published by WISE News Communique on April 11, 1997




Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 Summary

4. Country overview


4.1 Belgium

In 1994, Belgium decided to stop reprocessing its own spent fuel and make no more further reprocessing contracts. It wanted to use up the 4.6 tons of separated plutonium issued from older contracts as MOX fuel in its own reactors.1 All seven Belgian commercial reactors have reprocessing contracts with Cogéma at La Hague, France. The reprocessing contracts total 600 tons of spent fuel (with about 6,000 kg Pu) for the period up to 2000.2 In 1963, the research reactor BR-3 started to use MOX on an experimental scale: a world premier.3 In 1995, MOX has been inserted for the first time in two of the seven LWRs: Tihange-2 and Doel-3.

MOX fabrication
The Belgonucléaire plant in Dessel called P0, with a capacity of 35 ton/year, has been in operation since 1973, fabricating MOX fuel for FBRs. MOX for LWRs has been commercially produced by the Dessel plant since 1985, for LWRs of Belgium, France, Germany, and Switzerland. As of October 1996, over 300 tons of MOX fuel was fabricated. Belgonucléaire hopes to expand the production of the P0 to 40 tons of MOX a year.4
Belgonucléaire wanted to extend the facility by adding two new production lines called P1 with an annual capacity of 60 tons. Due to irregular licensing procedures, it has been brought to court, and the plant has never been constructed.
In July 1996, Belgonucléaire proposed to help the US to dispose of excess weapon Pu as MOX fuel. The company believes it would be possible to build a MOX fuel production plant in the US, to be used solely for producing MOX fuel from weapon Pu. Its design of the MOX P1 plant would be adaptable for use in the US. BN and its competitors Cogéma and BNFL are willing to produce test assemblies of MOX fuel for the US Department of Energy (DOE) at their European MOX plants. DOE does not intend however to ship its 50,000 kg of surplus weapons Pu to Europe for MOX production.5


4.2 Canada

The official nuclear policy has always been not to reprocess the spent fuel from the CANDU nuclear power plants. MOX fabrication costs for the CANDU reactors are not very favorable. The costs for fuel fabrication using plutonium would be "between five and ten times" the costs they face for natural uranium fuel. The US's DOE, which ordered the study, decided to keep the economic data classified.6 Nonetheless the utility Ontario Hydro plans to burn MOX from US-Russian weapon-plutonium in its nuclear reactors. The Canadian government "has agreed in principle" to support MOX use in CANDUs, "the challenge is going to be how it would be funded. The government won't subsidize Ontario Hydro". Canada will expand its cooperation on MOX with Russia in trying to construct a CANDU MOX plant in Russia.7
The US in cooperation with Ontario Hydro wants to test MOX fuel from US weapons plutonium in the Canadian Chalk River Laboratory NRU reactor, to see how the fuel will behave (see Chapter 4.12: United States).


4.3 European Union

The Directorate General for Energy of the European Union (EU) is funding a number of studies related to the disposition of fissile materials. The EU is currently funding 133 of the 202 projects of the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC), about 10% of which relate to nuclear fuels and storage of nuclear waste. The ISTC was set up in March 1994 by the EU, Japan, Russia and the US, to provide new work for unemployed Russian nuclear scientists. A US$580,000 study, Project N.369, carried out in the framework of the ISTC, is done on the "technical and economic feasibility of the use of ex-weapons plutonium and civil plutonium as fuel for both Fast Reactors and Light Water Reactors". The Project N.369 study involves all European companies with a plutonium-recycling technology: Belgonucleaire, BNFL, Cogéma and Siemens. The project considers three options for the use of dismantled weapons:

Another ISTC project, N.290, a three-year project funded by Japan and the EU, studies the transformation of Pu from dismantled nuclear weapons into Pu oxide and into MOX. Involved are: Siemens, BNFL, the EU Institute of Transuranium Elements in Karlsruhe, Germany, and Japan's Power Reactor & Nuclear Fuel Development Co. (PNC).8


4.4 France

Use of MOX fuel
EdF (Electricité de France) operates 58 Pressurized-Water Reactors: 20 1,300MW reactors, 34 900MW reactors, and four 1,450-MW reactors. EdF first loaded MOX in the PWR Chooz-A on an experimental scale in 1974. The Belgian-French reactor was closed in 1991.9 Since 1987 nine of the 900 MW reactors have partially been loaded with MOX fuel: St. Laurent des Eaux B1 (1987), St. Laurent B2 (1988), Gravelines 3 and 4 (1989), Dampierre 1 (1990) and Dampierre 2 (1993), Blayais 2 (1994) and Tricastin 4 (June 1996)10 and another one in Tricastin in November 1996.11 Since January 1997 one more reactor has been loaded with MOX fuel.12
Only those reactors can be loaded with MOX fuel that meet certain requirements: Sixteen reactors have such a decree: Blayais 1 and 2, Dampierre 1 to 4, Gravelines 1 to 4, St. Laurent des Eaux B1 and B2, and Tricastin 1 to 4.
Nearly all spent fuel from French reactors is being reprocessed. The annual amount of separated plutonium at the moment is about 8,000 kg. About 28 900MW LWRs are needed to burn this quantity of plutonium as MOX. Now only ten LWRs are burning MOX. EdF contracted to reprocess 1,000 ton of spent fuel past 2000.14 Therefore EdF desperately wants more reactors to be licensed for the burning of MOX.
By 1998, all 16 reactors allowed are planned to burn MOX fuel. They will use about 100 tons of MOX a year. With a plutonium content of 5.3%, that is about 5,300 kg Pu/yr. In this way EdF will never succeed in loading all French-separated plutonium as MOX fuel into the licensed LWRs, since about 8,500 kg of plutonium will be separated annually in the future. Each year 3,200 kg of separated plutonium will have to be stored. To use all the annual separated plutonium, EdF has to load 162 tons of MOX into 28 PWRs from the 900 MW series.15 This is exactly the number of reactors EdF wants to get licensed to use MOX at the end of the century. This, however, needs larger MOX fuel production capacity. Cogema and Framatome have launched a three-year investment program in the Melox fuel plant at Cadarache.16

A shortage of MOX fuel production capacity is not the only problem EdF faces. Another serious limitation to the use of MOX fuel in all 28 nuclear power plants of the 900 MW series, or even in the 20 PWRs of the 1300-MW series, is the fact that load following is not yet allowed for reactors with MOX fuel.17Load following means that reactors are allowed to operate under their maximum output. Because EdF has a large overcapacity in electricity generation, many nuclear reactors have to be operated under their maximum output, when electricity demand is low (at night, in the weekends and in summer). The reactors have the ability to operate between 20% and 100% of full power. While load following is not allowed with MOX fuel and if most or all PWRs are loaded with MOX fuel, the plants have to be shut down completely, instead of operating at low-power levels. This will have serious economic disadvantages, as it makes it very difficult if not impossible to follow the changing demand hour by hour. The burn-up of MOX fuel is now limited to 36 MWD/kg. EdF wants to increase it to 52 MWD/kg.18 There is little chance this will be permitted this century, especially after a test with MOX fuel at the Cabri Research Reactor ended in the rupture of the fuel.19

Fast Breeders
France has two Fast Breeders: Phenix and Superphenix. The country is the best example of the failure of the FBR technology. Most of the time these reactors are shut down, under repair or functioning less than half of their power. Superphenix will not (try to) breed anymore but will be rebuild into a research reactor for the burning of plutonium and transmutation of other actinides.20 However, the French supreme administrative court, the Conseil d'Etat, annulled the 1994 operating license in late February 1997. The licensing decree assigned a "new purpose" of research and demonstration to the reactor's operation that was out of step with owner Nersa's 1992 application for restart and the dossier it submitted to public inquiry.21 Phenix, in its turn, is also used for Pu-burning research and into the incineration of actinites. For these two research programs CEA is willing to continue operation for the next 10 years.22

MOX fabrication
The MOX fuel fabrication plant in Cadarache has been in operation since 1963 mainly for producing fuel for fast-breeder reactors, but has been engaged in fabricating MOX fuel for LWRs since 1990.23 The Melox plant in Marcoule started operations towards the end 1994 and has a production capacity of 120 tHM/yr. The MOX production at the Melox plant stays behind expectations. The production in 1996 was 58 tons instead of the expected 85 tons.24 Melox is owned by Cogéma and Framatome.

Reprocessing
The French electricity utility EdF has the policy to reprocess (nearly) all spent fuel from their LWRs. Some 350 tons of spent fuel, for which no reprocessing contracts are signed, will be stored each year in cooling pools at the reactor sites. In the past, the spent fuel from the GGRs has also been reprocessed. As the last GGR, Bugey 1 closed in 1994, the reprocessing plant in Marcoule, dedicated to reprocess GGR spent fuel will close in 1997.25
In 1995 about 750 tons of spent fuel from EdF was reprocessed by Cogéma in the UP2-800 plant at La Hague. EdF has asked Cogéma to reprocess 850 tons/yr (the full capacity of the UP2-800 plant) in the future. Then, the quantity of separated plutonium will be about 8,500 kg Pu/yr. It is very doubtful if the full production capacity will be realized each year.26

Zero value for plutonium
EdF uses some special tricks in calculating the costs of MOX fuel and enriched uranium fuel. Until 1995 EdF assigned a value to the plutonium content in the MOX fuel, equivalent to enriched uranium in uranium oxide fuel. In 1995 EdF shifted to a zero value for plutonium in MOX. In this way, the price difference between MOX and uranium fuel seems much smaller than it really is.
Beginning in 1995 EdF has been loading the entire reprocessing cost to the uranium oxide (UO2) fuel.27 In this way, the UO2 fuel is made artificially more expensive, while at the same time the MOX fuel seems much cheaper than it really is. The French nuclear community is putting a lot of effort in trying to solve the present problems with MOX fuel and to develop better and cheaper MOX fuels. A quarter of the FF400 million (about US$80 million) spent annually on nuclear fuel R&D, is devoted to MOX development.28


4.5 Germany

Till 1994, the official governmental policy obliged the utilities to reprocess all their spent fuel. This obligation has been changed. Direct storage of spent fuel is permitted under a renewed atomic law of May 1994. Since this policy change, some reprocessing contracts have been cancelled. The cancellation of these contracts of the German utilities HEW and RWE totalling 545 tons of spent fuel will decrease the quantity of separated plutonium and, therefore, the quantity of MOX made with the plutonium.29
The public resistance to direct temporary and final storage of spent fuel in Germany, however, is so strong that several utilities started negotiations to sign contracts with the UK and France for temporary storage of German spent fuel at their reprocessing plants, with an option to reprocess the spent fuel at a later moment.30 Later, the existence of these contracts were denied by Cogéma.31
Fierce opposition to the Castor transport of High Level Waste returning to Gorleben, Germany, from La Hague in France will probably have consequences on the decisions of German utilities about spent fuel management. In March 1997, these actions cost the state government of Lower Saxony between US$70 million and US$100 million, solely for the 30,000 police force, during that week.32 Estimates about property damage costs due to sabotage and bomb attacks are not given yet, but could be of the same attitude.
If future transports of German spent fuel to Gorleben or to the other facility for interim storage of high level waste, Ahaus, are not possible, "we must either have more storage capacity built at the nuclear reactor sites or we must sign additional reprocessing and storage contracts with BNFL or Cogema", one utility official said after last years shipment to Gorleben. Seven reactors are possibly facing shutdowns due to lack of storage unless the spent fuel is shipped to foreign reprocessors.33

MOX use
The Obrigheim plant started to use MOX fuel on an experimental scale in 1972. The experiment stopped in 1976.34 Unterweser and Neckarwestheim 1 reactors received the first MOX licenses in the late 80s. Grafenrheinfeld, Grohnde, and Philippsburg 2 reactors came next. Brokdorf, which started operation in 1986, was the first reactor that possessed a MOX license from the beginning.
Emsland, Isar 2, and Neckarwestheim 2, all of which started operation in 1988-89, have been constructed with MOX license. The first permit for boiling water reactors, Gundremmingen B and C had been granted in 1994.35 Not all have been loaded with MOX yet. Gundremmingen B+C are loaded in July 1995.36 By the beginning of 1997 eight reactors have actually used MOX: Brokdorf, Grafenrheinfeld, Grohnde, Neckar 1, Philippsburg 2, Unterweser and Gundremmingen B+C.37

MOX fabrication
Siemens had two MOX fabrication plants in Hanau; one small demonstration facility in operation and a new one which was almost complete for fullscale operation with an annual capacity of 120 tons. But the demonstration facility was closed down in 1991 when there was a contamination accident. This old facility had safety concerns that could not meet the safety standards prescribed in the new German Atomic Energy Law.
The commercial scale facility in Hanau received partial license in 1987 and construction was started, but in 1993, the Higher Administrative Court declared three of the partial licenses to be unlawful.38
In April 1994, it became apparent that it was impossible to gain approval of the state government of Hesse for operation because of safety and economic reasons. The utilities decided not to finance completion of the new plant nor to keep paying the maintenance costs. Siemens finally gave up the plan in 1995 and declared itself "forced to abandon MOX fuel production in Germany."39 As a result of that, the German utilities were forced to seek new MOX fabrication contracts in France and Belgium. In anticipation of these contracts with German utilities, Cadarache has invested over $100 million to upgrade the plant.40 For a period of 10 years 25 tons of MOX fuel per year (containing 5%-6% Pu), will be fabricated for the Germans.41 The Pu for this MOX comes from German spent fuel, reprocessed in France at La Hague under the so-called UP3 baseload contracts. The Germans also contracted for MOX fuel production with Belgonucléaire at its plant in Dessel in Belgium.42
An August 1996 court decision in Berlin may put an end, however, to expansion of MOX use in Germany. The court decided to forbid the use of foreign nuclear fuel in German nuclear reactors.43 As all German MOX fuel fabrication plants are closed, all MOX fuel has to be imported. According to the court, new research must be done about the possible link between the use of a new type of nuclear fuel and the incidence of leukemia around the Kruemmel nuclear power plant near Hamburg, before the use of the new fuel is allowed.


4.6 India

Against the wishes of the US State Department, in October 1995 India loaded home-made MOX fuel into its Tarapur-2 BWR, which was supplied by the US. Tarapur-2 will be reloaded with a core containing more MOX fuel assemblies than in Tarapur-1. In 1994, India loaded two MOX fuel assemblies in Tarapur-1, also supplied by the US. In coming years the Tarapur BWRs will be loaded with far less than 30% MOX fuel. India has notified the IAEA, which safeguards the Tarapur reactors under a trilateral agreement with India and the US. No decision is made about the handling of the spent MOX fuel. It is expected that India will dispose of the spent MOX as waste. The spent MOX fuel will be under IAEA safeguards. Reprocessing of the spent MOX fuel in a reprocessing plant dedicated to separation of plutonium from spent FBR fuel or other Pu fuel, would "contaminate" that facility with IAEA safeguards. That is something India would like to prevent. A reprocessing plant under construction at Kalpakkam, will be used to separate plutonium from unsafeguarded spent fuel from India's Pressurized Heavy Water Reactor. It will take several years to separate enough plutonium for the initial core of the 500-MW prototype FBR, which India still hopes to build. As FBRs are able to produce weapon-grade plutonium and India will not allow IAEA safeguards at its FBR, it seems as if India plans to use this FBR for military use. It is a clear example of the proliferation possibilities of the fabrication and use of MOX fuel.44


4.7 Japan

Japan wants to keep the possibility open to build Fast Breeder Reactors at around 2030. That is the justification to continue reprocessing and the use of plutonium. And, on the other hand, the amount of existing plutonium is another argument to use it in FBRs or in LWRs. The sodium fire on December 8, 1995, in the recently completed Monju FBR and the scandals surrounding the accident seemed to have created a new situation. The accident at Tokaimura on March 11, 1997, and the contamination of 35 workers45 will most likely strengthen the public concern and opposition about the Japanese nuclear policy. On January 20, 1997, an interim report of the Nuclear Energy Sub-Committee of the Advisory Committee for Energy to the Minister of International Trade and Industry (MITI) stressed the necessity of implementing MOX use in light water reactors to cope with the stalled FBR program and the accumulating plutonium surplus which amounts to nearly 15,000 kg (end 1995). This report can be regarded as the official response to the public concern and is a follow-up of the old pro-plutonium government policy.46
In February, Japanese nuclear utilities agreed to burn MOX fuel into 18 LWRs. Four of the 18, two BWRs and two PWRs, will load MOX by the year 2000. By 2010 all 18 LWRs will use MOX fuel. This is a clear policy shift from the earlier emphasis to burn plutonium in FBRs.47 Until now, MOX fuel is only used in the FBRs Joyo and Monju and in the ATR Fugen and, so far not in LWRs. From 1966-1993 more than 123 tons of MOX fuel have been used.48

MOX fabrication
Japan has four small-scale MOX fuel production plants49:

At the PFPF MOX plant a 70 kg discrepancy of plutonium in book values and physical inventory was discovered two years ago. After long discussions with the IAEA, Japan agreed to a US$100 million upgrade of the plant. By now, the discrepancy is lowered to below 10 kg. The plutonium was said to have accumulated inside the equipment.50The policy of all nuclear utilities is to reprocess all their spent fuel, in the UK, France and in Japanese reprocessing plants. Since 1977 a reprocessing plant at Tokaimura is in operation, with a design capacity of 210 ton/year and an average effective capacity of 75 ton/yr.51 A commercial scale reprocessing plant is under construction in Rokkasho-Mura, with a capacity of 800 tons spent fuel/year. This plant has been delayed several times and the estimated costs have doubled to US$16 billion. It is now expected not to go into operation until 2003.52
Over the next 15 years about 2,000 kg of fissile Pu/year will return from European reprocessing plants in the form of MOX fuel, totalling 30,000 kg fissile Pu separated in Europe.53 After years of negotiations it was made public that the MOX will be manufactured by Belgonucléaire's MOX plant at Dessel in Belgium.54 On February 10, 1997, the document which resolved the problem of allowing Belgonucléaire to fabricate the MOX was signed between Belgium, Japan and the European Commission. They detail the conditions under which an initial amount of Japanese-origin Pu can be moved from La Hague to Dessel. The exchange was necessary because Japan has no agreement for nuclear cooperation with Belgium. The conditions are in conformity with the international non-proliferation framework, and subjects the material to Euratom and IAEA safeguards. An initial 221 kg of plutonium will be transferred from La Hague to Dessel by September 1997, followed by 262 kg by July 1998. A total of 3,088 kg of uranium will be shipped from Japan to Dessel for incorporation into the MOX elements.55


4.8 Netherlands

One commercial nuclear reactor is in operation: a 480-MW PWR at Borssele since 1973 and which will be closed in 2004. There was also a 59-MW BWR at Dodewaard, which went into operation on March 26, 1968, and was closed on March 26, 1997. The long established policy of the utilities is to reprocess the spent fuel. Several reprocessing contracts have been signed with La Hague and Sellafield. In total, Dodewaard and Borssele will produce 3,850 kg of plutonium. Some 200 kg of plutonium that was sold to the FBR Kalkar will fall back again to the original owners, since Kalkar never went into operation, and is now sold as a luna-park. Plutonium is also sold to the French Superphenix FBR. The Netherlands are partners in both projects.56
In the past, some MOX fuel has been burned on an experimental scale in Dodewaard. Nowadays no MOX is used anymore, nor are there any official plans to do so in the future. Kokx, a spokesperson of the owner of Borssele, EPZ, expects the separated Pu would be sold to foreign customers for MOX in the French Melox facility. He expects no construction of a plutonium storage facility in the Netherlands.57


4.9 Russia

The former USSR had the ambition to build three new FBRs but Russia, it's "successor", does not have the funds. The Russian FBRs did not use MOX fuel, but High Enriched Uranium. Russia has no experience with fabrication or use of MOX in LWRs. Still, Minatom (Ministry of Atomic Energy) is interested in building MOX fuel fabrication plants in Russia, with financial and technical assistance from other countries. For the fiscal year 1995 Minatom requested US$85 million for producing MOX fuel from ex-weapons plutonium, but received much less. Russia would still have a weapons plutonium inventory of 125,000 kg. The civil plutonium stocks total 72,000 kg.58 The intention was to export this Russian MOX to Western countries. Too much problems had to be solved, however, to realize these plans. The G-7 approved in October 1996 the burning of Russian weapons-Pu in the BRD. The German administration decided, however, not to import and burn this plutonium on security grounds. They fear sabotage and terrorist attacks of the plutonium transports (about 60 shipments of weapon-grade plutonium/year). An official said: "There was no way we were going to take that risk"59. For the German utilities the use of Russian military plutonium as MOX fuel in German reactors would have been a first step to discuss the sending and storage of German spent fuel to Russia.
The justification for all plans to fabricate Russian military plutonium into MOX fuel is prevention of proliferation risks. Because Russia is a Nuclear Weapon State (NWS), the IAEA does not safeguard any plutonium stored in Russia. It is reported that Russian safeguarding of military plutonium stocks is quite inadequate. In the past months, BNFL, Siemens, Cogéma and Belgonucléaire proposed plans to build pilot MOX plants in Russia. Russia has already pilot MOX fabrication plants in Mayak and Dimitrovgrad.60 Almost 5,000 kg of military Pu will be generated annually from dismantling Russian nuclear weapons.61


4.10 Switzerland

There are five PWR reactors in operation and two reactors are using MOX fuel assemblies. The first reactor to install MOX was Beznau 1 (1978), Beznau 2 followed in 1984. Belgonucléaire started to fabricate MOX fuel for Goesgen in 1996.62 But Goesgen will not be loaded with MOX fuel before August 1997.63
It is expected that MOX burning will continue in the two Beznau reactors till the end of their lifetimes, around 2005. The MOX spent fuel will be stored and not reprocessed. The Beznau plant has specially sealed dry-storage areas for MOX fuel awaiting loading.64
Switzerland plans to receive 2.2 tons of plutonium from its reprocessing contracts by the year 2003. And all the five reactors are licensed to receive MOX fuel.65


4.11 United Kingdom

In the UK, both FBRs have been closed. The Dounreay Fast Reactor, 15 MW, was closed in 1977, the 270-MW PFR, also at Dounreay, was closed in 1994 because the government stopped funding it. Expenditure for research and development of FBRs totalled 4 billion pounds from 1960-1995.66 This is some US$6 billion in January 1993 exhange rates.
In Sellafield are two MOX fabrication plants for Light Water Reactors: MDF, in operation since October 1993, with a capacity of eight ton/year and a largescale commercial MOX fuel fabrication plant, the SMP, with a production of 120 ton/year for LWRs, which is still under construction.67 Start of operation is postponed and now expected in 1998.68 However, the SMP is constructed solely to meet the needs of BNFLs foreign reprocessing customers, notably Japan and Germany. It is very remarkable that no utility in the UK plans to use MOX in its reactors.


4.12 United States

In the US, development and construction of FBRs was abandoned earlier than in other countries. The last experimental FBR in operation, Fermi, was closed in 1972. The Clinch River FBR, under construction since 1976, was cancelled in 1983, as a (late) consequence of President Carter's Nuclear Non-Proliferation Act from 1978.69 By then, breeder reactors and reprocessing were seen by the US government as too proliferation prone for civil use. The US put a lot of pressure on countries like Pakistan, Taiwan, South Korea and North Korea, to stop their reprocessing program. However, they didn't try as hard and didn't succeed to convince European countries to do the same. MOX production in the US has been conducted in the past by Westinghouse, Exxon Nuclear, Gulf United Nuclear Fuels and General Electric. These were all laboratory-scale facilities.70
On January 14, 1997, a record of decision has been signed by the outgoing Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary, setting the Department of Energy on a dual-path approach to disposing of the 50 tons of excess weapon-grade plutonium taken from the dismantled nuclear warheads. The Department Of Energy (DOE) will pursue two options: The US continues research and testing of the MOX option in Canadian nuclear reactors, the CANDUs. The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) wants to export 1.04 kg of plutonium for MOX fuel to Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.'s (AECL) Chalk River's NRU reactor for testing. But the DOE pulled back its application for a license authorizing the plutonium export when non-proliferation groups complained that the department was jumping the gun by moving ahead with the export and testing while still reviewing the plutonium disposition options.72 But after the DOE's dual-path decision they renewed the bid and AECL announced the tests would take place in during the summer of 1997.73 Opponents claim that the test program "is undoubtedly being watched carefully by other countries interested in plutonium options" -- including South Korea, India, Romania and Argentina, all of which have CANDU reactors and are thought to have had "an active program to develop nuclear weapons".74 Because MOX has been produced in the US only a small scale, new MOX plants would have to be built or the partially built Fuel Materials Examination Facility at Hanford, Washington, be completed. The FMEF was built in the 1970s to produce FBR fuel.75


Sources:

  1. Vliet, J.van, D. Haas, Y. Vanderborck, M. Lippens, Cl. Vandenberg (Belgonucleaire); 'MIMAS MOX Fuel Fabrication & Irradiation Performance', June 1996 for the International Seminar on MOX Fuel in the UK. As cited in: 'Fissile Material Disposition & Civil Use Of Plutonium', No2, 3 October 1996
  2. Albright, D., F.Berkhout, W.Walker; 'World Inventory of Plutonium and Highly Enriched Uranium 1992', Oxford University Press, 1993, p.99
  3. Schneider, M., 'Le Plutonium Belge et le Programme d'Armement Nucléaire Français', WISE Paris, August 1995, p.7
  4. Nuclear Fuel, 18 November 1996: 'Belgonucleaire fabricating MOX fuel for second Swiss reactor', p.13
  5. Nuclear Fuel, 15 July 1996: 'Belgonucleaire tells Washington it can best help with weapons Pu disposition', p.16
  6. Nuclear Fuel, 11 September 1995: 'CANDU MOX fabrication costs are unfavorable, Germans say', p.8
  7. Nuclear Fuel, 24 February 1997: 'CANDU MOX fuel test to go ahead; government won't subsidize program', p.13
  8. Nuclear Fuel, 3 June 1996: 'German, French propose competing technology for Russian MOX project', p.11
  9. Nuclear Fuel, 6 November 1995: 'French working to improve MOX performance and economics', p.8
  10. Nuclear Fuel, 23 September 1996: 'EDF opens another site to MOX use; intends for other units to go MOX', p.14
  11. Le Forum Plutonium, La Lettre 1, November 1996; p.1
  12. Nuclear Fuel, 10 March 1997: 'Opponents of MOX use in France push to delay license for four Chinon PWRs' p.11
  13. Conseil Supérieur de la Sûreté et de l'Information Nucléaires, Réunion du 13 Octobre 1994; 'Points sur les Procédures Relatives à l'Utilisation du Combustible MOX'
  14. Nuclear Fuel, 18 November 1996: 'Cogema outlines firm plan to raise MOX production capacity', p.11
  15. Le Monde, 24 January 1996: 'EdF veut utiliser 'a plein' la filière MOX'
  16. Power in Europe, 6 September 1996: 'France, Nuclear' p.16
  17. Nuclear Fuel, 6 November 1995: 'French working to improve MOX performance and economics', p.8
  18. Nuclear Fuel, 11 March 1996: 'First Cabri test of high-burn-up MOX fuel doesn't lead to failure', p.11
  19. Nuclear Fuel, 10 March 1997: 'EDF, French regulators worried by rupture of MOX fuel test pin', p.11
  20. NucNet News Item, 20 December 1996; 'Superphenix Set For Breeder-to-Burner Conversion'
  21. Nucleonics Week, 6 March 1997: 'Top French court annuls license for superphenix, ministers battle', p.1
  22. La Gazette Nucleaire, January 1997; 'Situation du réacteur Phénix', p.28
  23. Revue Generale Nucleaire, January/February 1995: 'Le combustible MOX et l'usine de fabrication Melox'
  24. Nuclear Fuel, 10 March 1997: 'Melox plant shy of 1996 production goal', p.11
  25. Nuclear Fuel, 28 August 1995: 'EDF's fuel spending increases as reprocessing program takes off', p.6
  26. Le Monde, 24 January 1996: 'EdF veut utiliser 'a plein' la filière MOX'
  27. Nucleonics Week, 2 November 1995: 'EDF to erase positive Pu value in 1995 accounts', p.14
  28. Nuclear Fuel, 6 November 1995, 'French working to improve MOX performance and economics', p.8
  29. Nuclear Fuel, 10 April 1995, 'BNFL, NE seal huge reprocessing deal, securing future operations at THORP', p.13
  30. Nuclear Fuel, 20 May 1996: 'After Gorleben: more reprocessing or alternative spent fuel storage', p.10
  31. Reuter, 25 May 1996: 'French firm denies may store German nuclear waste'
  32. WISE Newscommunique 468, 14 March 1997: 'High level N-waste shipped to Gorleben, Germany', p.2
  33. Nuclear Fuel, 20 May 1996: 'After Gorleben: more reprocessing or alternative spent fuel storage', p.10
  34. Nuclear Fuel, 25 March 1996, 'Obrigheim to store spent fuel in lieu of Cogéma reprocessing', p.14
  35. Ayukawa, Y., Issue no.2, 3 October 1996: 'Fissile material disposition & civil use of plutonium'
  36. Frankfurter Rundschau, 29 July 1995: 'Gundremmingen Erstmal Strom aus MOX'
  37. Sailer, M., personal telephone conversation on 26 March 1997
  38. Küppers, C., and M. Sailer: 'MOX-Wirtschaft oder die zivile Plutoniumnutzung', IPPNW, 1994, p.32-33
  39. Die Tageszeitung, 8/9 July 1995: 'Aus für Hanauer MOX-Fabrik'
  40. Nuclear Fuel, 18 December 1995: 'Siemens shakes up fuel sector, prepares to decommission Hanau', p.9
  41. Liberation, 21 January 1996: 'Plutonium Allemand, Poubelle Française'
  42. Nuclear Fuel, 29 January 1996: 'EdF expresses little interest in German Pu; 'Enough of own'', p.9
  43. Nuclear Fuel, 26 August 1996: 'German court order casts chill over fuel and backfits markets', p.1
  44. Nuclear Fuel, 25 September 1995: 'Tarapur-2 join twin BWR in burning PHWR plutonium', p.18
  45. WISE Newscommunique 468, 14 March 1997: 'Explosion at PNC Tokai reprocessing plant', p.1
  46. Nuke Info, January/February 1997, 'MITI's Committee Gives Go-Ahead to MOX Program?', p.1
  47. Nucleonics Week, 27 February 1997: 'Japan utilities plan to burn MOX in up to 18 LWRS by 2010', p.3
  48. IAEA Bulletin, no 3 1993: 'Nuclear energy and its fuel cycle in Japan: Closing the circle', p.34
  49. Nuclear Engineering International, 'World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1996', p.115
  50. Nuclear Fuel, 4 November 1996: 'PFPF holdup Pu inventory under 10kg; R&D work to focus on Monju fuel', p.15
  51. Nuclear Fuel, 15 January 1996: 'Monju accident putting pressure on Rokkasho-mura work schedule', p.1
  52. Nuclear Fuel, 29 January 1996: 'Japan announces three-year delay in Rokkasho reprocessing project', p.7
  53. Nuclear Fuel, 9 October 1995: 'Japan could buy and burn 2 MT of Russian Pu per year, Suzuki says', p.8
  54. De Morgen, 11 February 1997: 'Belgisch-Japanse MOX-deal is rond'
  55. Nuclear Fuel, 24 February 1997: 'Trilateral exchange clears the way for fabrication of Japanese MOX', p.14
  56. Greenpeace Nederland: 'Het einde van de plutoniumdroom', 1996, p.6
  57. During a telephone conversation with LAKA on 16 November 1994
  58. Nuclear Fuel, 1 January 1996: 'Reprocessing critics say Mayak will die without foreign business', p.11
  59. Nucleonics Week, 2 January 1997: 'Investigators say terrorists steer violent German antinuclear protest', p.1
  60. Nuclear Fuel, 21 October 1996: 'Joint U.S.-Russian study details various Pu disposition options', p.11
  61. Nuclear Fuel, 9 October 1995: 'Japan could buy and burn 2 MT of Russian Pu per year, Suzuki says', p.8
  62. Nuclear Fuel, 18 November 1996: 'Belgonucleaire fabricating MOX fuel for second Swiss reactor', p.13
  63. Sailer, M., personal telephone conversation on 26 March 1997
  64. Nuclear Fuel, 26 February 1996: 'EDF seeking solutions to constraints on MOX use', p.7,8
  65. Stratton R. & H. Bay (NOK), 'Experience in the Use of MOX Fuels in the Beznau Plants of NOK', International Seminar on MOX Fuel, June 1996, UK. As cited in 'Fissile Material Disposition & Civil Use Of Plutonium', No2, 3 October 1996
  66. Nuclear Europe Worldscan, no.1-2 1993: 'UK plans orderly, scientific withdrawal from fast reactor R&D', p.58
  67. Nuclear Engineering International: 'World Nuclear Industry Handbook 1996', p.115
  68. Nuclear Fuel, 10 March 1997: 'ComEd set back by its position on European MOX market', p.9
  69. Nucleonics Week, 3 November 1983: 'U.S. Breeder establishment picking up the pieces in wake of CRBR's fall', p.8
  70. Nuclear Engineering International, January 1984: 'Laying the foundations for plutonium recycle in light water reactors', p.27
  71. Nuclear Fuel, 27 January 1997: 'It's official: DOE pursues dual strategy to dispose of excess weapons plutonium', p.15
  72. Nucleonics Week, 12 December 1996: 'DOE to renew bid to test MOX at AECL facility this summer', p.7
  73. Nuclear Fuel, 24 February 1997: 'CANDU MOX fuel test to go ahead; government won't subsidize program', p.13
  74. Nuclear Fuel, 7 October 1996: 'Groups oppose MOX fuel export seek to intervene at NRC', p.5
  75. Science for Democratic Action, February 1997: `Weapons Pu as Reactor Fuel - Technical aspects of the use of weapons Pu'
Contents 1 2 3 4 5 6 Summary


- | -
-
   home > newsletter > search > about us > links    
 -
- - -