Prospective Inventory of Radioactive Materials and Waste in the French Nuclear Fleet

1. Prospective inventory of radioactive materials and waste produced by the French nuclear fleet according to different plutonium multiple recycling options in the frame of the French law for waste management AIEA Conference – Vienna – June, 26th 2019 C. Chabert, E. Touron, A. Saturnin, F. Courtin, G. Krivtchik, Ph. Miranda, G. Martin, JL. Girottowith the collaboration of French industrial partners EDF, ORANO, FRAMATOME Atomic Energy and Alternative Energies Commission - www.cea.fr

2. CONTEXT • In accordance with the French Act of 28 June 2006 on the sustainable management of radioactive materials and waste, the CEA in partnership with EDF, Orano and Framatome, has studied prospective scenarios using different fuel cycle options: • Open cycle, • Mono-recyclingof plutonium and uranium in PWRs(current option for the French nuclear power fleet), • Multiple recycling of reusable materials in SFRs • Multiple recycling of plutonium in PWRs • The results of thisstudy has been submitted by the CEA to the Ministry of Energywithin the scope of Article 51 of the MinisterialOrderdated 23 February on the French National Radioactive Materials and Waste Management Plan (PNGMDR).

3. FUEL CYCLE TRANSITION SCENARIOS • Progressive implementation of SFRsthrough successive phases: • Eachphase envolves the more significantdeployment of fastreactorswithitsowngrowth objective Phase 0: hypothetical French fleethaving in an open cycle configuration only

4. FUEL CYCLE TRANSITION SCENARIOS • However, SFRsmay not becomeeconomicallycompetitive in the next few decades as uranium resourceswouldremainreadilyavailable • Advanced fuel technologies, called CORAIL-2000 and MIX, are applied to enable multiple recycling of plutonium in standard PWRs • The main objectives of these scenarios consist in stabilizing the plutonium inventory as well as all spent fuel stockpiles

5. MULTI-RECYCLING CONCEPTS In PWRs • CORAIL and MIX concepts studied in CEA near 2000 • MIX assembly • - Homogeneous concept • 1 type of rodswithinassemblies • MOX rodswith a support of enriched • uranium to compensate for the • degradation of the Pu isotopy • Constant Pu content, • 3 cases in ourstudy(8%, 9,54%,12%) • Pu consumption≈ -43kg/TWhe (MIX 9,54%) • CORAIL assembly design with 84 MOX rods • - Heterogeneous concept • 2 types of rodswithinassemblies: • UOX and MOX • U235 fixed(~5%) and Pu ajusted to compensate the Pu isotopicdegradation(<12%) • Pu consumption ≈ 0kg/TWhe

6. Assumptions • Few assumptions • The nuclear energy production remains steady at its current level, about 420TWhe/y • The starting point is the actual situation (with 58 PWR) • A lifespan of 60 years for future reactors (PWR and FR) • A lifespan of 50 years for the fuel cycle plants (La Hague/Melox facilities renewal near 2040) • For the FR fleet, the CFV core concept (low sodium void effect) (CEA) is considered • (600MWe, 1GWe and 1,45GWe) • For scenarios involving the progressive deployment of SFRs: • Start-up of commercial SFRs: 25 yearsafter the industrialcommissioning of the demonstrator • (assumed in thisstudy to be in 2039), i.e. in the mid-2060s • This timescaletakesintoaccount the need for sufficient feedback from the operation of • the demonstratorand for realistic lead times for technical and regulatoryactions • For scenarios involving the multiple recycling of Pu in PWRs: • The industrialdeployment of CORAIL and MIX concepts wouldbetheoretically possible • in 2045 • A timescalethatseems at this stage in the studies to bereasonable, allowing qualification • of these new fuel products.

7. FR deployment Main characteristics for each phases • The transition from phase A to phase D improves - at each phase - the quantities which are characteristic of the sustainable management of materials • Each phase makes its possible to improve the industrial maturity of the fast reactors whose integration into phase B remains very minor (4,5% of the fleet)

8. Multiple recycling of Pu in PWRs– Main characteristics for each phases • Multi-recycling of Pu in PWRscan lead to additionalsavings in uranium • resourcesup to about 10% comparedwith the current once-throughrecycling • in a configuration wherereprocessed uranium isrecycled • (for a total exceeding 25% comparedwith an open fuel cycle) • MIX/ CORAIL concepts enableto recycle all spent fuel and stabilizePu inventory

9. Fuel cycle transition scenariosscenariosinvolving the progressive deployment of SFRs • Scenario ABCD1 involves the successive deployment of all phases, • starting with phase A (once-through recycling of Pu in PWRs), then • phase B (stabilisation of spent PWR MOX by recycling in a few SFRs), • followed by phase C (stabilisation of the Pu inventory using a symbiotic • PWR-SFR fleet), and finally phase D1 (100% SFR fleet) • Scenario ABCD2 ends with a hybrid fleet comprising SFRs and 100% MOX PWRs • Scenario ABD2 : an alternative to scenario ABCD2 where deployment of D2 is accelerated • (this scenario could apply in the case where the price of natural uranium rises rapidly or • there is a shortage of natural uranium).

10. scenarios involving the progressive deployment of SFRs- MAIN RESULTS Open cycle Open cycle Once-recycling Once-recycling Multi-recycling Multi-recycling Unatconsumptiondecreaseduntil 0 Pu inventorystabilized Open cycle Once-recycling Open cycle Once-recycling ABCD1 ABCD2 ABD2 Multi-recycling Phase C: spent fuel inventorystabilized

11. scenarios involving the multiple recycling of Pu in pwrs Scenarios implementing MIX/CORAIL concepts Example: concept MIX 9,54% Pu associatedwithERU EPR

12. Natural uranium consumption • Self-sufficiency with respect to natural uranium can only be achieved by opting for the closed fuel cycle, i.e. deployment of SFRs • Compared with scenario A, the consumption of natural uranium in the MIX/CORAIL scenarios without ERU management is always higher by about 10 to 15% depending on the Pu content • In a configuration where reprocessed U is recycled, the multiple recycling of Pu in PWRs can lead to additional savings in U resources

13. Stabilization of spent fuels and ofthe plutonium inventory Stabilization of the total SF quantitynear2060 Stabilization of the Pu inventory  achievedfrom ~ 2060in all presented scenarios But the Pu multi-recycling in PWRs increases the production of minor actinides up to 4.2 - 4.5 t/year (vs. 3.3 t/year for “step A": increase ~ 30%)

14. Waste and geological disposal • The wastedisposal surface area required for the different options has been assessed in terms • of the thermo-hydro mechanical (THM) and thermal design criteria • relyingon data provided by Andra, corresponding to currenthypothesis of CIGEO project • This studydoes not pre-empt the location of the disposal site for the wasteconsidered, • noranyevolution or optimisations of the disposaldesign • For thisstudy: clayeyrock similar to the layer of argillaceous rock studied in the • Meuse/ Haute-Marne region for the Cigéoproject Surface area required for HLW for a period of 60 years and after an interimstorageperiode of 80 years A large quantity of spent fuel emitting high thermal releases in phases 0, A and B will also require disposal and thus a large disposal surface area

15. MAIN conclusions • CEA in collaboration with EDF, Framatome and Orano has studied the industrial feasibility of scenarios involving the progressive deployment of multiple recycling of Pu in French sodium fast reactors and also in PWRs • A deployment of about 4,5% of SFR (~3 GWe) in the French fleetwouldbesufficientto stabilise the interimstorage of spent PWR MOX fuel (Phase B) • It is possible to stabilise the Pu inventoryby deploying a symbiotic PWR-SFR fleetwithabout 30% of SFR in the fleet (Phase C) • A full deployment of SFR or a mixed fleetcomprising 75% breeder FRs and 25% PWR fuelledwith 100% MOX allowsourindependance on natural uranium resources(Phase D) • This independancecouldbereached about 60 yearsearlierwith a fasterdeployment of SFR( Scenario ABD compared ABCD)

16. MAIN conclusions • Recycling of Pu with MIX and CORAIL fuel assemblies in PWRs by the middle of the century could lead to a stabilization of spent fuel and plutonium inventories • Small savings on U resourceconsumptionmaybereachedonlywhenconsidering the recycling of reprocessed U into ERU fuels • Industrialfeasibilityisunderevaluation (requires adaptations of the fuel cycle plants or even new facilities according to design and fuel capacity manufacturing and treatment) • Waste disposal footprint: - onlythe disposal surface area required for vitrifiedwastepackages has been estimated, consideringcurrenthypothesis of the French disposalproject • Thesestudies are stillongoing in collaboration withAndra to estimate the surface area required to dispose of the non-recycledspentfuels