Use of Enriched Uranium in Canada's Power Reactors

Abstract

Recent trends in Canadian nuclear power reactor design and proposed development of nuclear power in Canada have indicated the possibility that Canada will break with its tradition of natural uranium fuelled systems, designed for superior neutron economy and, hence, superior uranium utilization. For instance, the Darlington B new reactor project procurement process included three reactor designs, all employing enriched fuel, although a natural uranium reactor design was included at a late stage in the ensuing environmental assessment for the project as an alternative technology. An evaluation of the alternative designs should include an assessment of the environmental implications through the entire fuel cycle, which unfortunately is not required by the environmental assessment process. Examples of comparative environmental implications of the reactor designs throughout the fuel cycle indicate the importance of these considerations when making a design selection. As Canada does not have enrichment capability, a move toward the use of enriched fuel would mean that Canada would be exporting natural uranium and buying back enriched uranium with value added. From a waste management perspective, Canada would need to deal with mill, refinery, and conversion tailings, as well as with the used fuel from its own reactors, while the enrichment supplier would retain depleted uranium with some commercial value. On the basis of reasoned estimates based on publicly available information, it is expected that enrichment in Canada is likely to be more profitable than exporting natural uranium and buying back enriched uranium. Further, on the basis of environmental assessments for enrichment facilities in other countries, it is expected that an environmental assessment of a properly sited enrichment facility would result in approval.