A comparison of radioactive waste from first generation fusion reactors and fast fission reactors with actinide recycling

Limitations of the fission fuel resources will presumably mandate the replacement of thermal fission reactors by fast fission reactors that operate on a self-sufficient closed fuel cycle. This replacement might take place within the next one hundred years, so the direct competitors of fusion reactors will be fission reactors of the latter rather than the former type. Also, fast fission reactors, in contrast to thermal fission reactors, have the potential for transmuting long-lived actinides into short-lived fission products. The associated reduction of the long-term activation of radioactive waste due to actinides makes the comparison of radioactive waste from fast fission reactors to that from fusion reactors more rewarding than the comparison of radioactive waste from thermal fission reactors to that from fusion reactors. Radioactive waste from an experimental and a commercial fast fission reactor and an experimental and a commercial fusion reactor has been characterized. The fast fission reactors chosen for this study were the Experimental Breeder Reactor 2 and the Integral Fast Reactor. The fusion reactors chosen for this study were the International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor and a Reduced Activation Ferrite Helium Tokamak. The comparison of radioactive waste parameters shows that radioactive waste from the experimental fast fission reactor may be less hazardous than that from the experimental fusion reactor. Inclusion of the actinides would reverse this conclusion only in the long-term. Radioactive waste from the commercial fusion reactor may always be less hazardous than that from the commercial fast fission reactor, irrespective of the inclusion or exclusion of the actinides. The fusion waste would even be far less hazardous, if advanced structural materials, like silicon carbide or vanadium alloy, were employed.