[en] A handy guidebook containing basic information about nuclear power, the U.S. breeder reactor pogram and the role of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant in our Nation's energy future.

[en] Conceptual designs of spent-fuel shipping casks for use by facilities participating in the Breeder Reactor Program have been developed by Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico. Some aspects of conceptual designs that are reviewed are interface requirements and cask design features. The major emphasis of the work to date has been to develop cask designs which would be suitable for use at the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) and the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRBRP). However, the advanced technology utilized in developing spent-fuel shipping-cask designs for these facilities results in many cask features which would be required by all breeder reactor plants

[en] Under Secretary of Energy Dale Myers said in the hearing on March 21, 1978, that the Administration's position is that Clinch River is not needed, but that technology should be kept in the forefront; that a program must be carried out that ''means carrying on those pieces of Clinch River that apply to the technology from an engineering standpoint in terms of testing these various components. Further, have a design study which uses all of the top professional people in these various teams that have been associated with Clinch River, to aid in making design studies of those things which are coming out of alternate fuel studies.'' At the March 22, 1978 hearing, Rep. Barry Goldwater, Jr. presented his views on the administration's proposal before proceeding with testimonies. He felt testimonials at the previous hearing did not include answers to ''legal, financial, and other implications of terminating the Clinch River project.'' He said he was (1) concerned about the lengthy delay the abandonment of CRBR followed by a study of the new breeder would entail and (2) confused by the proposed coupling of fuel-cycle studies with plant design. He feels we should pay more attention to the plant itself, especially to such matters as performance, reliability, maintainability, and safety and worry about the fuel cycle later as a means of accelerating this project. At the April 4, 1978 hearing, panelists from industry, utilities, and university and public-interest personnel presented views on the future of the U.S. breeder program

[en] Over the past decade, the United States has developed plans and carried out programs directed toward the demonstration of breeder fuel reprocessing in connection with early breeder demonstration reactors. Although subject to continuing debate, progress continued on the construction of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor (CRBR) with startup anticipated near the end of this decade, while plans for the CRBR and its associated fuel cycle are still being firmed up, the basic R and D programs required to carry out the demonstrations have continued. Policies call for breeder recycle to begin in the early to mid-1990s. An important objective of the reprocessing program is to develop advanced technology for the recovery of fissile materials in systems that minimize environmental emissions and doses to plant workers, and that also provide effective fissile material safeguards. Major improvements include technology for remote operation and maintenance, low-flow ventilation systems coupled with more effective off-gas treatment, and advanced process monitoring for control and safeguards

[en] A commercial fuel-cloning machine, a nuclear breeder reactor, is yet to produce electricity in the United States. It is expensive in capital and fuel costs, its fuel that must be reprocessed can become a link to nuclear weapons manufacture, and its safety is no greater than conventional nuclear reactors. The breeder has had on-again/off-again administrative support from Washington. Opponents worry about escalating costs and failure to develop alternatives like solar energy. Proponents say fossil-fuel depletion will eventually force long-term renewable resources such as the breeder anyway. Some who share parts of both views oppose present policy regarding the Clinch River Breeder demonstration plant specifically. The correct choices on breeder concept development and commercialization will be known in 2050. 3 figures

[en] Contrary to some beliefs in the electric utility industry that ERDA is committed to developing a commercial breeder economy, it is pointed out that ERDA isn't even willing to pay the total cost of the R and D program--and unless there is a major commitment from the private sector (the electric utility industry, in particular) the breeder program will die. The schedule as of Fall 1976 called for: (1) Fast Flux Test Facility (scheduled to go critical in 1979, operate in 1980); (2) Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project (CRBRP) (¹/₃ commercial size plant hopefully operating by 1983); (3) Prototype Large Breeder Reactor (planned construction starting in 1981, operating in 1988); and (4) Commercial Breeder Reactor (CBR-1 design work to start in 1983, construction in 1986, and operation in 1993). The $257 million the utility industry has pledged to the CRBRP was just for openers. The $2 billion follow-on breeder project being designed calls for massive capital input from a utility (or utility consortium)--and if that is not forthcoming, then in the words of an ERDA official, ''we'll have to reassess the whole breeder program.''

No abstract available

[en] Interest in breeder reactors dates from the Manhatten Project to the present effort to build the Clinch River Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reactor (LMFBR) demonstration plant. Seven breeder-type reactors which were built during this time are described and their technological progress assessed. The Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project (CRBRP) has been designed to demonstrate that it can be licensed, can operate on a large power grid, and can provide industry with important experience. As the next logical step in LMFBR development, the project has suffered repeated cancellation efforts with only minor modifications to its schedule. Controversies have developed over the timing of a large-scale demonstration plant, the risks of proliferation, economics, and other problems. Among the innovative developments adopted for the CRBRP is a higher thermal efficiency potential, the type of development which Senator McCormack feels justifies continuing the project. He argues that the nuclear power program can and should be revitalized by continuing the CRBRP

[en] Uranium supply and demand as projected by the Uranium Institute is discussed. It is concluded that for the industrialized countries, maximum energy independence is a necessity. Hence it is necessary to achieve assurance of supply for uranium used in thermal power reactors in current programs and eventually to move towards breeders

No abstract available