Benefits and concerns of a closed nuclear fuel cycle

Nuclear power can play an important role in our energy future, contributing to increasing electricity demand while at the same time decreasing carbon dioxide emissions. However, the nuclear fuel cycle in the United States today is unsustainable. As stated in the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act, the U.S. Department of Energy is responsible for disposing of spent nuclear fuel generated by commercial nuclear power plants operating in a 'once-through' fuel cycle in the deep geologic repository located at Yucca Mountain. However, unyielding political opposition to the site has hindered the commissioning process to the extant that the current administration has recently declared the unsuitability of the Yucca Mountain site. In light of this the DOE is exploring other options, including closing the fuel cycle through recycling and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. The possibility of closing the fuel cycle is receiving special attention because of its ability to minimize the final high level waste (HLW) package as well as recover additional energy value from the original fuel. The technology is, however, still very controversial because of the increased cost and proliferation risk it can present. To lend perspective on the closed fuel cycle alternative, this presents the arguments for and against closing the fuel cycle with respect to sustainability, proliferation risk, commercial viability, waste management, and energy security.