Beginning on page 46 is a 12-page analysis and commentary of AREVA’s used nuclear fuel recycling process in France, including a graphic (pg. 52) summarizing the process fuel output and waste generated. This section highlights the fact that about 96% of the energy in used nuclear fuel can be recycled, and this recycling reduces by around 75% the physical amount of leftover fuel needing long-term storage. In France, both recycled uranium and plutonium are used as fuel in reactors and reliably provide the French with the lowest cost electricity in Europe without carbon emissions.

With the ongoing U.S. used nuclear fuel debate in mind, we encourage you to review the report [PDF link] and learn more about the benefits gained by implementing the complete nuclear fuel process here in the United States.

And we applaud the argument that it isn’t “nuclear vs. renewables” but that nuclear energy provides a crucial compliment to renewable energy sources as an always on backstop or “baseload” source of energy. As she put it well:

Renewable power suffers from problems of intermittency; it is very difficult to predict how much the wind will blow or how strong the sun will shine. The American electricity grid — built to connect massive, centralized, “always on” power plants to consumers — is unable to handle the unpredictability that a substantial increase in renewable power would bring. Natural gas, too, faces economic hurdles — it has a history of rapid and extreme price fluctuations that have made utilities reluctant to rely on it.

Until these problems are solved, our electricity system requires a stable, cheap source of energy to provide “always on” baseload power. The only candidates for such power in today’s energy mix are nuclear or coal power plants. We are learning that mining and burning coal provides too much danger to human health to base our electricity system on it: a new study in the American Economic Review has found that the air pollution emitted by coal-fired electricity generation is greater than the value it adds to economy. Nuclear power, on the other hand, can provide emissions-free baseload power at a low cost.

Today, a total of 104 nuclear reactors are operational around the country. They provide about 20 percent of the country’s total electricity. No other electricity source can combine the benefits of knowing that it will always be on with its affordability and its lack of emissions….This cheap, always available, zero-carbon power is an important backstop to the growth of new technologies. It can help smooth the price fluctuations that natural gas is vulnerable to and it provides the “always on” capacity that renewable power cannot.

Read the whole article here.

In a panel focused on advanced technology, the discussion focused on whether recycling nuclear fuel could provide a feasible option for the United States. David Jones, Senior V.P. at AREVA Inc. and Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Infrastructure Council, pointed out that recycling nuclear fuel is a proven, economical and safe option for the United States to consider as a possibility for managing some of the nation’s used fuel.

“A sustainable fuel cycle is a critical building block for new nuclear energy in the United States, requiring an all-of-the-above approach to back-end implementation, not an either/or strategy. We favor more options not less,” Jones said. “Both the Council and AREVA strongly support a Federally-chartered corporation with broad authority for the management of used-fuel.”

He added that such a federal corporation, or FedCorp, would be well placed to develop interim storage facilities, but these are only part of the solution. “At AREVA, we support an evolutionary ‘pilot project’ approach that deploys current state-of-the-art recycling technology with the ability to implement advanced technologies as they are developed,” Jones said.

In a statement to the panel, Bob Gee, President of Gee Strategies Group, supported the notion that the U.S. should not wait for an ideal solution before moving ahead with those available now. He noted:

The Commission should not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. I join in the recommendation being made by others that the Commission endorse a phased approach to closing the fuel cycle, which contemplates a pilot recycling facility that utilizes best available technology. With this approach, RD & D can continue to build incrementally on today’s technology, yield improved plant operating performance, and provide a platform for further progress on an advanced fuel cycle designed to meet U.S. specifications.

Other speakers at the meeting agreed that recycling should at least be available as an option for managing used fuel in the United States.

“The National Association of Neighborhoods (NAN) agrees with the BRC recommendation that we need to move forward with consolidated interim storage capacity. However, we strongly disagree with BRC that there is a need to wait for ‘new technologies to materialize’ before making a decision about reprocessing spent nuclear fuel,” said Ricardo Byrd, Executive Director of NAN.

Mervin Tano, President of the International Institute for Indigenous Resource Management, also noted his organization’s support for recycling of used nuclear fuel. “However, how the Institute comes to that view may be quite different from the logic of other proponents of reprocessing,” Tano said.

“We view the once-through paradigm as immoral and intergenerationally unjust. We think the once-through paradigm is unjust to past generations,” because it places most of the burden on communities that host uranium mines and “waste facilities.” He added that recycling is the more sustainable solution because it reduces by 25% the amount of mining required.

Other proponents focused on the positive effect that a recycling facility would have on the economy of its host community.

“A recycling facility would represent a significant investment (billions of dollars) in our future energy infrastructure, providing over 15,000 construction jobs, over 5,000 permanent jobs and thousands more indirect jobs in the surrounding communities,” said Brent Wilkes, Executive Director of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), in a written statement submitted to the Blue Ribbon Commission.

If you are there and have any of your own impressions of things, do add comments here or you can also send us those via Twitter or on Facebook.

“Virginia voters approve 71 – 20 percent of using nuclear power to produce electricity and support 60 – 32 percent the construction of new nuclear plants in the commonwealth.”

From Quinnipac University polling of Virginia voters, October 12th, 2011

The pro-nuclear petition needs 5,000 signatures by 10/23 to be accepted by the Obama Administration for consideration.

The petition states,

We petition the Obama Administration to:

Educate the Public Regarding Nuclear Power.

This petition is a response to the “End taxpayer subsidies for new nuclear reactors” petition.

Due to the manufactured controversy that is the nuclear reactor meltdown in Fukushima, Japan, perpetuated by a scientifically illiterate news media, the public is unnecessarily hostile to nuclear power as an energy source.

To date nobody has died from the accident and Fukushima, and nuclear power has the lowest per Terra-watt hour death toll of any energy source known to man:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/03/deaths-per-twh-by-energy-source.html

The Obama administration should take better strides to educate the public regarding this important energy source.

Go to the “We the People” website and take action.

Multiple strengthening grids integral to EPR reactor construction.

This commitment created an astounding statistic: From the day President Eisenhower commissioned the first reactor to the present day, the ongoing commercial operations of U.S. nuclear reactors have caused zero (0) deaths in the workforce and general public. And modern reactors are designed to maintain that safety commitment with advanced technology and techniques.

For example, AREVA’s 1,600+ megawatt U.S. EPR™ reactor design completing review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) represents additional advancements in secure, robust construction and multi-layer preventive and reactive safety systems. Here are the details divided out by the numbers …

As a starting point, nuclear reactor safety requires that three basic functions be met at all times:

1. Full control of the nuclear chain reaction
2. Permanent cooling of the fuel
3. Containment of radioactive elements

AREVA’s reactor designs achieve these safety requirements by adhering to two principles:

1. Seal the nuclear processes within multiple protective barriers, and
2. “Defense in Depth” protective measures.

To fulfill the first principle, AREVA’s U.S. EPR™ reactor design inserts a series of strong, physical barriers between the radioactive materials and the environment:

1. The nuclear fuel resides within metal cladding immersed in water within the core.
2. A durable, pressurized metal envelope surrounds the reactor vessel housing the core and the reactor coolant systems.
3. A thick-walled, double-shell concrete containment building with a robust foundation designed to withstand significant earthquakes backs up the metal envelope.

The second principle, “Defense in Depth,” sustains the effectiveness of the physical barriers. AREVA’s U.S. EPR™ reactor fulfills this principle by proactively layering in comprehensive defensive features:

1. Facility integrity – Combination of safety-focused design, high-quality construction, and reliable operational processes, all honed from experience gained as the global market leader in nuclear facility development.
2. Constant system surveillance – Digital instrumentation and control (I&C) systems detect any anomalies that could lead to a departure from normal operating conditions
3. Responsive systems and processes – Designed to mitigate consequences in the event a situation occurs, these responses include multiple redundant active and passive safety systems that automatically bring the reactor to a stable shutdown state.

The U.S. nuclear industry’s intentional approach implementing modern designs like AREVA’s U.S. EPR™ reactor will help ensure nuclear energy continues safely generating substantial, reliable, low-carbon power.

In addition, building and operating these projects inject billions of dollars into the regional economies. One nuclear energy facility contributes, on average, $430 million in sales of goods and services in the local community, almost $20 million in state and local tax revenue, and nearly $75 million annually in federal taxes annually.

AREVA is investing in other aspect of nuclear supply chain. The company plans to begin building its Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility next year, a project that would create up to 1,000 jobs during peak construction and some 350-400 jobs during operation. This $3 billion state-of-the-art facility would help invigorate the eastern Idaho economy.

Additionally, AREVA is partnering with the Shaw Group to build the MOX (Mixed-Oxide) Fuel Fabrication Facility in South Carolina for the DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration in support of its nonproliferation effort. Construction of the facility is well advanced and today some 2,000 workers are employed at the site.

Other companies in the nuclear energy sector are also doing their part with each new projects hundreds or even thousands of jobs are created. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry has already created some 15,000 jobs over the past few years. Workers in the nuclear sector earn more a higher than average wage, and operation jobs are long-term and quite stable.

While U.S. policymakers struggle with approaches that will help bring down stubbornly high unemployment, they should consider ways to encourage investment in new nuclear projects that can create jobs by the thousands and spur investment in local communities. When complete, nuclear power plants produce clean, reliable and affordable electricity, which underpins a healthy economy.

The scope of these inspections included ongoing construction activities, engineering processes and oversight of subcontractor activities.

“We are committed to constructing the MOX facility safely and in accordance with regulations of the NRC,” said Kelly Trice, president and chief operating officer of Shaw AREVA MOX Services, LLC, “and the NRC’s report underscores this commitment.”

This dedication to safety and excellence is a key component of the work being done at the MOX Project. Another important accomplishment in safety took place in June when the MOX project surpassed 4 million consecutive work hours without a lost-time accident.

The MOX facility is currently under construction at the Savannah River Site in Aiken, S.C. More than 1,800 people are engaged in the design, construction and administration of the MOX project, which is being constructed for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and is scheduled to begin operation in 2016.

The MOX facility will convert surplus weapons-grade plutonium into reactor fuel for use in commercial nuclear power plants, supporting the Department’s non-proliferation program to eliminate surplus weapons-grade plutonium in the U.S.

Shaw AREVA MOX Services, LLC, comprised of Shaw Environmental & Infrastructure Group and AREVA, works for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration to design, build and operate a facility. For more information, visit www.moxproject.com.

And in case you are curious, the NRC inspection report can be found at: under the document number ML112082293.

The most recent example of these advancements is the first-ever installation in a U.S. nuclear plant of AREVA’s comprehensive Digital Instrumentation & Control (I&C) Reactor Protection System this June.

In a nutshell, replacing the existing analog control system with a modern digital platform enhances the facility’s capabilities to ensure safe and reliable nuclear plant operations. And in the same way that advanced Generation III+ nuclear reactor designs emphasize redundant physical safety features, the digital I&C system ensures continuous integrity with its own inherent system redundancies.

This globally proven technology is already in operation or being installed at 69 units on 40 separate sites in 14 countries, and in reactors by 10 different suppliers. Last year, AREVA became the first and only supplier in the U.S. to receive NRC approval for full plant specific application of a safety-related digital I&C system.

By first evaluating and implementing regular, intentional safety upgrades and improvements like digital I&C, the U.S. nuclear industry continues progressively operating as a safe, secure clean energy source reliably generating 20% of American households’ electricity.