RE: So, is reprocessing in America's future?

["Michael Ford" <MFORD@PANTEX.COM>]

The key issue here is that once you've got Pu-239/240 out of a reactor environment, you're pretty darn close to a purified form of Pu-239.  At this point in time, though, the whole issue of proliferation is meaningless.  Anyone who wants the technology either has it or can get it.



The key point left out of the $6,000 recycled cost of spent fuel versus the $1,200 cost of new fuel is the disposal cost once you've gone through a 10% burnup of your *new* fuel and you're ready to toss the perfectly useable 90% of the remainder.  You eventually optimize your fuel costs by reprocessing to the point where it's competitive with new fuel by avoiding the large volume disposal costs.  Otherwise, it wouldn't seem that the Frances and Germany's and Japans of the world would be undertaking such programs.



Have a great day!

v/r

Michael





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.