Nuclear storage can't wait for reprocessing

With the underground repository for nuclear waste at YuccaMountain in Nevada expected to be filled to capacity shortly afterit is opened, there is a move under way in Congress to revive aprogram that was shelved in the United States years ago: therecycling of "spent" nuclear power plant fuel.

Unfortunately, trying to bring back recycling prematurely will divert time and money from the waste repository.

The program is called nuclear fuel reprocessing, and other countries do it routinely. President Bush's energy plan calls for development of reprocessing technologies as part of a long-term effort to expand the use of nuclear power.

Sen. Pete Domenici, the Republican senator from New Mexico whochairs the Senate Energy Committee, is an outspoken proponent ofreprocessing.

For years now, the United States has been storing spent fuel safely at nuclear power plant sites. Because it would be more economic and even safer to store the fuel in one central facility, Congress approved Yucca Mountain as the site for an underground repository.

Although spent fuel is often referred to as nuclear waste, really it is not.

More than 1,000 metric tons of spent fuel is stored at the San Onofre nuclear power plant. The spent fuel contains a large amount of valuable uranium, as well as another reactor fuel, plutonium, and still other useful radioactive and nonradioactive materials.Both uranium and plutonium can be readily extracted and converted into new fuel for use again in producing electricity.

This program requires spent nuclear fuel rods to be recycled through a chemical operation that separates the useful fuel remaining in the rods from the other radioactive and nonradioactive materials, some of which may truly be waste. It removes about half of the material from the spent fuel rods, thereby reducing the volume and cost of storing nuclear waste and, in effect, doubling the capacity of the Yucca Mountain repository. The use of reprocessing would not lessen the need for a waste repository, though it could help avoid the need for additional repositories after Yucca Mountain.

Unfortunately, all of the talk about reprocessing diverts attention -- and siphons funds -- from the U.S. repository project. Congress reduced the Yucca Mountain budget for fiscal year 2006 to $450 million, which is $127 million below what the project had received for each of the last three years.

This reduction will contribute to the delay of licensing and construction of the Yucca Mountain project beyond the current opening date in 2010.

Another problem is that, for many years to come, fuel that results from reprocessing will cost more than producing new uranium fuel for nuclear power plants. It is currently unclear that reprocessed fuel can compete economically with new fuel.

Nonetheless, the difficulties encountered with current reprocessing technology will someday be overcome. However, reprocessing should be funded separately from the Yucca Mountain project and that project's funds maintained so that licensing and construction of Yucca Mountain can proceed without further delay.

Encinitas resident Al Tschaeche worked as a health physicist in the nuclear industry for more than 50 years.

Copyright © 2016, The San Diego Union-Tribune