Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

reACTIONary

(6,776 posts)
32. 5 Fast Facts about Spent Nuclear Fuel
Sat Jan 21, 2023, 02:31 PM
Jan 2023
https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel

Nuclear energy is one of the largest sources of emissions-free power in the world.

It generates nearly a fifth of America’s electricity and half of its clean energy.

During this process, it creates spent or used fuel (sometimes incorrectly referred to as nuclear waste) but it’s not the green oozy liquid you might be thinking of when watching "The Simpsons."

In fact, some in the industry actually consider it a valuable resource.

Say what?

Don’t worry, we’ll get you up to speed with these 5 fast facts on spent fuel that is generated from commercial nuclear power reactors in operation today.

1. COMMERCIAL SPENT NUCLEAR FUEL IS A SOLID
Spent fuel refers to the nuclear fuel that has been used in a reactor.

The fuel used in today’s commercial reactors is made up of small ceramic pellets of low-enriched uranium oxide. The fuel pellets are stacked vertically and encased in a metallic cladding to form a fuel rod. These fuel rods are bundled together into tall fuel assemblies that are then placed into the reactor.

The spent nuclear fuel is a solid when it goes into the reactor and a solid when it comes out. Sorry “Simpsons.”


2. THE U.S. GENERATES ABOUT 2,000 METRIC TONS OF SPENT FUEL EACH YEAR

This number may sound like a lot, but the volume of the spent fuel assemblies is actually quite small considering the amount of energy they produce.

The amount is roughly equivalent to less than half the volume of an Olympic-sized swimming pool.

And, the clean energy generated from this fuel would be enough to power more than 70 million homes—avoiding more than 400 million metrics tons of carbon dioxide emissions.

If we take that a step further, U.S. commercial reactors have generated about 90,000 metric tons of spent fuel since the 1950s. If all of it were able to be stacked together, it could fit on a single football field at a depth of less than 10 yards.

The nation’s spent nuclear fuel is initially stored in steel-lined concrete pools surrounded by water. It’s later removed from the pools and placed into dry storage casks that are made of steel and concrete or other materials used for protective shielding.


3. SPENT FUEL FROM U.S. COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS IS STORED AT MORE THAN 70 SITES IN 35 STATES

Most of the nation’s spent fuel is safely and securely stored at more than 70 reactor sites across the country. Roughly a quarter of these sites no longer have a reactor in operation.

The U.S. Department of Energy is now exploring the possibility of consolidating this spent nuclear fuel at one or more federal interim storage facilities using a consent-based siting process.

For the foreseeable future, the spent fuel can safely stay at the reactor sites or a future consolidated interim storage facility until a permanent disposal solution is determined by the federal government.


4. SPENT FUEL IS SAFELY TRANSPORTED ACROSS THE UNITED STATES

Over the last 55 years, more than 2,500 cask shipments of spent fuel have been transported across the United States without any radiological releases to the environment or harm to the public.

The fuel is shipped in transportation casks that are designed to withstand more than 99 percent of vehicle accidents, including water immersion, impact, punctures and fires.


5. SPENT FUEL CAN BE RECYCLED
That’s right!

Spent nuclear fuel can be recycled to make new fuel and byproducts.

More than 90% of its potential energy still remains in the fuel, even after five years of operation in a reactor.

The United States does not currently recycle spent nuclear fuel but foreign countries, such as France, do.

There are also some advanced reactor designs in development  that could consume or run on spent nuclear fuel in the future.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Here we glow again... No advanced disposal plan unless we shoot them to Mars on Eloon's rockets. Ford_Prefect Jan 2023 #1
Now all the NUKE champions can really have a nuclear reactor in their back yard. Tikki Jan 2023 #2
What is your answer? hunter Jan 2023 #3
+1. Nuclear power and desalination will be essential dalton99a Jan 2023 #4
+2. nt iluvtennis Jan 2023 #24
+10 nt reACTIONary Jan 2023 #7
Nuclear waste disposal. Tikki Jan 2023 #8
In my opinion, the only reason that disposal is a problem... reACTIONary Jan 2023 #10
Bingo! Spot on. paleotn Jan 2023 #13
Uh the waste processing was never considered IbogaProject Jan 2023 #39
It would be helpful... reACTIONary Jan 2023 #41
Exactly FredGarvin Jan 2023 #45
They want to put the spent reactors in my state of NM womanofthehills Jan 2023 #64
Isn't as big a deal as you think. paleotn Jan 2023 #12
I guess you don't live in NM where they want to bury it womanofthehills Jan 2023 #65
Fossil fuel waste is a far greater problem and is likely to destroy our civilization. hunter Jan 2023 #22
Geothermal energy -- available worldwide -- is currently the suppressed renewable energy source. ancianita Jan 2023 #9
Not very practical currently for places such as the East Coast plus you missed something. cstanleytech Jan 2023 #15
Okay. Thought I'd give that one a try. It seems as if there are still more & cheaper pluses than ancianita Jan 2023 #18
Fusion is the answer Polybius Jan 2023 #31
The issue is using Uranium rather than Thorium IbogaProject Jan 2023 #38
Not exactly - Sun Zia wind project 3,000 mw verses 50 mw womanofthehills Jan 2023 #43
This project will only prolong our dependence on fossil fuels, especially gas... hunter Jan 2023 #51
Read the rest of the article - nuclear costs too much womanofthehills Jan 2023 #63
Magical batteries will save us! Hooray! hunter Jan 2023 #68
30 billion for Georgia's nuclear plant - womanofthehills Jan 2023 #74
Sun Zia wind will cost $8 billion vs Georgia's $30 billion plant womanofthehills Jan 2023 #77
Speaking of batteries... LudwigPastorius Jan 2023 #86
Agreed Metaphorical Jan 2023 #48
The only energy resource capable "so far" of displacing fossil fuels entirely. Arthur_Frain Jan 2023 #69
Which technologies are "right on the cusp" as you say? hunter Jan 2023 #70
You're aware of what technologies are on the cusp. Arthur_Frain Jan 2023 #71
Who said anything about "86 researching the technology?" hunter Jan 2023 #72
Perhaps I misunderstood your first reply to me. Arthur_Frain Jan 2023 #82
We're not afraid of fossil fuel waste because we are familiar with it. hunter Jan 2023 #84
NUKE champion here... reACTIONary Jan 2023 #5
When you get it in your backyard, you better stock up on iodine womanofthehills Jan 2023 #44
I've got a five year supply.... reACTIONary Jan 2023 #53
I hope those are GMO soybeans womanofthehills Jan 2023 #76
LOL, +10! nt reACTIONary Jan 2023 #85
And when exactly was the last time someone in the US had to take iodine due to living near reactor? EX500rider Jan 2023 #61
Health Department Distributes Potassium Iodide Pills Around Oyster Creek Nuclear Plant womanofthehills Jan 2023 #75
And what I asked was when was the last time someone had to take them EX500rider Jan 2023 #81
HOAs Metaphorical Jan 2023 #49
LOL, +10 nt reACTIONary Jan 2023 #54
This message was self-deleted by its author Metaphorical Jan 2023 #50
Nuclear is probably our only hope at this point. Happy Hoosier Jan 2023 #56
Or tens of thousands or more acres of habitat-obliterating, short-lived solar farms jeffreyi Jan 2023 #62
Not exactly-Most countries are going with wind womanofthehills Jan 2023 #66
I'm an advocate for wind too. Happy Hoosier Jan 2023 #73
My roof is covered in solar panels as are most of my neighbors womanofthehills Jan 2023 #78
Well its about the only way to honestly provide for our current energy usage as solar and cstanleytech Jan 2023 #11
Actually wind is producing more energy than nuclear reactors womanofthehills Jan 2023 #80
Only if you can find a suitable location though with relatively steady wind as well as cstanleytech Jan 2023 #83
great. coming to a street corner near us all. that's another reason they denied global warming - so certainot Jan 2023 #27
Its the ONLY realistic way to achieve it. oldsoftie Jan 2023 #35
I assumed the municipality tonekat Jan 2023 #55
This is the only way to end fossil fuels Mysterian Jan 2023 #6
Use West Texas dalton99a Jan 2023 #14
Actually, the government picked SE New Mexico womanofthehills Jan 2023 #79
"This is the only way to end fossil fuels" Currently true as solar and wind do have limitations. cstanleytech Jan 2023 #16
Lots of places in the contiguous 48 states for safe disposal... paleotn Jan 2023 #19
Store it on site FredGarvin Jan 2023 #46
They already do that. hunter Jan 2023 #52
Looks like it's New Mexico womanofthehills Jan 2023 #67
The US Navy has operated hundreds of small, portable nuclear plants for nearly 70 years pfitz59 Jan 2023 #17
Like. n/t iluvtennis Jan 2023 #25
100%. You nailed it. NT Happy Hoosier Jan 2023 #57
What is the solution to the waste problem? 3825-87867 Jan 2023 #20
FYI... reACTIONary Jan 2023 #30
Store the waste on site. FredGarvin Jan 2023 #42
This can save a lot of time and money. Tennessee Hillbilly Jan 2023 #21
This also means there is no way to appropriately review the design by anyone outside of the industry Ford_Prefect Jan 2023 #26
This seems to be the way it is done for other... reACTIONary Jan 2023 #34
They migh not produce carbom or methane emissions, but they're hardly clean Warpy Jan 2023 #23
What could go wrong? nt BWdem4life Jan 2023 #28
Small operations will have much smaller problems than large structures. multigraincracker Jan 2023 #29
5 Fast Facts about Spent Nuclear Fuel reACTIONary Jan 2023 #32
THIS should have its own OP for all the naysayers around here. oldsoftie Jan 2023 #36
Thanks. . . . h2ebits Jan 2023 #33
From Wikipedia Red Mountain Jan 2023 #37
Nuclear waste versus global warming DBoon Jan 2023 #40
Let's replace all energy generators with Bicycle generators pedaled by slaves. Wolf Frankula Jan 2023 #47
Let's replace all energy generators with bicycle generators pedaled by aka-chmeee Jan 2023 #60
Tha Naysayers sound like anti-vaxxers, IMHO. Happy Hoosier Jan 2023 #58
Here is a very informative video on dealing with nuclear waste Takket Jan 2023 #59
Can someone explain to me how these are inherently safer than large reactors? LudwigPastorius Jan 2023 #87
That's good news! The startup of a new, traditionally giant reactor Hortensis Jan 2023 #88
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»First small modular nucle...»Reply #32