3.0
percent enrichment level that is re-
quired for nuclear powerplants. The

.gas left behind has been stripped of
its U-235 from 0.7 percent to less
than 0.3 percent, and is known as
depleted uranium. This depleted
uranium cannot be used as fuel, but
it has value as fertile material in
breeder reactors.

After tine uranium is enriched, it
is chemically converted back into
uranium oxide to be processed into
fuel. The powdery oxide is
compressed into small cylindrical .
pellets and loaded and sealed into
metal tubes to form the ftsel rods.
Detailed inspection follows eyery

step of this fabrication process
(Figure 30).

These fuel rods, about 12 feet
Song, are grouped together in
bundles known as fuel assemblies.
The fuel rods are carefully spaced
in the assemblies to allow a coolant
to flow between them. The fuel
assemblies am grouped together to
make up the core of the reactor
(Figure 31)- The nuclear fuel fis-
sions and generates heat in the
teactor, just as burning coal or oiJ
generates heat in a boiler/

Nuclear Fuel: Reactor to Waste Disposal

Aii operations involving radioac-
tive materials— including nuclear
powerpJants, hospitals, research
centers and industrial processes —
create radioactive wastes that must
be safety handled and disposed of.
The radioactive wastes are created
in several difterent form's, ranging
from only slightly radioactive to
intensely radioactive, and they are
handled in Afferent ways depending

on their level of radioactivity, the
amount Of heat they generate, and
xrther factors.

Handling Spent Fuel

A 1 -million kilowatt nuclear
power plant typically contains about
100 tons of uranium fuel. Each year
about one-third of the fuel — roughly
33 tons, or 60 of its fuel bundles—

Figure 32. lectin titans* use an undetwater periscope to inspect fuel
pool. (Credit: Wisconsin Electric Power Co.)

hues in the spent fuel

V
ERIC

Uranium Wn— And Mill*

Conversion
ToUF t

Enriehmant-GuMus Diffusion

Rrcovftfcd Uranium (Af UF»)

Plutonium (As PuO>)

HighUwf
Wist* Repository

Reprocessing
' Pimm For

msa spemfHisi

NNN

nil

Fual Fabrication

Rsecior

Figure 33. 77*9 NuclBar Fuel Cycte

must be removed and replaced. The
used fuel is called spent fuel.

As the spent fuel rods leave the
plant, they are physically similar to
the new fuel rods that were
originally installed. They are still
composed largely of U-238, more
than 94 percent" by weight. The
primary difference is that the U-235
that released its energy in the reac-
tor created radioactive fission
products and other long-lived
radioisotopes. Though they repre-
sent a/small proportion of the spent
fuel, only 3.5 percent, they Continue
to generate heat and release radia-
tion long after the fuel is 4 removed
from the reactor.

Most spent fuel from nuclear .
powerpiants is stored in deep pools
of water near the reactor (Figure .
32). The water cools the fuel rods,
to keep them from overheating, and
it serves as an effective shield to

protect workers from the radiation.

The level of radiation begins
declining immediately, and within 10
years it has decayed by some 90
percent. Nevertheless, some fission
products remain radioactive for
many years. Storage of the spent
fuel in pools near the reactors is a
temporary measure, until the fuel is
shipped to long-term storage, to
permanent waste repositories, or to
reprocessfng plants.

Reprocessed Wastes

From the beginning of nuclear
power use, it was assumed that the
spent fuel would be chemically
reprocessed to allow the stiK-usabie
fuel to be recycled and to concen-
trate the fission products into a
smaller volume. (Figure 33). Fuel
reprocessing technology has been
developed and utilized in the United

ERIC

Rgur* 34. The Climax Spent Fuel Storage Test is being conducted to evaluate the effects of
storing spent reactor fueLin a crystalline rock formation 1,400 feet below the surface of the
Nevada Test Site. (Credit: Atomic Industrial Forum)

States. It is now being used m
several other countries. After a
moratorium on commerical
reprocessing imposed in 1977, the
United States Government and
industry are now studying the
circumstances anc^ requirements
under which resumption of
reprocessing could bd considered.

A reprocessing plant dissolves
the fuel rods in acid and separates
out the uranium and plutonium
Isotopes from the fission products
and cladding. The uranium can be
fabricated into fresh reactor fuel,
and the newly created plutonium -
could be used in the advanced
"breeder" reactor.

After the chemical repro-
cessing, the fission products exist in
the form of a highly radioactive li-
quid. That liquid can then be turned
into a solid that has a volume 80
percent less than the original spent
fuel, thus requiring a smaller area
for high-level waste disposal. <

Handling and Disposing of
High-Level Wastes

High-level waste (HLW) is
nuclear waste with a relatively high
level of radioactivity. HLW comes
from the reprocessing step after
nuclear fuel is removed from a
reactor; it has come to mean also

the spent reactor fuel assemblies if
they are not reprocessed

The goal of safe waste disposal
is to ensure that essentially no
radioactive material from the waste
ever reaches man or his environ-
ment. The barriers that are
designed to prevent the waste from
reaching the environment include
the form of the waste itself, its con-
tainers, the ; packing around them,
and the physical protection of the
permanent repository, such as a
deep geologic formation (Figure 34).

Rflai* 35. Radioactive Wast* from thf nuclear fuet cycle cm be unmoMzed in glass for han-
dling and disposal. The simulated waste glass shown is comprised of 25 percent high-level
waste-type material and 75 percent non-radioactive glass Ingredients. The button on the left
represents the annual quantity of high-level waste for one person If ail U.S. electricity were pro-
duced by nuclear powwsJThe cylinder at right represents an individual's lifetime quantity. (Credit-
Department of Energy)

The first assurance that
radioactive waste will not move from
its repository to the environment lies
in its very form: one of the most
likely forms— based on decades of
research and experience in the
United States and abroad— is a
special glass compound, like Pyrex.
This compound called "borosilicate
glass", combines silicon (an ingre-
dient of sand) with boron oxide and
other elements* ordinary glassware
contains a higher percentage of
silicon and lime instead of boron

oxide, tn the borosilicate-glass form,
the waste would be resistant to

^ heat, chemical action, stress and
radiation (Figure 36).

The solid waste could then be
sealed in waterproof, corrosion- m

_ resistant steel containers about 10
feet long and one foot in diameter.
The waste containers would then be
encased in a series of protective
wrappings, including cases of metal,
ceramic or cement and buffers that
would absorb water and other
chemicals before they reached the
container. These additional barriers
would further isolate the radio-
activity from the environment. About
a dozen of these special canisters ,
could hold ail the higfvlevel waste
produced in a full-size\^ctear
powerpfant in a year. '

The Nuclear Waste Policy Act
of 1982 spells out a procedure and
timetable for the site selection r con-
struction and operation of HLW
repositories, the first one to be*
operable around the turn of the cen-
tury. In addition to this strong com-
mitment to permanent geologic
disposal, it provides for a system of
fees paid by utilities to fund waste
disposal; a strong voice for States
in the choice of siting; a limited,
temporary federal storage program
to alleviate near-term storage prob-
iems at powerpiantsf and a study of
monitored retrievable storage as an
interim step toward permanent
disposal.

Handling and Disposing of
Low-Level Wastes

Low-level wastes (LLW) contain
relatively little of the radioactive

ERIC

^■teansuranic elements. Most of this
waste requires little or no shielding
and no coding and may be handled
by direct contact.

Every organization that uses or
produces radioactive materials,
generates low-level wastes. In-
dustrial users that manufacture
.radiopharmaceuticals, smoke
alarms, emergency exit signs,
radium watch dials and other con-
sumer goods produce low-ldvel
wastes consisting of machinery
parts, plastics and organic solvents.

* About half of the total low-level
waste generated today is from
nuclear powerpiants. This includes
used resins from chemical ion-
exchange processes, filters and
filter sludges, lubricating oils and
greases, and detergent wastes from
laundry operations and from decon-
taminating personnel and equip-
ment- Most of this waste is pro-
cessed and packaged for disposal
at a specially designed waste
facility.

The common method of dispo-
sing of low-level waste is to ship the
wastes to a commercial disposal
site where the containers of waste
are buried in trenches. Low-level
wastes pre packaged in 55-gallon or
30-gaiion metal drums, or high-
integrity casks, and shipped by
truck to the disposal site, in accor-
dance with regulations set by the
Department of Transportation and
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1
(Figure 36).

The dimensions of the trenches
vary, depending on the soil and
water conditions of the area.
Typically, they might measure some
600 feet long, about 60 feet in

Figure 36. A 55-galfon drum of solid /ow-fevW waste Is loaded by crane into a tmOar for ship-
ment to a LLW disposal site. (Credit: Atomic Industrial Forwn, Inc.)

width, and 25 feet or more in depth.
Each trench is filfed with waste
drums and crates to about two-
thirds of the trench depth. Then l
several feet of soft and fill material
are pfaced on top. When an entire
trench has been completely, back-
filled in this manner, -an
impermeable "cap" of soil and
sometimes compacted clay about 6
feet deep is sealed on top of the
trench, creating a contour that
sheds surface water.

After the trenches are filled and
capped, their locations are outlined
* * with permanent stone or metal
markers which fist the amount and
type of radioactivity in the trenches
below. Then the closed trench is
seeded with grass to restore
vegetation cover and prevent
erosion. Site operators and

regulatory agencies conduct regular
surveys to determine radiation
levels at open and filled trenches
and around the site boundaries.

Changes in Low-Level Waste
PWIcy

The current system for manage- •
ment of low-level waste evolved
over a period of time when disposal
capacity was available and costs
were low. Disposal capacity is now
limited to three sites: Barnwell,
South Carolina; Beatty, Nevada; *
and Hanford, Washington. Two of
the states have decided to cut back
on the amount of waste they will
accept from other states, and the
Nevada facility is reaching its max-
imum capacity. Furthermore, the

ERLC

volume of wastes generated is on
the rise despite improved volume-,
reduction techniques: in 1982 nearly
3 million cubic feet of tow-level
waste were shipped to commercial
sites for disposal. Costs have risen
as well, especially for transporting
the wastaaamuch as-3vG0O unites
to accommodate current volume
ceilings at the existing disposal
sites.

When Congress passed the
Low-Level Waste Policy Act in 1S80,
it set in motion major changes in
the national low-level waste disposal
program:

• As of January 1 f 1986, each
state will be responsible for
providing its own disposal
facilities for iow-ievei waste.
That includes all fifty states
and the District of Columbia.

• The most efficient method
would be through regional
compacts, which would pro-
vide a central disposal
facility for several neighbor-
ing states. Congress must
endorse the creation of
yach compact in advance
and renew its approval
every five years.

*Atter January 1, 1986, any
State can refuse* to accept
low-level wastes from other
states that are not members
of its N regional compact.
Essentially, this means that
a stat^ must enter into a
regional agreement,
establish its own disposal
facility N or stop generating
low-lev^l wasjte.

ERIC

Vital services like electricity
supply, medical diagnosis and treat-
ment, and advancements made
possible in research centers across
the country depend on adequate
low-level waste disposal capacity in
the coming decades.

52 *

Transporting Radioactive Materials

Each ytfar in the United St^£s 9
some 500 billion shipments of com-
modities are made by truck, rail,,
barge, airplane, or other means. Of
these about one in 5,000 contains
materia! classified as hazardous.
They include caustics and acids;
toxic materials like pesticides and
poisons; explosives, flammables,
like gasoline and propane; cor-
rosives; compressed gases; and
radioactive materials.

Radioactive materials account
for about two percent of all hazar-
dous materials shipped. Half of
these Sre radionuclides used in the
practice of nuclear medicine. The
rest are mostly radioisotopes used
in industciaf radiography, consumer
products, and some industrial and
scientific instrumentation. Radioac-
tive materials involved in the opera-

tion of -the Nation's nuclear
powerplants account for only one
quarter of one percent of all
shipments of hazardous materials.
(Table 3.)

The safety record of shipping
radioactive materials is weiP
established. Only one-half of one
percent of all 1 accidents in the ship-
ment of hazardous materials' in-
volves radioactive materials. (Table
4.) Most of the accidents involve
small packages of iow-ievel waste
which contain little radioactivity. No
deaths or serious injuries have ever
been attributed to the radioactive
nature of any materials involved in
a transportation accident.

>-^[nce radioactive materials are
subject to the same transportation
hazards as any other freight, th#
regulations and procedures for ship-

T*bJ« 3. Annual Shipments of Nuclear Materials in the United States
Type of Material

Exempt amount or limited radioactive level materials, e.g. smoke
detectors, luminous signs or watches

Pharmaceutical and other medical sources, mainly radioisotopes
used for diagnosis and treatment

industrial radiation sources, including gauges to measure thickness
of paper, portable x-ray devices 1 .

Nuclear materials used in the front end of the fuel cycle, including
uranium, fresh fuels from fabrication plants, and a small amount of
tnterpiant spent fuel

Wastes from all industrial and medical sources other than nuclear <^
powerplants

Nuclear powerplant wastes

No. of Shipments/Year

700,000
910,000
220,000

2OQ.0OC

100,000
50,000

Total

2,180:000

Source: Data courtesy of Robert Jefferson, Transportation Technology Center, Sandia National
Laboratories; reprinted In "Understanding Radioactive Waste", Battefte Press, 1982.

Tftbte 4. Flv-Y*arJotaJ ot Hazardous Materials incident Reports 9
In tha UfUfrd States by Classification

„ t >JH No- of Percent

Classification Reports of Total

RammabJe Hquid 16,406 51,27

Corrosive material

Poisons, Class B 2,026 6.32

Flammable clompf eased gas 718 2.24

Oxidizing materia] 544 2 01

Nonflammable compressed gas 535 1 57

"Miscellaneous and unknown 472 1,47

FlammaWasoHd ' \ 183 0.57

Radioactive material ^\ 144 0 45

Explosives V^22 0.38

Combustible liquid \ 69 / 0.21

/ 0.08

Total 32,018 100.00

Poisons, Class A

33.33

*The figures in this table refer onty to accidents that are reported to the Department of
Transportation. Some events of sach type fail to be reported.

Source: Department of Transportation Report DOT/RSPA/MTB-79/8; reprinted in "Understand-
ing Radioactive Waste", Battalia Press, 1982.

ping them are governed by two
thoughts: First, the methods for
shipping radioactive materials from
one location to another should
minimize the chance that an acci-
dent will occur. Second, the
radioactive materials should be
packaged in such a way that no
radiation will be released even if an
accident should occur. Traditionally,
the primary safety factor is the ship-
ping container itself, which ensures
against leakage and prevents
accidents or sabotage.

ERIC

Spent Fuel Shipments

H Fuel assemblies are removed
from the reactor after about three
yeafsTfrnhis poinit, the used or
"spent fue^gssejnbjiee-are highly
radioactive. They are removed to
storage soots of water near the
reactor wnere they We held for a
time to aJ&w their radioactivity to
decay andilheir hea) to diminish
before shipment. After a period of
time, the spent fuel Assemblies may

1 >•

s •••.'TV?

Figure 38* To test. the durability of a 22-/on container used to transport spent nuclear fuel,
technicians at the Department of Energy's Sandia Laboratories in New^Aexico mounted the cask
on the bed qf an expendable tractor-trailer. The rig was than loaded onto the Lab's rocket sled
and stemmed into a 104oot thick concrete wall at 60 mph. Although the truck was tetany
demolished, the container suffered only a slight dent at one end but no part of the oask cracked
open. A high-speed camera recorded the- moment of impact and scattering wreckage
Immediately following. (Credit: Sandia Laboratories}

be shipped in massive protective
containers by truck or rail to a
reprocessing facility (to extract still
usable fuel), to a permanent
disposal site, or to another storage,
pool.

Each nuclear pqwerptant
annually produces the equivalent of
approximately 25 fruckioads or 10
rasicars of spent fu^l (Figure 37).
Since 1964, over 4,000 spent fuel
assemblies have been shipped from
reactor sites to other locations,
incfflding two reprocessing plants.
Today, however, there are no
operational reprocessing plants or
permanent disposal sites for com-
mercial spent^tuel, so such
shipments are not taking place.

The shipping containers for
spent fuel are rigorously designed/
manufactured and tested— Figure

38 shows one cask design. In
another cask design, the fuel
assemblies are sealed into a water-
filled stainless steel cylinder with
wails one-half inch thick, clad with
four inches of heavy metal
shielding* enclosed by a shell of
inch-and-a-half steel plate, sur-
rounded by five inches of -water,
and encircled by a corrugated
stainless steel outer jacket. The
overall package measures 5 feet by
17 feet and weighs 70 tons.

The shipping cask is required
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-
sion to withstand a series of acci-
dent conditions:

• a 30-foot fall on a flat, hard
surface (as if the cask drop-
ped from an overpass onto
a concrete highway)

• a 40-inch drop onto*a metal
pin 6-inches in diameter (as
if the cfSk hit a shftrp cor-
ner of a bridge abutment)

; • a 30-minute exposure to a
fire at a temperature of
1475°F (as if a tank of
gasoline ruptured in an acci-
dent and a fire ensued)

• complete immersion in three
feet of water for eight hours
(as if the cask rolled off into
a creek along the highway)

The container must undergo
these destructive forces 7ft 9
sequence with no breach of contain-
ment and with no significant reduc-
tion in shielding.

Road experiments designed tp
confirm the integrity of the spent
fuel cask have been carried out yd
in all cases the safety requirements
have been met or exceeded.

Transporting High- and Low-
Level Wastes

Concentrated fission products,
or high-level waste, are the most
radioactive components of spent
tuei. They result from reprocessing
operations which can separate tfp
radioactive waste from reusable
tuel. When commercial reprocessing
becomes available again and per-
manent waste disposal facilities
begin operation in the United
- States, these wastes will be shipped
to a permanent disposal site.

Before the high-level wastes
/from a reprocessing plant can be
shipped, they will be transformed
from a liquid Jo a solid. By solidify-

ing the waste in canisters and plac-
ing them in shielded, hardened con-
tainers, the integrity of the wastes is
assured under virtually all transpor-
tation conditions.

Low-level wastes contain small
amounts of radioactive materials
that generally do not require
shielding during transportation.
Most often they are shipped by
truck in compacted solid form
-placed in sealed drums. A commer-
cial nuclear reactor generates from
16 to 45 truckloads of low-level
waste each year.

Shipping Procedures and
Regulatory Responsibilities

The Department of Transporta-
tion (DOT) has general authority for .
regulating the transportation of
hazardous materials, including
radioactive materials. Its regulations
include:

• packaging, marking and
labeling radioactive
materials shipments

• mechanical conditions for
carriers and qualifications of
carrier personnel

• loading, unloading, handling
and storage

The Nuclear Regulatory Com-
mission is responsible for licensing
and regulating all commercial users
and handlers of radioactive
materials, including waste shippers
and carriers.

Shipping procedures are '
designed to assure that radioactive
materials are transported carefully.
In shipping low-level waste, for

ERIC

example, truck drivers must meet
basic mechanical knowledge of
equipment and driving performance
requirements, and are responsible
for truck inspection and
maintenance of vehicle logs. DOT
requires that appropriate markers
be placed on the truck to designate
the potential radiation hazard of the
kinds of waste carried. The
transporter selects a specific route
to the low-level waste disposal site
before departure and notifies state
authorities of the route chosen.

Shipments of spent fuel require,
further precautions. The NRC and
focal iaw enforcement agencies
along the <mjte are , notified before t
eacfr shipment. A communication
center remains in touch with the
transport vehicle and moqifors its
progress. >

The Economics of Nuclear Power

Do nuclear electric plants cost
more than other types of
powerplants, or do they save money
for the electricity consumer? Sur-
prisingly perhaps, the answer to
both questions can be yes.

Just as you may spend more
money for a car that gets better 'gas
mileage, so that it actually saves >
you money over the life of the car,
utilities spend more money to con-
struct nuclear electric plants
because the fuel costs are so much
tower than .for plants that burn coaf.
(Oil and natural gas have become
too valuable and expensive to burn
in nefr^goQerating plants.) Because
of the considerable difference in
fuel costs, nuclear plants result in a
savings to consumers in many parts
of the country, particularly in areas
like the Northeast that do not have
coal mines nearby. i

The cost of electricity frorl|a
generating plant is made up of%
three parts:

• the cost of fuel (coai, oil,
gas or nuclear fuel) and the
disposal of the residue (ash
or nuclear waste);

• operation and maintenance
costs (largely wages and
salaries plus tools and
equipment); and

• powerpiant capital cost (cost
of design, engineering, and
construction including fac-
tory equipment, tools, in-
terest on the capital, etc.)

Actual generating costs depend
on several factors that can vary
considerably: the location of the
plant, the fuel choice, environmental

protection equipment, anc^the
length of time that iMakeskto build
the plant. Perhaps most important
of all, the, costs depend or\ the time
frame over which the plant was
built. The higher interest and infla-
tion rates of the past few years
have raised the construction costs
of nuclear and coal plants alike by
some 15 percent a year, making
new electric power stations much
more expensive than those built a
few years earlier.

Capital costs of electric
generating plants are expressed in
terms of dollars per kifowatt of in-
stalled ca#acity. For example, a
1,000-kilowatt plant that had a total
capital cost of $500,000 would be
described as costing $500 per
kilowatt. In these terms alone,
nuclear energy has always been on
the expensive side. In the late
1960's nuclear plants were pro-
jected to cost about $150 per
kilowatt, and coal plants about
$120. After years of inflation, cur-
rent projections for plants that
would begin operating at the end of
the 1980 f s estimate that nuclear
electric plants would cost some
$2,400 per kilowatt, and coai about
$1,600. That means a 1 -million
kilowatt nuclear plant would cost
about $2,4 billion, and a coai plant
that size would cost some $1,6
billion by the time it could be
completed.

Nuclear plants, however, begin
saving money shortly after they go
into service because of their lower
fuel costs. While every utility system
is a unique case, one of the most
useful comparisons of nuclear and
fossil costs can be seen on the

ERIC

Commonwealth Edison electric
system in the Chicago area. That .
utility has six large nuclear plants
and ?&x large coal plants of roughly
the same size and dates of con-
struction. In 1982 the electricity
from the coal and nuclear plants
cost about the same. Ttit principal
difference between them is the cost
of the fuel. The fuel amounted to 54
percent of the total cost of the coal-
generated electricity, but only 19
percent of the cost of nuclear
power. t v

* Although the differences are .
not necessarily this dramatic in all
parts of the country,, nuclear plants
show a slight economic edge in
total generating costs. Nationwide,
nuclear plants generated*8lectricity
at a cost of 26 mills per kilowatt
hour in 1981 t ; for coal plants, the
cost was 29 mills. Even though oil-
fired plants are much less expen-
sive to build than eittjer nuclear or
coal plants, the costs of the fuel
itself make their electricity costs
considerably higher.

Estimated costs of electricity
from new powerplants in the future,
continue to show that both nuclear
and coal will generate electricity at
about the same cdk but at a much
lower cost than^ne alternative fuels
such as oil. These projections
depend on several unknowns— the
future inflation rate, interest costs,
regulatory processes, pollution con-
trol equipment, fuel costs, and
demand for power.

It's important to remember that
the current nuclear cost advantage
is in comparison to coal plants built
at the same time. As long as the
United States is in a period of high

interest, high inflation, rising fuel
costs and lengthy regulatory pro-
cesses, electricity from any new ^
electric plant— whether nuclear or
coal— will no doubt be more expen-
sive than from older plants. This
means that every new generating
unit tends to raise the cost of elec-
tricity to consumers.

Utilities, electricity rate payers,
and bond holders have an enor-
mous investment in the nuclear
powerplants that are now operating
or being built. The steadily rising
capital costs of electric plants are
adding new pressures to electric
utilities: instead of paying
$100-$150 million for a 1 -million
kilowatt electric plant, as they did in
the mid-1 960's, utilities must now
commit upwards of $2 billion. The
pressures associated with raising
that much capital, paying the carry-
ing charges, and seeking increases
in electric rates to pay for these
costs have steered many utilities
away from a "build-and-grow"
philosophy, instead they are en-
couraging energy efficiency and
conservation programs to slow
down the rate at which they must
build new central station generating
plants.

Even with better managed
growth in electric demand, more
generating plants will most probably
be required in most areas of the\
country. Why? Because the coun-
try's population continues to grow;
old powerplants need to be
replaced; the economy— which is
extremely dependent on energy-
continues to expand, even if not as
rapidly as in the past; and many •
energy users are continuing to shift

from direct oil use to other
substitutes, including electricity.
This anticipated increase will extend
the need for new powerplants that
generate electricity at a cost com-
petitive with other available fuel
sources.

Nuclear Electricity in Other Countries

in September 1956 two nuclear
electric plants, Caider Hall 1 and 2,
in Northern England began opera*
tion, becoming the world's first com-
mercial nuclear generating station.
Because of its dependence on
, imported oil, Great Britain turned to
nuclear power earlier than other
countries. The wisdom of this deci-
sion was dramatized when the Suez
Canal crisis erupted only weeks
after Caider Hall had started up. m
The UK presently has about 30
nuclear powerplants (gas cooled) in
operation, generating 16.5% of the
country's electricity in 1982.

Today most industrialized ,
nations are Operating or building
nuclear plants for similar reasons^-
lack of enough locally owned fuel
resources and concern over
Imported oil. Several nations-
France, Switzerland, Sweden,
Belgium, Taiwan, Finland, J^pan,
. and West Germany— generate a
larger proportion of their electricity
from nuclear energy than does the
United States.

As of March 31 , 1983, the 220
nuclear plants operating in 24 coun-
tries outside the United States pro-
vided more than 9 percent of the
world's electricity (Table 5). More
than 360 other nuclear plants are
under construction or being
planned, which would bring the tot&
nuclear generating capacity in other
countries to some 440 million
kilowatts— which is equal to the
entire U.S. electrical capacity as
recently as 1973.

Throughout the 1970s France
conducted the world's most
aggressive nuclear development
program. France was relying on

imported oU for more than 65 per-
cent of her energy needs when oil
prices quadrupled in the early
1970s. France turned to her one
abundant energy resource, uranium,
and developed a policy of "tout

. nucleaire" — or "all nuclear/' vowing
that no more coal- or oil-fired elec-
tric plants would be built. By the
end of the decade France was
operating 22 nuclear powerplants
and bringing new ones into service
at an average of one every two
months (Figure 39). France's
nuclear program is the third largest
in the world after those of the
United States and the Soviet Union
and first in percentage of electricity
needs satisfied by nuclear reactors.
Nuclear energy is expected to pro-
vide more than 40 percent of
France's electricity in the 1990§.

As of March 31 , 1983, the
Soviet Union was operating 40
nuclear electric plants and providing
some 18 million kilowatts of capac-
ity, The USSR expects to generate
10. percent of its electricity from
nuclear power in 1985 and 25 per-
cent in 1990.

Japan, which brought its first
nuclear powerplant into servfce in
1966, now operates 25 (Figure 40).

- They provide 17 million kilowatts of
capacity or about 12 percent of the
nation's total electrical capability.
One of its giants, Fukushima, is the
largest nuclear generating facility in
the world, with six reactors
representing a total of 4.7 million
kilowatts. By 1990 Japan expects to
have increased its nuclear power
program to 53 million kilowatts, or
about 23 percent of the national
electric capacity.

Table 5. Nuckw Powafptonts Outskfy the United Slates
(as of March 31, 1983)

Reactor Status

In Operation
Under Construction
Planned

Total

Country

Argentina

Belgium

Brazil

Bulgaria

Canada

Czechoslovakia

Finland

France

Germany, Democratic

Republic of
Germany, Federal '

Republic of ./
Hungary *

No. of Kilowatts

113,440,000
163,184,000
167,681,000

444,305.000

No. of Nuclear Units

220
176
175

571

Foreign Countries with Operating Reactors

No. of Operatir^Units No. of Units Under Construction

India
Italy

Japan /
Korea, Republics?

South
The Netherlands
Pafc&an
Spam
Sweden
Switzerland
JTaiwan
Union of Soviet

Socialist Republics
United Kingdom
Yugoslavia

Total

2
6
1

13
2
*4

32
5

1
4
4
25
2

2
1
4

10
4
4

220

1
2
2
3
11
10

7
3
14

11
2
1
2

176

5ourc«: tntsmSlonal Atomic Energy Agency

ERIC

France and Belgium share equally the power generated by the Wtange*1 Nuclear
Shown here during construction, the 970,000 kilowatt facWty has been operating
since^ty. whang* is a PWR whose major components war* manufactured in. Europe. (Credit:
Atomic TMusiriai Forum)

Figure 40. The 100,000 ktiowatt reactor, Joyo, near MHo, Japan, is a HqukJ metal fast breeder
reactor which achieved critically In 1977. Other facilities planned for the Japanese LMFBR pro-
gram are the 300,000 kilowatt Monju prototype demonstration plant and a 1,500,000 kOowatt
commercial plant (Credit: Department of Energy)

ERiC

Conclusion

Electricity generated by nuclear
energy has grown from a small ex-
perimental scale only 30 years ago
to its current position as a signifi-
cant component of the energy sup-
ply of tH& United States and most of
the industrialized world. Because of
the increasing costs of oil and
natural gas, it is generally agreed
that nuclear energy and coal are
now the only two energy sources
that are available economically for
large new electric powerplants.

The future of nuclear power in
the United States will depend large-
ly on economic factors and energy
policies yet to be determined, ff the
demand for electricity continues to
increase as a result of economic
growth, and if shifts from our heavy
reliance on imported oil are
necessary, nucfear energy offers
the potential for centuries of electric
power that does not further deplete
our finite fossil fuel supply. Even
the current level of nuclear plants in
operation ; and under construction
around the country indicates that,
as a minimum, nuclear energy will
generate a significant 4hare of our
electric power until well into the
21st century.

Selected References

Books ^

• Nuclear Power 'Issues and \ k
Choices, Ford Foundation/Mitre
Corporation, Bailinger Publishing
Co., Cambridge, Mass. 02138,
1977, 418 pp., $6.97.

• Understanding theJSluclear Reac-
tor, Andrew W. Kramer,
Technical Publishing Co., Bar-
ringtop, III., 1970, 111 pp.,
$14.95

• A Guidebook to Nuclear Reac-
tors, Anthony V. Nero Jr.,
University of California Press,
Berkeley, Cal. 94720, 1979, 289
pp., $9.95.

• Environmental Radioactivity, Mer-
ril Eisenbud, Acaderqic Press,
Nfcw York, N.Y., 1973, 529 pp M
$29.95

• Understanding Radioactive
Waste, Raymond L. Murray, Bat-
telle's Pacific Northwest
Laboratory, U.S. Department of
Energy, Battelie Press, Colum-
bus Ohio, 43201, 1982, 120 pp.,
$10.

Reports and Articles

• ' 4 Nuclear Power from Fission •
Reactors: An Introduction," the
Assistant Secretary for Nuclear
Energy, U.S. Department of
Energy, Washington, D.C., 1982,
21 pp M DOE/NE-0029. Available
free from the Technical Informa-
tion Center P.O. Box 62, Oak
Ridge, TN 37830.

• " Annual Re
Energy Info

)rt to Congress/'
jation Administra-

Resources

tion, U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, D.C. 20546.

• "Nuclear Reactors Built, Being
Built, or Planned in the. U.S.,"
Technical Information Centef
(TIC), U,S,\Department of- r
Energy, twicra yearly. Contact
TIC, P.O. BAk 62, Oak Ridge,
TN 37830. \

• "Energy Resources Available to
the United State?, 1978 to
2000," Earl T. Hkyes, Science
magazine, January 1979, pp.
233-239.

• "the Need for Chatfbe: It
Legacy orTMl," report^
President's Commission 6(
Accident at Three Mile Island^
October 1979, 179 pp., Goven
ment Printing Office No.
0-303-300.

• 4 'Economics of Nuclear Powei\
A. D. Rossin and T.A. Rieck^V
Science magazine, August 1978.

• "Report to the President by the *
Interagency Review Group on
Nuclear Waste Management,"
Directorate of Energy Research,
U.S. Department of Energy,
March 1979, 149 pp., $10.75.
Available from the National
[Technical Information Service,
5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield,
Va. 22161.

Films

• Electricity— The Way it Works (16
mm, color, 16 minutes, 1976).
This film explains thfe generation
and transmission of electricity
and includes reports on sucb

alternative fuels as coal,
hydropower, nuclear energy, the
sun and wind. Available for
preview from Screen News •
Digest, 235 E.^th Street, New
York, N.Y. 10017..

The Paradox of Plenty (16 mm,
color 22 minutes, 1977). This
film features Don Herbert, also
known as "Mr. Wizard," tracing
the history of our energy
sources. It focuses on the pre-
sent choices for electric power ,
generation — coal and uranium.
Available for preview from The
Magic Lantern, Carlton Center,
925 Penn Avenue, Pittsburgh,
Pa. 15222.

ERIC

U.S. CiOVERMMSNT PRINTING OFFICE : 1984 O - 428-035

Wf : nvi!t\v^ r^produ^e th»s document and.wiM be happy fa make printing negatives availably
on a Joan ba^ through tho

U S Department of Energy
Office 'of Public Affairs
1000 independence Avenue SW.
Washington, D C. 20585

f-nr t'tjti:r».nnat mformatron about nuclear energy please contact

• > - •

l J S Department of Energy

A.v-*t<»;jf S'KM'tary for Nuclear Lnnrgy

- ■ ■- Ht^/inttopTjfVdetttre Ave* tut* SW ' - - - ■

vV -ishm'jftjn DC 20£?8b

; r 'iM^ff i op'-vs H t o r-> puPMf.'ri^on .-*fo available through
Oak Ftujijf*. Tennu*ioOu 37&JU