Assessment of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems. Comparison between closed and open fuel cycles

Poinssot, Christophe; Bourg, Stéphane; Ouvrier, N.; Combernoux, Nicolas; Rostaing, Christine; Vargas-Gonzalez, Marcial; Bruno, Jordi

doi:10.1016/j.energy.2014.02.069

Cited by 152 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This approach is hence often referred to as a "cradle to grave" approach; it averages the different impacts on the whole life of the facilities without any specific consideration at that time for the respective contribution of the different lifecycle stages. We recently published a comprehensive assessment of the French nuclear energy environmental footprint based on a specific LCA tool (Nuclear Energy Life Cycle Assessment Simulation, NELCAS) [3]. In that paper, the results were compared with published data on nuclear energy as well as other energy sources (coal, oil/gas and renewables) showing the consistency and relevance of the methodology developed in the NELCAS tool [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We recently published a comprehensive assessment of the French nuclear energy environmental footprint based on a specific LCA tool (Nuclear Energy Life Cycle Assessment Simulation, NELCAS) [3]. In that paper, the results were compared with published data on nuclear energy as well as other energy sources (coal, oil/gas and renewables) showing the consistency and relevance of the methodology developed in the NELCAS tool [3]. Since then, very few papers compared different nuclear fuel cycles; one can mention the study of Kadiyala et al [4] which focused on the GHG emissions only.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of the Anticipated Environmental Footprint of Future Nuclear Energy Systems. Evidence of the Beneficial Effect of Extensive Recycling

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In this early 21st century, our societies have to face a tremendous and increasing energy need while mitigating the global climate change and preserving the environment. Addressing this challenge requires an energy transition from the current fossil energy-based system to a carbon-free energy production system, based on a relevant energy mix combining renewables and nuclear energy. However, such an energy transition will only occur if it is accepted by the population. Powerful and reliable tools, such as life cycle assessments (LCA), aiming at assessing the respective merits of the different energy mix for most of the environmental impact indicators are therefore mandatory for supporting a risk-informed decision-process at the societal level. Before studying the deployment of a given energy mix, a prerequisite is to perform LCAs on each of the components of the mix. This paper addresses two potential nuclear energy components: a nuclear fuel cycle based on the Generation III European Pressurized Reactors (EPR) and a nuclear fuel cycle based on the Generation IV Sodium Fast Reactors (SFR). The basis of this study relies on the previous work done on the current French nuclear fuel cycle using the bespoke NELCAS tool specifically developed for studying nuclear fuel cycle environmental impacts. Our study highlights that the EPR already brings a limited improvement to the current fuel cycle thanks to a higher efficiency of the energy transformation and a higher burn-up of the nuclear fuel (−20% on most of the chosen indicators) whereas the introduction of the GEN IV fast reactors will bring a significant breakthrough by suppressing the current front-end of the fuel cycle thanks to the use of depleted uranium instead of natural enriched uranium (this leads to a decrease of the impact from 17% on water consumption and withdrawal and up to 96% on SO x emissions). The specific case of the radioactive waste is also studied, showing that only the partitioning and transmutation of the americium in the blanket fuel of the SFR can reduce the footprint of the geological disposal (saving up to a factor of 7 on the total repository volume). Having now at disposition five models (open fuel cycle, current French twice through fuel cycle, EPR twice through fuel cycle, multi-recycling SFR fuel cycle and at a longer term, multi-recycling SFR fuel cycle including americium transmutation), it is possible to model the environmental impact of any fuel cycle combining these technologies. In the next step, these models will be combined with those of other carbon-free energies (wind, solar, biomass . . . ) in order to estimate the environmental impact of future energy mixes and also to analyze the impact on the way these scenarios are deployed (transition pathways).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the Anticipated Environmental Footprint of Future Nuclear Energy Systems. Evidence of the Beneficial Effect of Extensive Recycling

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This way of treatment has been demonstrated to be environmentally efficient, by allowing a maximum use of the energetical potential of uranium [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dissolution of uranium dioxide in nitric acid media: what do we know?

Marc

Magnaldo

Vaudano

et al. 2017

EPJ Nuclear Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This article draws a state of knowledge of the dissolution of uranium dioxide in nitric acid media. The chemistry of the reaction is first investigated, and two reactions appear as most suitable to describe the mechanism, leading to the formation of monoxide and dioxide nitrogen as reaction by-products, while the oxidation mechanism is shown to happen before solubilization. The solid aspect of the reaction is also investigated: manufacturing conditions have an impact on dissolution kinetics, and the non-uniform attack at the surface of the solid results in the appearing of pits and cracks. Last, the existence of an autocatalytic mechanism is questionned. The second part of this article presents a compilation of the impacts of several physico-chemical parameters on the dissolution rates. Even though these measurements have been undertaken under a broad variety of conditions, and that the rate determining step of the reaction is usually not specified, general trends are drawn from these results. Finally, it appears that several key points of knowledge still have to be clarified concerning the dissolution of uranium dioxide in nitric acid media, and that the macroscopic scale which has been used in most studies is probably not suitable.

show abstract

“…of nuclear power that may further increase with decreasing uranium ore grades [40,41]. In the long term this environmental impact of nuclear energy may be reduced if fast breeder reactors are deployed [42]. In the short term this environmental impact of nuclear power can partly be reduced if uranium is extracted as a byproduct from another primary ore. Again, phosphate rock is used as an example to illustrate the environmental impact of uranium byproduct extraction vs. traditional uranium mining and milling.…”

Section: Motivation Behind Energy Neutral Mineral Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the Sustainability and Progress of Energy Neutral Mineral Processing

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of primary ores such as phosphate rock, gold-, copper-and rare earth ores contain considerable amounts of accompanying uranium and other critical materials. Energy neutral mineral processing is the extraction of unconventional uranium during primary ore processing to use it, after enrichment and fuel production, to generate greenhouse gas lean energy in a nuclear reactor. Energy neutrality is reached if the energy produced from the extracted uranium is equal to or larger than the energy required for primary ore processing, uranium extraction, -conversion, -enrichment and -fuel production. This work discusses the sustainability of energy neutral mineral processing and provides an overview of the current progress of a multinational research project on that topic conducted under the umbrella of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

show abstract

Assessment of the environmental footprint of nuclear energy systems. Comparison between closed and open fuel cycles

Cited by 152 publications

References 21 publications

Assessment of the Anticipated Environmental Footprint of Future Nuclear Energy Systems. Evidence of the Beneficial Effect of Extensive Recycling

Assessment of the Anticipated Environmental Footprint of Future Nuclear Energy Systems. Evidence of the Beneficial Effect of Extensive Recycling

Dissolution of uranium dioxide in nitric acid media: what do we know?

On the Sustainability and Progress of Energy Neutral Mineral Processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About