It's clear we can't
shy away from the recycling and reuse of our nuclear wastes in the
name of safety any longer. As a globalized species it's time for us
to take care of our responsibility. The storage of useable nuclear
materials, the ones we used to call waste, is no longer an option. As
we get closer and closer to expending our fossil fuels we are finally
beginning to realize, that with the advances in technology and safety
measures (mostly by France), that we are viably able to reduce the
sizes of both high and low-level nuclear wastes and reproduce clean
energy at the same time.
The technology for
uranium recovery began in 1949, and was developed in Oak Ridge
National Laboratory (ORNL). However, the fear of nuclear weapons
proliferation (especially after India demonstrated nuclear weapons
capabilities using reprocessing technology) led President Gerald Ford
to issue a Presidential directive to indefinitely suspend the
commercial reprocessing and recycling of plutonium in the U.S. On
April 7, 1977, President Jimmy Carter banned the reprocessing of
commercial reactor spent nuclear fuel. The key issues driving this
policy was the serious threat of nuclear weapons proliferation by
diversion of plutonium from the civilian fuel cycle, and to encourage
other nations to follow the USA lead. For a short time this succeeded
essentially making the United States a power house for nuclear energy
and trying to cap the market for all other countries (Xoubi, 2008:
2). What Carter and now presidents after him have failed to
recognize, is that by suffocating other nations from developing their
own nuclear programs the United States also succeeded in stunting the
growth of the recycling component of nuclear programs. However,
non-governmental companies and universities have successfully made
major discoveries in the past 15 years towards the mass use and
recycling of low-level nuclear wastes.
In today's world, what needs to also be dealt with is that fact that
we are proliferating two very different types of nuclear waste. As a
global community we have build-ups of both low-level (slightly
contaminated processing materials such as gloves, filters, and
uniforms) and high-level (of particular concern are two long-lived
fission bi-products, both having half-life's longer than hundred of
thousands of years) nuclear wastes. The laws of conservation of
energy and mass say that energy or mass cannot be created or
destroyed – it can only change form.
Two companies in
particular, have taken it upon themselves to use the integration of
technology and research to actively find ways that are cost
efficient, harmless, and safe for both humans and the environment.
The French company AREVA along with Idaho University as well has the
global company Cleantech and its Israeli partner Environmental Energy
Resources Ltd. (EER) have made astounding developments in the
processes of cleaning low-level wastes. Both companies end their
decontamination and recycling processes with a very similar product
involving glass or binding the irradiated nuclear material to a solid
state particle which is used in aspects of industrial manufacturing.
Retrieving enriched
Uranium from low-level nuclear waste is what AREVA and Idaho
University are doing together, the most fascinating aspect about
their process is that it's nearly identical to what we use on our
decaffeinated coffee today! Chien Wai, a University of Idaho
chemistry professor, has developed a process that uses super-critical
fluids (any substance raised to a temperature and pressure at which
it exhibits properties of both a gas and a liquid) to dissolve toxic
metals. When coupled with a unique purifying process (developed in
partnership with Sydney Koegler an engineer with AREVA, and
University of Idaho alumnus), enriched uranium (usable for energy)
can be recovered from the ashes of contaminated materials (University
of Idaho, 2008). Sure we don't torch our coffee after wards to lose
the bean husk and get the flavor, but the process itself works just
about the same way to obtain the leftovers of nuclear waste!
In a similar way by resulting in the reconstitution of radiated
materials, EER, by using a system called plasma gasification melting
technology (PGM, developed by scientists from Russia's Kurchatov
Institute research center, the Radon Institute in Russia, and
Israel's Technion Institute) - EER combines high temperatures and
low-radioactive energy to transform waste. The reactor combines three
processes into one solution: (1) it takes plasma torches to break
down the waste, (2) the carbon (organic) leftovers are then
essentially vaporized by the plasma heat, (3) and the inorganic
components are converted to solid waste. The remaining vitrified1
(the embedding of the irradiated material into a glassy matrix or
silica) material is inert and can be cast into molds to produce
tiles, blocks or plates for the construction industry. EER's waste
disposal rector does not harm the environment and leaves no surface
water, groundwater, or soil pollution in its wake. The main goal of
EER was to help the Ukrainian government provide safer disposal
methods of Chernobyl's hazardous waste. At that time, the country was
looking for a way to treat its low-radioactive waste zones resulting
from the Chernobyl explosion (Kloosterman, 2008). As you can easily
see this way effectively and efficiently deals with the large scale
clean-up issues that the Ukraine government is dealing with.
What's more
important is that we as a global community recognize that we now have
the capabilities to handle the low-level mess we've created at a very
fast and efficient rate. Money should not be what holds us back at
this point, seen as how these two processes will nearly pay for
themselves in the long run. Our difficulties come in dealing
effectively with our high-level nuclear waste. Too many absurd ideas
are being tossed about. Everything from storing concentrated levels
of plutonium in mountains and under the sea bed, to rocketing them
off into space to be taken by solar-winds to some distant planet or
even the sun (Coopersmith, 2005). However ultimately what it comes
down to is our personal and sincere want
to fix the problem we've created.
Holding
us back from reprocessing is the fear mongering in favor for the
displacement of our global responsibility. Some say that nuclear
reprocessing and recycling will only allow room and opportunity for
nuclear proliferation and terrorism (UCS, 2011). This is complete and
utter nonsense. With the proper precautions we could securely contain
the recycling process to just a few localities and not only take care
of hundred of millions of tons of nuclear waste that has already been
made, but we can assume our responsibility of following through with
the technology that is coming from the processes of managing
low-level nuclear waste and use them to help us find better ways of
recycling and reducing our high-level waste. One way this
reprocessing can be accomplished is through the development of new
reactors that reuse the waste materials produced. This would then
create essentially a chain that would consume the bi-products till
only a small amount of highly concentrated waste material is left.
Many believe this is the next step for high-level bi-products, and
maybe it is, but it still leaves materials in the long-run that we
are not yet prepared to deal with.
While
there aren't many clear solutions to the disposal and recycling of
high-level nuclear waste, one thing is for sure. We are definitely
able to take care of our low-level waste, and should. Maybe what we
should consider long before the decommissioning of the last nuclear
power plant is investing in something besides this technology that
everyone is afraid of, and has the potential to be very harmful. Why,
as humans, are we always looking for the fastest way to meet our
needs? Instead of investing in harmful methods that proliferate
problems we don't know how to fix or can't possibly handle, why not
turn to what the earth gives us completely free? Our wind, oceans,
and sunlight offer us the most extensive and unimaginable amounts of
energy available to us. Shouldn't we put our discovered technology to
good use and completely deal with the problems we've created with
nuclear fission, and at the same time look to bettering ourselves and
our world through the use of completely reusable and non-harmful
forms of energy?
1Vitrification
(from Latin vitreum, "glass" via French vitrifier) is the
transformation of a substance into a glass. Usually, it is achieved
by rapidly cooling a liquid through the glass transition. Certain
chemical reactions also result in glasses. An important application
is the vitrification of an antifreeze-like liquid in
cryo-preservation. In a wider sense, the embedding of material in a
glassy matrix is also called vitrification. An important application
is the vitrification of radioactive waste to obtain a stable
compound that is suitable for ultimate disposal.
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitrification].
May 4,2012.
(apologies for anyone who feel they should have been cited, this was just an exercise in personal rhetoric, please feel free to contact me with any comments or inquiries.)
Coopersmith,
Jonathan. 2005. “Nuclear Waste in Space”. The Space
Review.
Http://thespacereview.com/article/437/1.
May 3, 2012.
Kloosterman,
Karin. 2008. “Nuclear Energy Breakthrough – From Atomic Waste to
Recycled Inert Material”. The Cutting Edge.
Http://thecuttingedge.com/index.php?article=381.
May 3, 2012.
Spencer,
Jack. December 27, 2007. “Recycling Nuclear Fuel: The French Do It,
Why Can't Oui?”. Http://foxnews.com/story/0,2933,318688,00.html.
May 4, 2012.
Union of Concerned Scientists. April 5,
2011. “Nuclear Reprocessing: Dangerous, Dirty, and Expensive”.
Union of Concerned Scientists.
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_power/nuclear_power_risk/nuclear_proliferation_and_terrorism
/nuclear-reprocessing.html. May 3,
2012.
University
of Idaho. 2008. “Readioactive Waste Recycling No Longer a Pain in
the Ash”. The Science Daily.
Http://sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/08/080821213606.htm.
May 3, 2012.
Xoubi,
Dr. Ned. 2008. The Politics, Science, Environment, and
Common Sense of Spent Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing.
October. 1-10.
