NEA Mandates and Structures

Task Force on the Demonstration of Fuel Cycle Closure including Partitioning and Transmutation (P&T) for Industrial Readiness by 2050 (TF-FCPT)

Mandate (Document reference):

• Summary record of the 31st meeting of the Nuclear Science Committee held in 2020 [NEA/SEN/NSC(2020)20]
• Mandate of the Task Force on Demonstration of Fuel Cycle Closure Including Partitioning and Transmutation (P&T) for Industrial Readiness By 2050 (TF-FCPT) [NEA/SEN/NSC(2021)1] 

Mandate (Document extract):

Extract from document [NEA/SEN/NSC(2021)1]

Background

Nuclear power produces eleven percent of world’s electricity today. Nuclear power plants are recognised to produce virtually no greenhouse gases nor air pollutants during their operation – and the emissions over their entire life cycle are very low. Nuclear energy can play a significant role in achieving a low-carbon energy mix in many regions of the world as of today and for decades to come, with a huge potential to contribute in particular to the decarbonisation of the power sector. However, many uncertainties weigh on the future role of nuclear energy, as concern for escalating costs arises and historical challenges such as spent fuel and radioactive waste management persist. In Europe, 2 500t of spent fuel are discharged annually from reactors containing uranium (U), plutonium (Pu), minor actinides (MAs) – namely neptunium (Np), americium (Am) and curium (Cm) –  and fission products (FPs). The long-term management of waste at the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle remains one of the most critical issues affecting the acceptance of nuclear power and consequently challenges the global expansion of nuclear power. Spent fuel can be reprocessed or not, depending on national fuel cycle options and waste management policies. Only 1 200t over the 2 500t of spent fuel produced annually in Europe are processed to recover and recycle plutonium (12t) and potentially uranium (U) (1 140t), the remaining 48t (MAs and FPs) being vitrified (nuclear glass). Currently the reference option is to dispose of waste (spent fuel and/or nuclear glass) in engineered disposal facilities located in suitable geological formations.

Advanced Fuel Cycles can be defined as any fuel cycle operating with Gen IV reactors and other advanced concepts – Sodium Cooled Reactors (SFR), Liquid Metal Fast Reactors (LFR), Gas Cooled Fast Reactors (GFR), Very High Temperature Reactors (VHTR), Molten Salt Reactors (MSR), Accelerator Driven Systems (ADS) – and new emerging concepts, with innovative fuel management options (hydro-/pyro-reprocessing, Pu burning/multi-recycling, MA transmutation, etc.) and based on the following four pillars:

• Sustainability: optimisation of resource utilisation (non-enriched U and reused U) and reduction of waste with direct impact on fuel composition, fuel treatment and recycling (Pu, MAs, FPs, etc.).
• Safety and reliability: increased safety requirements (vs Generation II and III) in particular fuel element designs and performances are safety oriented.
• Economic competitiveness (better use of resources, reduction of qualification timeframe, waste reduction, flexibility).
• Proliferation resistance and physical protection all along the fuel cycle steps.

Advanced fuel cycles are unique in the sense that the whole system is intrinsically interconnected (fuel cycle, reactors and fuels, and fuel treatment).

Advanced nuclear fuel cycles can enable better use of natural resources while minimising proliferation concerns as well as the volume and longevity of nuclear waste. P&T has been pointed out in numerous studies as the strategy that can relax constraints on geological disposal, e.g. by reducing both the waste radiotoxicity and the footprint of the underground facility. Therefore, a special effort has been made to investigate the potential role of P&T and the related options for waste management all along the fuel cycle. Transmutation based on critical or sub-critical fast spectrum transmuters should be assessed in terms of its technical and economic feasibility and its capacity at pre-industrial scale, which could ease deep geological disposal implementation.

Although R&D on advanced fuel cycle technologies has been carried out for a few decades, there is a consensus within the international community that a complete programme is needed in order to demonstrate the feasibility of a closed fuel cycle, safely and with the aim of industrial maturity. Indeed, most technologies for advanced transuranic (TRU) management strategies –  e.g. Pu multi-recycling and MA transmutation –  need to achieve a higher level of technological and economic development before they can be deployed at industrial scale. Further efforts are needed in the following areas:

• Separation technologies;
• Fuel fabrication;
• Transmutation systems;
• Fuel reprocessing;
• Fuel technological aspects (particularly for MA-loaded fuels): transportation, cooling, and handling.

Scope

The Task Force will cover the different advanced fuel cycles and P&T options looking at all existing and emerging technologies.

Objective

Under the guidance of the Nuclear Science Committee (NSC), the Task Force on Demonstration of Fuel Cycle Closure including Partitioning and Transmutation (P&T) for Industrial Readiness by 2050 (TF-FCPT) will be established to produce a “High-level Report” aiming at being a comprehensive reference paper covering technology, economics and societal aspects written by a community of international experts. The “High-level Report” will:

• give a short review of the work performed over the last 30 years in the field of advanced fuel cycles including P&T to highlight the knowledge accumulated, the main findings and breakthroughs, based on existing literature;
• consider concepts of FRs, ADSs and MSRs and commonalities between the different fuel cycle strategies;
• establish the current status of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) for each building block (also based on existing studies and reassess if needed), looking at their evolution over the last 30 years;
• identify R&D needs to increase TRL, depending on the considered process of technology;
• identify R&D gaps and clearly state what needs to be done in the next two decades by steps of five years to reach pre-industrialisation;
• lead to the drawing of a long-term vision for the industrial readiness of advanced nuclear fuel cycles including P&T by 2050 and give recommendations on the priority actions to be implemented by 2030;
• be complemented by an economic study.

In addition to the preparation of the paper, the review of existing documents will lead to the creation of a library of published documents addressing the benefits of P&T, the technical challenges and developments in the field.

Based on the recommendations, the Task Force can provide guidance on establishing a joint experimental programme.

Working method

The TF-FCPT will report to the Nuclear Science Committee. Regularly remote meetings will be organised to ensure progress of work.

Interactions

The Task Force will liaise closely with the NSC Working Party on Scientific Issues of Advanced Fuel Cycles (WPFC), the Committee for Technical and Economic Studies on Nuclear Energy Development and the Fuel Cycle (NDC) and the Generation-IV international Forum (GIF)

Deliverables

The deliverables of the Task Force are:

• The “High-level Report” as described above;
• An online “catalogue” of published reports and articles on advanced fuel cycles and P&T options addressing the benefits, the technical challenges and developments in the field.

¹ Partly based on Hamid Aït Abderrahim et al., “Partitioning and transmutation contribution of MYRRHA to an EU strategy for HLW management and main achievements of MYRRHA related FP7 and H2020 projects: MYRTE, MARISA, MAXSIMA, SEARCH, MAX, FREYA, ARCAS”, EPJ Nuclear Sci. Technol. 6, 33 (2020).