About Social Media Today
Signs of progress are mixed with public questions, some legitimate, some not
The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) could sometime after 2016 begin burning a portion of 34 tons of surplus weapons grade plutonium in two of its reactors. Mixed Oxide Fuel (MOX) that is expected to be produced at a fuel fabrication center being built by Shaw Areva MOX Services at Savannah River, SC, will be offered for sale by the Department of Energy (DOE) to TVA and to other commercial nuclear utilities. According to the NRC, up to 40% of a reactor core could use MOX fuel. (See World Nuclear Association briefing on MOX fuel)
It’s a long path to a decision by TVA to use MOX fuel. First, the Department of Energy has to build the production plant and get an NRC license to produce the fuel. Second, TVA has to conduct tests to make sure there are no problems and that the fuel will be cost effective.
TVA expects buying MOX from the Savannah River plant will be cheaper than buying other fuel. The utility would have to modify the licenses of the Sequoyah reactor in Tennessee and the Browns Ferry reactor in Alabama to use it.
While no reactors in the U.S. burn MOX fuel, almost three dozen reactors elsewhere have used it for the past two decades. Japan is rapidly expanding the use of MOX fuel for its commercial reactors. MOX in Japan is manufactured by blending uranium with plutonium from spent nuclear fuel from its commercial reactors. The fuel is fabricated by Areva at its LaHague facility in France. World Nuclear News reported that Japan started using MOX fuel in November 2009.
UCS again attacks MOX fuel
Critics of TVA’s test plan for MOX fuel call it “dirty, dangerous, and expensive.” That’s what Ed Lyman, (right) from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), said at a public meeting held in Tanner, Ala., in early August. UCS is opposed to the production of MOX fuel and its use in U.S. commercial reactors.
Last November UCS and Friends of the Earth (FOE) issued deceptive statements about a test of MOX fuel which took place at a commercial reactor operated by Duke Energy. It comes as no surprise that UCS is now attempting to use the same deceptive statements that the Duke test was a “failure” to oppose tests of MOX fuel by TVA. UCS is attempting to use its prior misstatements about the Duke MOX fuel test to convince the public TVA should not go forward with its own.
Lyman’s comments were picked up and used extensively by an opinion piece by columnist John Gibson published in the Tennessean Aug 18. After quoting Lyman at length, the article called the plan to test MOX fuel in two reactors “a tricky sell.” The piece gets some of the facts about the Duke test right, but in the end comes out against TVA’s plan to test MOX fuel in its reactors.
DOE and Duke statements on MOX fuel test
Last November the Department of Energy and Duke Energy, two normally conservative organizations, especially when it comes to public statements, contacted the news media to repudiate comments by FOE and mirrored by UCS, about the Duke MOX fuel test.
The statements by FOE and UCS that the Duke MOX fuel tests were a “failure” are like icebergs. They tell one part, their story, which is visible above the water. What they don’t tell you is that another seven parts, of facts, are also part of the picture.
According to a media report in the Charleston Regional Business Journal Nov 13, 2009; Duke Power issued a statement that the decision not to reload the MOX fuel has nothing to do with success or failure of the testing program.
Instead, the utility said the fuel has been sent to Oak Ridge for testing and that the remainder of the fuel outage for the Catawba reactor is on schedule. Duke Energy spokesperson Rita Sipe told the Journal the evaluation of the fuel at a lab in Tennessee is part of the project.
“For us nothing has really changed. The technical evaluation of the fuel rods was part of the lead assembly program. We have expressed interest in a new proposal [for use of MOX fuel] and we are still supportive of the program”
NNSA spokesperson Jennifer Wagner said in an email to this blog . . .
“The news release issued today by Friends of the Earth is inaccurate and draws incorrect conclusions about the performance of the MOX lead test assemblies.” [additional details here]
NNSA explains nonproliferation goals
Speaking this past August at the same meeting as Ed Lyman, Ken Baker, (right) deputy administrator at DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) said the tests at the two TVA reactors are an “important step” in evaluating the potential use of the fuel.
Also, he pointed out burning the weapons grade plutonium, as MOX fuel, serves important nonproliferation goals. It gets the weapons grade material out of circulation forever. (NNSA MOX fuel fact sheet)
TVA and Shaw Areva MOX Services signed an agreement in July 2009 to test and evaluate the use of MOX fuel. The MOX fuel will be a mix of 95% uranium and 5 % plutonium. NNSA’s 600,000 sq ft. MOX plant in South Carolina is being built as part of an agreement with Russia for the U.S. to turn 34 metric tons of weapons grade plutonium, enough for 8,500 warheads, into commercial fuel to generate electricity. Russia will also convert 34 metric tonnes of weapons grade plutonium into MOX fuel. It is the ultimate expression by the two nations of Isaiah's biblical call for turning “swords into ploughshares.”
NRC issues draft safety evaluation report for MOX plant
The NRC announced Aug 25 it has published its draft Safety Evaluation Report (SER) for the license application by Shaw AREVA MOX Services for the Mixed-Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility at the Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site near Aiken, S.C.
“The report contains the staff’s conclusion that the applicant’s descriptions, specifications, commitments and analyses provide an adequate basis for safety and safeguards of facility operations, and that operation of the facility would not pose an undue risk to worker and public health and safety. “
The NRC issued a Construction Authorization for the facility in March 2005, and construction is underway at the site. The plant is expected to begin operations in 2016.
The NRC report, which has been redacted to remove security related and proprietary information, documents the NRC staff’s technical safety review of MOX Services’ operating license application for the facility. It does not represent a decision to issue the license. That stage is expected to be several years away.
The draft SER reviews the applicant’s financial qualifications, plans for protection of classified matter, organization and administration, integrated safety analysis, nuclear criticality safety, fire protection, chemical safety, radiation safety, environmental protection and plant systems.
# # #
