1973Nuclear TechnologyRequires access

The Value of Plutonium Recycle in Thermal Reactors

D.E. Deonigi

Open publisher page 12 citations

Abstract

A generalized plutonium value equation is given which permits corrections for changes in separative work and uranium price:Pu value = AU - 0.16P(incremental fabrication cost per kg fuel/g of fissile Pu/kg fuel). In this equation, A is the relative worth of 239Pu to 235U as fissile material, U is the cost of 93% enriched uranium, and P is the ratio of 242Pu content to fissile content. The optimum uranium enrichment to be used in plutonium-containing fuel rods is found to be equivalent to that of natural uranium. Incremental plutonium fabrication costs could go from ∼100% over the projected uranium fabrication cost of $44/kg in 1975 to a 35% increase over this figure in 1985.In considering the throwaway cycle, it is found that the reprocessing will cost $56/kg compared with $21/kg for the throwaway. This leaves the cost difference of $35 as the minimum value of plutonium and uranium in discharged fuel.The value of plutonium in 1975 is estimated to be $7.50/g fissile, increasing to $8.50/g fissile by 1985.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A generalized plutonium value equation is given which permits corrections for changes in separative work and uranium price:Pu value = AU - 0.16P(incremental fabrication cost per kg fuel/g of fissile Pu/kg fuel). In this equation, A is the relative worth of 239Pu to 235U as fissile material, U is the cost of 93% enriched uranium, and P is the ratio of 242Pu content to fissile content. The optimum uranium enrichment to be used in plutonium-containing fuel rods is found to be equivalent to that of natural uranium. Incremental plutonium fabrication costs could go from ∼100% over the projected uranium fabrication cost of $44/kg in 1975 to a 35% increase over this figure in 1985.In considering the throwaway cycle, it is found that the reprocessing will cost $56/kg compared with $21/kg for the throwaway. This leaves the cost difference of $35 as the minimum value of plutonium and uranium in discharged fuel.The value of plutonium in 1975 is estimated to be $7.50/g fissile, increasing to $8.50/g fissile by 1985.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A generalized plutonium value equation is given which permits corrections for changes in separative work and uranium price:Pu value = AU - 0.16P(incremental fabrication cost per kg fuel/g of fissile Pu/kg fuel). In this equation, A is the relative worth of 239Pu to 235U as fissile material, U is the cost of 93% enriched uranium, and P is the ratio of 242Pu content to fissile content. The optimum uranium enrichment to be used in plutonium-containing fuel rods is found to be equivalent to that of natural uranium. Incremental plutonium fabrication costs could go from ∼100% over the projected uranium fabrication cost of $44/kg in 1975 to a 35% increase over this figure in 1985.In considering the throwaway cycle, it is found that the reprocessing will cost $56/kg compared with $21/kg for the throwaway. This leaves the cost difference of $35 as the minimum value of plutonium and uranium in discharged fuel.The value of plutonium in 1975 is estimated to be $7.50/g fissile, increasing to $8.50/g fissile by 1985.

Key concepts: Fissile material, Plutonium, Natural uranium, Uranium, MOX fuel, Nuclear engineering, Enriched uranium, Spent nuclear fuel

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Value of Plutonium Recycle in Thermal Reactors — Research Paper | ScholarLens