Nuclear Engineering and Design 114 (1989) 187-191 187

North-Holland, Amsterdam

THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE

Jean RASTOIN and Daniel BASTIEN

Commissariat ~ l'Energie Atomique, CEA / C E N Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France

In the first half of the 21st century, a redistribution of the energy data should occur, where nuclear will play a more
important role, particularly as coal will become more and more costly to extract.
On a worldwide basis, the unability of oil to be replaced in some areas like transportation, and the difficulty of developing
countries to find substitutes for this energy source, could also lead developed countries to keep the energy resources for a
better utilization, and give the countries which have no access to other resources, a possibility to develop.
Thus, France has extensively enhanced nuclear energy for its electricity production, and, consequently, makes the necessary
efforts for the knowledge of the whole fuel cycle.

1. Introduction In fact, in 1986, F r a n c e has profitably p r o d u c e d a

Between 1965 a n d 1985, the world p r i m a r y energy
c o n s u m p t i o n has been multiplied b y a factor of two,
a n d the last p u b l i s h e d statistics show a present growth
of 3% per year. Fossile fuels account for nearly 90% of
this c o n s u m p t i o n , whereas nuclear only accounts for 5%
(according to the Comit6 Professionnel du P&role).
Whereas the world p r o v e n solid mineral fuel reserves
are considerable, the gas a n d oil reserves only represent
less t h a n 50 years at the present rate of c o n s u m p t i o n ,
a n d are unevenly distributed; indeed, new deposits will
be found, b u t the oil a n d gas prospections have already
been carried out very far, a n d one should n o t be over-
optimistic in this respect.
Hence, in the first half of the 21st century, a redistri-
b u t i o n of the energy d a t a should occur, where nuclear
will play a more i m p o r t a n t role, particularly as coal will
b e c o m e more a n d m o r e costly to extract.
O n a worldwide basis, the unability of oil to be
replaced in some areas like transportation, a n d the
difficulty of developing countries to find substitutes for
this energy source, could also lead developed countries
to keep the energy resources for a better utilization, a n d
give the countries which have n o access to other re-
sources, a possibility to develop.
O t h e r considerations can b r i n g some countries to
anticipate this trend. They c a n be political for countries
without fossile self resources a n d which look for their
energy independence.
They can also be economical for the d e m o n s t r a t i o n
of the nuclear competitivness, like F r a n c e did with its
electricity production.
29% electrical o u t p u t of p r i m a r y energy coming from
uranium. Hence, the nuclear share in electricity o u t p u t
is nearly 70%. This shows how m u c h stress F r a n c e puts
o n this form of energy, a n d gives reasons why it has
made, a n d continues, the necessary efforts for the
knowledge of the whole fuel cycle.
2. The extraction
According to O E C D , the estimated k n o w n a n d ad-
ditional resources in the free world which c a n be ex-
tracted at less t h a n 130 $ per kg of u r a n i u m can reach
3.5 millions of tons of natural u r a n i u m . This is not
m u c h and, as a m a t t e r of fact, represents only 100 years
of supply at present rates of production. In fact, u r a n i u m
prospection is far from having reached the level of oil
prospection, a n d the u r a n i u m potential, estimated for
the whole world, still after the same source, could b e as
high as 5 times more. Hence, potentially, u r a n i u m re-
serves are a b o u t 10 times more i m p o r t a n t t h a n oil
reserves.
C o n t r a r y to oil, u r a n i u m is scattered t h r o u g h o u t the
world, and, for these two energy sources, supply p r o b -
lems arise in very different ways. F o r u r a n i u m , on one
h a n d c o m p e t i t i o n makes the prices stable, on the o t h e r
h a n d , the multiplicity of sources brings reliability to the
users supply.
Right now, there is of course n o p r o d u c t i o n problem,
except that the producers c o m p l a i n a b o u t the calmness
of the m a r k e t . . .

0029-5493/89/$03.50 E l s e v i e r S c i e n c e P u b l i s h e r s B.V.
188 J. Rastoin, D. Bastien / The nuclear fuel cycle
As far as France is concerned, it operates under-
ground or strip mines and produces 60% of its needs.
In addition to the nationwide existing resources,
C O G E M A owns important shares in foreign companies
settled in Niger, Gabon, Canada, thus ensuring France
a safe supply.
On the whole, France's natural uranium production
represents 10% of the free world production.
3. Enrichment
The enrichment capacity of uranium for supplying
nuclear plants in operation in the world is now over-
abundant. In particular, with U R E N C O and E U R O -
DIF, Europe relies on means which can satisfy its own
needs and those of its foreign customers, since it
accounts for nearly 40% of world production.
However, the gas diffusion process, used in these
plants from the years 1970, may become obsolete in the
years 2000, and France, USA, Great Britain, and Japan
have undertaken the study of the laser enrichment pro-
cess, in order to set for its replacement. In addition to
the foreseen economical advantages, this process, thanks
to its selectivness, will be able to separate the different
isotopes of uranium. This will enhance an obvious inter-
est for reprocessed 0.9% enriched uranium, which can
be further enriched in U 235, with a significant reduc-
tion of troublesome isotopes, neutron absorbing or
emitters. Thus the energy yield of reprocessed uranium,
which is 1.25 times the yield of natural uranium with
the gas diffusion process, can be brought up to 1.4 times
with the laser process.
The industrial issue of this technique is a stake of
paramount importance, which fits perfectly with the
strategy of fuel cycle chosen by France, which is based
on the reprocessing and recycling of plutonium and
uranium.
4. Fuel fabrication
The company " F r a n c o Beige de Fabrication des
Combustibles" (FBFC), aimed at the fabrication of
fuels for PWRS, and founded in 1973, runs three plants,
with an overall capacity of 1500 t a year. For the time
being, this allows the fullfilment of French needs, and
exportation as well.
F R A M A T O M E takes care of the fuel design and
sells the first cores, while F R A G E M A commercializes
all over the world, fuel elements for PWRs. An
Advanced Fuel Assembly (AFA), with a specific french
design, has been developed with the support of CEA; it
allows a better utilization of the fuel, particularly be-
cause of the use of less absorbing materials for neu-
trons.
Electricit6 de France (EDF) having chosen to recycle
plutonium, France is to acquire the means necessary for
this policy. Thus, the fabrication facility for plutonium
fuels in Cadarache (called CFCA, belonging to CEA),
which has, up to now, ensured the production of the
mixed oxide fuels for the FBRs ( = 100t), is to upgrade
its annual capacity to 30t in 1988, in order to supply 15t
per year of M O X fuel to the PWRs. On the other hand,
C O G E M A and Belgonucl~aire have given rise to the
C O M M O X company. Lastly, a plant of 1 0 0 t / y e a r
capacity, M E L O X , will be built in Marcoule, to be
commissioned in 1993.
5. U s e of the fissile material
This step of the cycle is by far the most important
one. On one hand because it contains energy produc-
tion, on the other hand because the parameters for
optimizing the use of the material are the most numer-
ous. Without being depreciative for the other parts, we
would say that it is the " n o b l e " part of the cycle (i.e.
the reactor fission).
405 reactors are in operation in different parts of the
world, 137 others are under construction, and 68 on
order. As we saw it for the resources, the supply reserves
for such a number are not unlimited, and one should
aim at getting the best energy output from uranium.
Shorter term economical considerations lead to the same
direction, and result in beneficial actions.
France, whose nuclear involvement is well known,
since it ranks second after the U S A in terms of operat-
ing reactors, and first in terms of percentage of nuclear
in the electricity output (70%), has launched an optimi-
zation program which deals with several parameters:
5.1. Increase of burn up
For the time being, the average P W R burn up is 33
G W d / t . An enrichment of 3.75% in U 235, and an
irradiation time of 870 full power days correspond to a
refueling of 1 / 3 of a core.
5.1.1. Availability factor
If one considers a give rate of fortuitous shutdowns,
say 5%, and a shutdown time for refueling of 8 weeks,
the availability factor (in time) will increase with burn
up: from 80% for 33 G W d / t , to 84% for 45 G W d / t and
86% for 60 G W d / t .
 J. Rastoin, D. Bastien / The nuclearfuel cycle
5.1.2. Material flux
The fuel masses, loaded and unloaded each year, are
proportional to the electricity output. As a result, the
masses to fabricate and to reprocess are inversely pro-
portional to the discharge burn-up, which represents
gains of 36% for 45 G W d / t and 82% for 60 G W d / t .
5.1.3. Fuel reload splitting
When dealing with a burn up of 60 G W d / t and
refueling of 1 / 3 of a core, the irradiation time is 30
months, which is not very realistic with respect to the
maintenance of the non nuclear facilities.
Thus, it is necessary to split up in the fuel manage-
ment, i.e. refuel 1 / 4 of a core instead of 1 / 3 ; moreover,
this allows a better use of the fuel since it results in a
7% bonus in the energy extracted (11% for 1 / 5 of core
refueling instead of 1 / 3 of core refueling).
Already, E D F has decided to promote a fuel mana-
gement of 1 / 4 of a core, which will be progressively
enforced.
5.1.4. Consumption of natural uranium and S WU
A more complete fuel burn up needs a more im-
portant initial reactivity, hence a higher enrichment for
a smaller fuel mass. As a result, with a 1 / 3 of a core
refueling, the enrichment will be 4.2% in order to reach
45 G W d / t .
In the mass balance, the natural uranium consump-
tion hardly changes, whereas the demand for S W U
increases by 12% for 45 G W d / t and 15% for 60 G W d / t .
5.1.5. Plutonium production
An other drawback is that the production of fissile
plutonium is decreased by 9% for 45 G W d / t and 33%
for 60 G W d / t , in the same time as its quality decreases.
In a context of overabondant S W U capacity, and of
delayed plutonium needs, the burn-up increase is there-
fore a short term objective, which E D F has set at the
level of 45 G W d / t , level technologically achievable.
5.2. Spectral Shift Reactor (SSR)
Any process allowing a reactivity gain for a given
enrichment induces an improvement in the use of fuel.
The spectral shift is the most efficient one among those
surveyed for the advanced reactor project studied by
F R A M A T O M E , in collaboration with CEA. Calcula-
tions show that it should be possible to reach 45 G W d / t
with a 3.2% enriched fuel and 60 G W d / t with a 4.2%
enriched fuel. The gain in energy is 33% or, inversely,
for the same energy output, the consumption of natural
uranium and SWU are reduced by 25%, with reference
to the standard case.
189
For countries which have chosen the non-re-
processing issue, this reactor type offers much interest.
5.3. Plutonium use
Having chosen the reprocessing issue, France will,
within a few years, dispose of an important stock of
plutonium, representing an appreciable energy source.
In addition to the fuel supply of existing FBRs, this
stock will allow for plutonium recycling in PWRs.
5. 3.1. Recycling in P WRs
When stored on shelves, the plutonium depletes with
time and its energy value decreases.
It would therefore be an error not to use this fissile
material. If recycled in the present PWRs, it allows a
saving on the fuel side, without any other investment on
the reactor side. In fact, it has been demonstrated that it
is possible to replace at least one third of a P W R core
by mixed oxide U O 2 - P u O 2 fuel, called also M O X fuel,
without bringing any modification to the control and
operation of the plant.
E D F has already taken the decision to run 4 reactors
with 30% core refueling with this type of fuel (one
already in 1987), and later to extend this strategy to
other reactors.
Thus, plutonium recycling can bring a saving of 3
billion francs between now and 1995, and studies are in
progress for defining more accurately the maximum
acceptable proportion of M O X assemblies.
When a standard P W R yields 25 kg of fissile
plutonium per TWh, a P W R with recycled Pu uses 19
Kg per T W h in the M O X assemblies and yields 18 kg
per TWh in the U O 2 assemblies.
Therefore, the mass balance is nearly constant, but
the isotopic composition depletes and makes further
recyclings more difficult.
5.3.2. Recycling in Light Water High Converter Reactors
(LWHCRs)
As said above, plutonium recycling in standard
PWRs shows a financial advantage in the short term,
but limits the number of successive recyclings. Ex-
amination of long term consequences of plutonium re-
cycling on the cumulated consumption of natural
uranium shows that this consumption is not decreased
as much as with other solutions.
One proposed alternative solution is the use of
plutonium in " a d v a n c e d " LWRs, with undermodera-
tion (LWHCRs). Several countries now study this pro-
ject, and France has launched a feasability study which
appears to be very promising. This reactor would use
190 J. Rastoin, D. Bastien / The nuclear fuel cycle
U O 2 - P u O 2 fuel, with 7% of fissile Pu and would,
according to different options, yield conversion ratios
between 0.8 and 0.95 and allow for multiple recyclings.
The introduction, from the year 2000, of this type of
reactor, would bring, in the 2040s, an economy of
cumulated natural uranium of 25%. On the other hand,
thanks to a high conversion ratio and to the upkeeping
of the isotopic composition of plutonium, it would
nearly maintain the available stock. The L W H C R thus
appears as a solution for the conservation of a good
quality plutonium stock, enabling a substantial saving
of natural uranium.
5.3.3. Recycling in F B R s
Whatever the merits and interest of the LWHCRs,
they would never promote the energy independence for
any country, regarding its nuclear electricity produc-
tion. This goal can only be achieved with FBRs, and
this is the reason why France, since it has started in the
nuclear power field, has become interested in such a
system. With moderate but consistent steps, it has over-
come the stages between laboratory studies and an
industrial prototype achievement, materialized by the
1200 MWe Super-Phenix reactor.
The technical demonstration having been made, it is
now necessary to decrease its cost: on one hand the
investment cost, for which much progress has been
achieved with the " R a p i d e 1500" project, on the other
hand the production cost which we will comment later
when dealing with reprocessing. We are convinced that
the competitivness of these reactors, already achieved
with respect to coal plants, can also be achieved with
respect to PWRs, and that from then on, the energy
stake being known, the future of FBRs will appear in a
more favourable light. This stake is considerable for
France, which is deprived of oil resources, and endowed
which limited uranium resources. With the chosen
scenario for developing its nuclear electricity produc-
tion, in the 2040s France will have consumed 3 times its
natural uranium reserves, now estimated at 160 000 t. It
is at the same date that, with the introduction of FBRs,
moderate between 2002 and 2010, then maximum be-
tween 2010 and 2020, France could see its natural
uranium needs cancel out, and therefore the country
become independent.
In the energy time scale, 2040 is t o m o r r o w . . , and
our grand children will only be between 45 and 65.
One therefore must prepare this future, technically.
For the time being, FBRs in project have breeding
ratios of the order of 1.2, and reprocessing plants are
planned for a cooling time of 3 years. In order to get
above mentioned independence, one should aim at a
breeding ratio of 1.4 and cooling time of 2 years. On the
other hand, France would thus spare the equivalent of
its presently known natural uranium resources.
5.4. Use o f reprocessed uranium
In 2020, France will have at its disposal a stock of
reprocessed uranium in the range of 32000 to 38000 t.
Because of its enrichment (0.9%) and of the neutronic
drawbacks due to the troublesome isotopes, this stock
will represent 25% more in equivalent natural uranium,
if reenriched by the gaseous diffusion process, and 40%
more if reenriched by the laser process. In other words,
France could have at its disposal an extra 35 to 45% of
its known reserves. This is not to be disregarded.
In the short term, this potential can be assigned to
the constitution of a strategic stock, aimed at a 5 year
supply independence. Later on, between 2000 and 2010,
it will be possible to upgrade this uranium by enriching
it with the laser process.
6. Reprocessing
France has continuously reprocessed fuel for two
reasons:
- the first one has been already given above: the use of
reprocessed uranium and plutonium in the power
plants and especially in the FBRs.
- the second one deals with safety aspects, because we
believe it to be safer to separate fission products
according to their activity range and to manage them
consequently, rather than to store used fuels, which
implies to guarantee the leaktightness of large and
numerous canisters.
To achieve these goals, France has built two plants,
one in Marcoule and the other one in La Hague, with
an initial capacity of 400 t per year each. Later on, the
La Hague plant has been adapted to treat the P W R
fuels, and its extension, under construction, will up-
grade its capacity to 800t/year, then 1600t/year. This
extension is a huge working site with 6000 workers, the
largest in Europe. Other countries have chosen the
reprocessing issue as well, in particular Belgium, Great
Britain, Japan, West Germany, and this accounts for an
overall reprocessing capacity of 5000 t of heavy metal
per year, which would be insufficient if it was decided
to reprocess all irradiated fuels.
For the reprocessing of FBRs fuels, for which it is
essential to reduce the cycle cost, France is now in-
vestigating the possibility of a dilution reprocessing
process with P W R fuels.
 J. Rastoin, D. Bastien / The nuclear fuel cycle
However, this technique, already used for the Phenix
fuel, will not solve the problem in the long term, and
international negociations are now underway for the
study of a specific large capacity plant.
7. Waste disposal
This step is the last one of six in the fuel cycle. It is
not the least important, because, for the public, it
continues to represent a long term preoccupation with
respect to nuclear energy. However, the waste problem,
if worthwhile, is not a real technological problem. To
start with, one must know that the waste volume com-
ing from nuclear industry is little compared to the
volume coming from coal plants for example. As for
waste conditioning, they would be of the same order of
magnitude as for most chemical waste, if one would
adopt equivalent standards for safety and protection of
the environment.
On the other hand, the problems arising from nuclear
wastes are specific because of their radioactivity which
is a function of time. Schematically, these wastes can be
classified into two large groups:
- those, including radionucleids, which have a long life
(more than 30 years)
- those, including radionucleids, which have a short life
(less than 30 years)
and, inside these two families, classifications can be
made, according to their activity level.
For the short life wastes, with low and medium
activities, solutions are already available and do not set
any problem with respect to safety. A m o n g them, France
has chosen, at least for the time being, those which
allow later changes, rather than irreversible ones like
deep sea immersion. The waste facility of La Hague is
in operation since 1969, and, the Soulaines one, located
150 km East of Paris, will be commissioned in 1990.
For the long life wastes, which set a double problem
of cooling and life time, the chosen solution is the
vitrification, with a view to a ventilated storage, in the
short and medium term, followed by a future final
191
storage in the deep geological layers, which could be
granite, salt, clay, basalt, shale or tuff. France has a
vitrification unit in Marcoule and is building a second
one in La Hague; in the same time, it prospects sites
within four geological layer-types (clay at Montcornet,
granite at Parthenay, shale at Segr6 and salt at Gex), in
order to make a deep laboratory which would give " i n
situ" access to essential data for the demonstration of
the feasability and safety of the project, which could
"see the light", if we may say so, somewhere in 2000.
Finally, for the long term medium and low activity
wastes, and which are essentially wastes, the encapsula-
tion techniques in different matrices such as concrete or
bitumen have been developed. Later they will also have
to be placed into a final deep storage like the ones
above; in the meantime, they are temporarily stored at
the producers' facilities.
8. Conclusion
F r o m this survey of the cycle of nuclear fuels, we
will recall that a large use of nuclear electricity produc-
tion seems to us very likely.
We will not risk ourself at crystal-gazing to foresee
its date, but a boost in this technological area is neces-
sarily correlated to it.
We now are in the uranium era, and we will soon
enter the plutonium era, or more precisely a symbiosis
of these two energy sources.
It would seem to us desirable that the countries
which have access to these technologies go further into
it, in order for those which do not have this chance, to
be able to resort to oil.
Finally, this resort to nuclear will have to be major
and responsible. We mean that we ought to continue to
check that the built reactors are safe and reliable, and
that the fuel cycle can be correctly closed, taking care
that future generations do not inherit any nuisances for
which we would be responsible, but on the contrary a
good quality power production tool.