Nuclear energy in Europe: Uranium flow modeling and fuel cycle scenario trade-offs from a sustainability perspective

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 45, Issue 6, 2011, Pages 2442-2449

  Tendall, Danielle M ^a,b   Binder, Claudia R ^c,d  

^a EPFL   (Switzerland)

^b ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GRAZ   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS; FAST NEUTRON REACTORS; FLOW MODELING; FUEL CYCLE; LONG TERM; MATERIAL EFFICIENCY; MATERIAL FLOW ANALYSIS; NONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS; NUCLEAR ENERGY AGENCY; NUCLEAR ENERGY IN EUROPE; NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLES; PAPER MODELS; PROLIFERATION RISKS; RADIATION EMISSIONS; RESOURCE DEPLETION; SOCIAL RISKS; SPENT FUEL REPROCESSING; STAKEHOLDER INTEREST; SUSTAINABLE SOLUTION; SWITZERLAND; UKRAINE; WASTE PRODUCTION;

ASSAYS; DATA FLOW ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; FAST REACTORS; FUELS; INTERNATIONAL TRADE; NUCLEAR ENERGY; RADIOACTIVE WASTES; RISK PERCEPTION; URANIUM;

NUCLEAR FUEL REPROCESSING;

NUCLEAR FUEL; URANIUM;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; FLOW FIELD; FLOW MODELING; NUCLEAR POWER; OPTIMIZATION; RADIOACTIVE WASTE; STAKEHOLDER; SUSTAINABILITY; TRADE-OFF; URANIUM;

ARTICLE; COST; ENERGY RESOURCE; ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY; EUROPE; FLOW; NUCLEAR ENERGY; POLLUTION; RADIATION HAZARD;

CONSERVATION OF ENERGY RESOURCES; EFFICIENCY, ORGANIZATIONAL; EUROPE; MODELS, ECONOMIC; NUCLEAR ENERGY; RISK ASSESSMENT; URANIUM;

SWITZERLAND; UKRAINE;

EID: 79953851719     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es103270a     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Uranium 2007: Resources, Production and Demand; Nuclear Energy Association (NEA): Issy-les-Moulineaux, France, 2008; http://www. nea.fr/pub/ret.cgi?div=NDD#6345.
2. World Nuclear Association (WNA). http://www.world-nuclear. org/info/info.html (accessed September 17, 2009).
3. Country Nuclear Fuel Cycle Profiles; Technical reports series No. 425, 2nd ed.; International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): Vienna, Austria, 2005; http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/PDF/ TRS425-web.pdf.
4. Euratom Supply Agency Annual Report 2007; European Energy Commission: Luxembourg, 2008; http://ec.europa.eu/energy/publications/ index-en.htm.
5. Reichweite des Uran-Vorräte der Welt; Greenpeace: Berlin, Germany, 2006; http://www.greenpeace.de/fileadmin/gpd/user-upload/ themen/atomkraft/ uranreport2006-lf.pdf
6. Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Nuclear Issues Paper 3; Heinrich Boll Stiftung: Saxonwold, South Africa, 2006; http://www.boell.de/downloads/ ecology/NIP3DiehletalEndf.pdf.
7. Nuclear Power, The Energy Balance; Storm Van Leeuwen, J. W.; Chaam: The Netherlands, 2008; http://www.stormsmith.nl/.
8. Krütli, P.; Stauffacher, M.; Flüeler, T.; Scholz, R. W. Functionaldynamic public participation in technological decision making: Site selection processes of nuclear waste repositories. J. Risk Res. 2010, DOI: 10.1080/13669871003703252
9. Europeans and Nuclear Safety, Special Eurobarometer 32; European Commission, Brussels, 2010.
10. Material Flow-Based Indicators in Environmental Reporting; Environmental Issues Series, 14; European Environmental Agency (EEA): Wuppertal, Germany, 1998; http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/ environmental-issue-report-1998-14/ at-download/file
11. Wade, D.; Van Den Durpel, L.; Yacout, A.; Finck, P.; Khalil, H. A multi-regional analysis of nuclear energy systems: synergies between regions, reactors and fuel cycles. Proc. GLOBAL 2005, 567.
12. World Information Service on Energy (WISE) Uranium Project Website; http://www.wise-uranium.org/.
13. Energy, electricity and nuclear power estimates for the period up to 2030; Reference Data Series No. 1; International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA): Vienna, Austria, 2009; http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/publications/ PDF/RDS1-27-web.pdf.
14. Rudolf, M. Stoffflussanalyse des Ressource Uran: Analyse der Herstellung und der globalen Flüsse; Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zürich, Switzerland, 2009; Unpublished student project.
15. Boucher, L.; Grouiller, J.-P. "COSI": The complete renewal of the simulation software for the fuel cycle analysis. Proceedings of ICONE 14: Miami, FL, 2006.
16. Jacobson, J. J.; Matthern, G. E.; Piet, S. J.; Shropshire, D. E. VISION: Verifiable Fuel Cycle Simulation Model. Advances in Nuclear Fuel Management IV, Paper Pre-Print; Idaho National Laboratory: Idaho Falls, ID, 2009; http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/952015-NXIYNu/ 952015.pdf.
17. Neue Erneubare Energien Und Neue Nuklearanlagen: Potenziale und Kosten; Paul Scherrer Institute Bericht 04-05; Paul Scherrer Institute: Villigen, Switzerland, 2005; http://gabe.web.psi.ch/pdfs/ PSI-Report/PSI-Bericht-05-04sc. pdf.
18. Nuclearinfo, University of Melbourne. Life cycle of nuclear power.http://nuclearinfo.net/Nuclearpower/WebHomeEnergyLifecycle-OfNuclear- Power (accessed October 5, 2009).
19. Life-Cycle Energy Balance and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Nuclear Energy in Australia; Integrated Sustainability Analysis, University of Sydney: Sydney, Australia, 2006; http://www.isa.org.usyd.edu.au/ publications/documents/ISA- Nuclear-Report.pdf.
20. ExternE-Pol: Externalities of Energy: Extension of Accounting Framework and Policy Applications, Final technical report, Version 2; ExternE Research Programme; European Commission: 2005; http:// www.externe.info/expoltec.pdf.
21. Charlton, W. S.; Leboeuf, R. F.; Gariazzo, C.; Grant Fort, D.; Beard, C.; et al. Proliferation resistance assessment methodology for nuclear fuel cycles. Nucl. Technol. 2007, 157, 143-156.
22. Guidance for the Application of an Assessment Methodology for Innovative Nuclear Energy Systems, INPRO Manual; IAEA: Vienna, 2008; Vol. 1.
23. Assessment of Nuclear Energy Systems Based on a Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle with Fast Reactors, A report of the International Project on Innovative Nuclear Reactors and Fuel Cycles (INPRO); IAEA: Vienna, 2010.
24. Cometto, M.; Wydler, P.; Chawla, R. A. Comparative physics study of alternative long-term strategies for closure of the nuclear fuel cycle. Ann. Nucl. Energy 2004, 31, 413-429.
25. Stacey,W.M.; vanRooijen,W.ATRU-Zrmetal fuel, sodiumcooled, fast subcritical advanced burner reactor. Nucl. Technol. 2008, 162, 53-79. (Pubitemid 351577619)
26. Fuel Cycle Scenario Definition, Evaluation, And Trade-Offs, INL/ EXT-06-11683 Report for US Department of Energy; Idaho National Laboratory: Idaho Falls, ID, 2006; http://www.inl.gov/technicalpublications/ Documents/3382970.pdf.
27. Piet, S. J.; Dixon, B. W.; Jacobson, J. J.; Matthern, G. E.; Shropshire, D. E. Lessons learned from dynamic simulations of advanced fuel cycles. Nucl. Technol. 2011, 173, (March).
28. Salvatores, M.; Meyer, M.; Romanello, V.; Boucher, L.; Schwenk-Ferrero, A. Nuclear fuel cycle synergies and regional scenarios for Europe. Nucl. Sci. 2009, NEA No. 6857.
29. Brunner, P. H.; Rechberger, H. Practical Handbook of Material Flow Analysis; Lewis Publishers: Boca Raton, FL, 2004.
30. Software for Substance Flow Analysis Version, 2.0.1703; Institute for Water Quality, Resources and Waste Management, Vienna University of Technology, Inka Software: Vienna.
31. A Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems, GIF-002-00; Generation IV International Forum: 2002; http://www.gen-4.org/PDFs/ GenIVRoadmap.pdf.
32. Walker, W. Entrapment in large technology systems: Institutional commitment and power relations. Res. Policy 2000, 29, 833-846.
33. Loi sur l'énergie nucléaire (LENu). Public Law of Switzerland 732.1, 2003. http://www.admin.ch/ch/f/rs/7/732.1.fr.pdf (accessed August 25, 2010).
34. The Economics of Reprocessing Vs. Direct Disposal of Spent Nuclear Fuel, Project on Managing the Atom Final Report, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 2003; http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/ files/repro-report.pdf.
35. The Economics of theNuclear Fuel Cycle; Nuclear Energy Agency/ OECD: Paris1994; http://www.nea.fr/ndd/reports/efc/EFC-complete. pdf.
36. Swiss Federal Office of Energy. http://www.bfe.admin.ch/ radioaktiveabfaelle/ 01278/01345/index.html?lang=en (accessed August 25, 2010).
37. World Nuclear News. http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/ wr-yucca-mountain-coste-stimate-rises-to-96-billion-dollars-0608085. html (accessed August 25, 2010).
38. Acton, J. M. The myth of proliferation-resistant technology. Bull. At. Sci. 2009, 65, 49-59.
39. Graedel, T. E.; Bertram, M.; Fuse, K.; Gordon, R. B.; Lifset, R.; Rechberger, H.; Spatari, S. The contemporary European copper cycle: the characterization of technological copper cycles. Ecol. Econ. 2002, 42, 9-26. (Pubitemid 34850241)
40. Ewing, R. C.; von Hippel, F. N. Nuclear waste management in the United States - Starting over. Science 2009, 325, 151-152.
41. Radioactive Waste, Special Eurobarometer 227: European Commission: Brussels, 2005.
42. Krütli, P.; Flüeler, T.; Stauffacher, M.; Wiek, A.; Scholz, R. W. Technical safety vs. public involvement? A case study on the unrealized project for the disposal of nuclear waste at Wellenberg (Switzerland). J. Integr. Environ. Sci. 2010, 7, 229-24.
43. Binder, C. R.; Quirici, R.; Domitcheva, S.; Stäubli, B. Smart labels for waste and resource management: An integrated assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 2008, 12, 207-228. (Pubitemid 351881208)
44. Binder, C. R. From material flow analysis to material flow management Part II: The role of Structural Agent Analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2007, 15, 1605-1617. (Pubitemid 47030906)
45. Binder, C. R.; Hofer, C.; Wiek, A.; Scholz, R. W. Transition towards improved regional wood flow by integrating material flux analysis with agent analysis: The case of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, Switzerland. Ecol. Econ. 2004, 49, 1-17. (Pubitemid 38617272)
46. Susskind, L., McKearnnan, S., Thomas-Larmer, J., Eds. The Consensus Building Handbook;A Comprehensive Guide to Reaching Agreement; Sage: Thousand Oaks, 1999.