Open cycle thorium–uranium-fuelled nuclear energy systems

Thorium—Energy for the Future

Fenner

et al. 2019

As part of the RCUK-India civil nuclear research collaboration, British and Indian researchers have assessed the merits and disadvantages of, and potential for, open-cycle thorium-uranium-fuelled (Th-U-fuelled) nuclear energy systems. The research centred on fuel cycle modelling and life-cycle assessment of three Th-U-fuelled nuclear energy systems and compared these to a reference uranium-fuelled nuclear energy system, all operating with open nuclear fuel cycles. The results indicate that thorium-based fuels offer little benefit over conventional uranium-fuelled approaches for open-cycle nuclear energy production. This paper provides an overview on the project and stresses over-arching conclusions.

Section: Scope Of the Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An overview of the systems chosen and the rationale for choosing these systems is presented in Ref. [1]. The work centred on assessing various performance indicators spanning material flows, waste composition, economics, emissions, and proliferation resistance.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technology Assessment of Near-Term Open-Cycle Thorium-Fuelled Nuclear Energy Systems

Nuttall

Thorium—Energy for the Future

Fenner

et al. 2019

“…Nuclear energy technologies that can potentially utilise open Th-U-based nuclear fuel cycles are described in Ashley et al (2013) and references therein. Three different reactor technologies that broadly cover LWRs, heavy-water-moderated, light-watercooled reactors, and high-temperature gas-cooled reactors have been selected for this study, these are respectively: AREVA's EPR, the Indian AHWR, and General Atomics' GT-MHR.…”

Section: Selection Of Nuclear Energy Systems Fuelled With Thorium Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fuel cycle modelling of open cycle thorium-fuelled nuclear energy systems

Annals of Nuclear Energy

Lindley

Parks

et al. 2014

a b s t r a c tIn this study, we have sought to determine the advantages, disadvantages, and viability of open cycle thorium-uranium-fuelled (Th-U-fuelled) nuclear energy systems. This has been done by assessing three such systems, each of which requires uranium enriched to $20% 235 U, in comparison to a reference uranium-fuelled (U-fuelled) system over various performance indicators, spanning material flows, waste composition, economics, and proliferation resistance. The values of these indicators were determined using the UK National Nuclear Laboratory's fuel cycle modelling code ORION. This code required the results of lattice-physics calculations to model the neutronics of each nuclear energy system, and these were obtained using various nuclear reactor physics codes and burn-up routines. In summary, all three Th-U-fuelled nuclear energy systems required more separative work capacity than the equivalent benchmark U-fuelled system, with larger levelised fuel cycle costs and larger levelised cost of electricity. Although a reduction of $6% in the required uranium ore per kWh was seen for one of the Th-U-fuelled systems compared to the reference U-fuelled system, the other two Th-U-fuelled systems required more uranium ore per kWh than the reference. Negligible advantages and disadvantages were observed for the amount and the properties of the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) generated by the systems considered. Two of the Th-U-fuelled systems showed some benefit in terms of proliferation resistance of the SNF generated.Overall, it appears that there is little merit in incorporating thorium into nuclear energy systems operating with open nuclear fuel cycles.

“…A recent review paper [10] has highlighted a number of technology families that could prospectively use open Th-U-based fuel cycles, including: (1) existing light water reactors (LWRs), (2) novel heavy-water-moderated, light-water-cooled reactors, and (3) novel high-temperature gas-cooled reactors. Fuel cycle modelling of three nuclear energy technologies operating with open Th-U-based fuel cycles has recently been performed [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Life-cycle impacts from novel thorium–uranium-fuelled nuclear energy systems

Energy Conversion and Management

Fenner

Nuttall

et al. 2015

a b s t r a c tElectricity generated from nuclear power plants is generally associated with low emissions per kWh generated, an aspect that feeds into the wider debate surrounding nuclear power. This paper seeks to investigate how life-cycle emissions would be affected by including thorium in the nuclear fuel cycle, and in particular its inclusion in technologies that could prospectively operate open Th-U-based nuclear fuel cycles. Three potential Th-U-based systems operating with open nuclear fuel cycles are considered: AREVA's European Pressurised Reactor; India's Advanced Heavy Water Reactor; and General Atomics' Gas-Turbine Modular Helium Reactor. These technologies are compared to a reference U-fuelled European Pressurised Reactor. A life-cycle analysis is performed that considers the construction, operation, and decommissioning of each of the reactor technologies and all of the other associated facilities in the open nuclear fuel cycle. This includes the development of life-cycle analysis models to describe the extraction of thorium from monazitic beach sands and for the production of heavy water. The results of the life-cycle impact analysis highlight that the reference U-fuelled system has the lowest overall emissions per kWh generated, predominantly due to having the second-lowest uranium ore requirement per kWh generated. The results highlight that the requirement for mined or recovered uranium (and thorium) ore is the greatest overall contributor to emissions, with the possible exception of nuclear energy systems that require heavy water. In terms of like-for-like comparison of mining and recovery techniques, thorium from monazitic beach sands has lower overall emissions than uranium that is either conventionally mined or recovered from in-situ leaching. Although monazitic beach sands (and equivalent placer deposits) only form 30% of the overall known thorium ore deposits, it is expected that such deposits would generally be utilised first if thorium becomes a viable nuclear fuel. Overall, for these four nuclear energy technologies, the range of CO 2 (eq) emissions per kWh generated (6.60-13.2 gCO 2 (eq)/kWh) appears to be low in comparison to the majority of electricity-generating technologies.