Pu & Reprocessing

Plutonium is a manmade element created in nuclear reactors. If separated from the spent fuel of nuclear power plants by means of reprocessing, plutonium can be made into atomic bombs.

Reprocessing produces by the ton a material that can be used by the pound to make nuclear weapons. About a dozen pounds of plutonium was used in the bomb that destroyed Nagasaki. Because of plutoniums weapons potential, it is much more costly to store and difficult to safeguard than the spent fuel from which it is separated.

Plutonium is also intensely toxic. A speck the size of a pollen grain causes lung cancer.

The Nuclear Control Institute (NCI) opposes reprocessing and advocates direct, geological disposal of spent fuel because of the proliferation, terrorism and health risks associated with plutonium.

In the 1970s, Presidents Ford and Carter rejected reprocessing for the purpose of turning plutonium into reactor fuel because of plutoniums role in nuclear weapons and its poor economics.

Vice President Richard Cheney was Gerald Fords Chief of Staff when this U.S. anti-reprocessing policy was established. Vice President Cheneys energy task force report, prepared for President Bush, now calls for reconsideration of this important 25-year-old nuclear non-proliferation policy.

The Bush energy plan cites the reliance of Britain, France and Japan on reprocessing, an industrial approach that separates nuclear waste into usable fuel and highly concentrated waste, as an example for the United States to follow. But these countries refused to follow the United States example of steering clear of reprocessing. Now they are struggling with what to do with large volumes of highly radioactive reprocessing waste and growing stockpiles of unwanted, uneconomic weapons-usable plutonium fuel.

Because of European and Japanese reprocessing, more separated, weapons-usable plutonium has been produced in civilian than military nuclear programs worldwide. Only about one-third of this plutonium has been used as fuel in power reactors, leaving a surplus of about 200 tons of weapons-usable plutonium in civilian hands.

[See chart:
Separated
Military and
Civilian
Plutonium.] [Seechart:
Civilian
Separated
Plutonium
by Nation.]

These reprocessing programs also set a dangerous example for other nations. India used its civilian plutonium program as a cover for making nuclear weapons. Iran is suspected of preparing to follow Indias example.

The Bush energy plan credits reprocessing with easing nuclear waste disposal. In fact, reprocessing actually makes the waste problem worse because it creates several high-volume radioactive waste streams requiring storage, treatment and burial. A U.S. experiment with commercial reprocessing at West Valley, N.Y., abandoned in 1972, vastly increased the amount of nuclear waste and has thus far cost taxpayers more than $1.5 billion for cleanup.

And since it is not technically feasible to recycle plutonium as fuel in reactors more than once, reprocessing does not eliminate the need for a repository for spent fuel. It simply defers it.

The Bush plan also cites growing interest in new technology known as accelerator transmutation, which could be used in combination with reprocessing to reduce the quantity and toxicity of nuclear waste. But such an undertaking, assuming it could be made to work, is projected by the Department of Energy to cost $300 billion and to last 117 years---a likely underestimate given DOEs average cost overrun of 500% on large capital projects!

Plutoniums toxicity also presents special problems. A peer-reviewed technical study by NCI [in PDF format] concludes that a severe accident at a nuclear power plant loaded with plutonium-based fuel would result in twice as many fatal cancers beyond the plant as the same type of accident at a reactor containing only conventional uranium fuel.

NCI advocates disposing of separated plutonium by recombining it with the highly radioactive waste from which it was extracted---a process known as immobilization---instead of using it as fuel in reactors. In this way, nuclear-weapon states and non-nuclear-weapon states could merge nuclear disarmament with nuclear non-proliferation and cooperate to rid the world of plutonium.

For the United States and Russia, immobilization of excess warhead plutonium would provide a faster, cheaper and more secure way of disposing of plutonium from retired warheads than the present plan to turn it into fuel for commercial nuclear power reactors. For this reason, NCI advocates direct disposal of surplus U.S. and Russian military plutonium as waste.

(For more background information on plutonium and
reprocessing, see "The Plutonium Threat".)

President Gerald Ford
Statement on Nuclear Policy, October 28, 1976
President Jimmy Carter
Presidential Directive/NSC-8, March 24, 1977
President Jimmy Carter
Nuclear Power Policy: Statement on Decisions
Reached Following a Review, April 7, 1977
President Ronald Reagan
United States Non-Proliferation and Peaceful
Nuclear Cooperation Policy, July 16, 1981
President Ronald Reagan
Statement on United States Nuclear
Nonproliferation Policy, July 16, 1981
President Bill Clinton
Statement on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and
Export Control Policy, September 23, 1993

  The documents below describe NCIs initiatives
  to oppose reprocessing and avoid the use of
  plutonium-based, mixed-oxide ("MOX") fuel:

Stories on plutonium and reprocessing gathered from various sources:


	Enormous "Plutonium Gap" at Japan's Tokai Plant Highlights Proliferation Risks of Reprocessing NCI Press Release Jan. 28, 2003
	Nonessential Nukes (Dr. Edwin Lyman, NCI President, and Paul Leventhal, NCI President Emeritus, Washington Post, November 26, 2002) .............................................................................. NCI, Groups to Congress: Eliminate Support for Reprocessing from Energy Bill (Letter from NCI and 33 Public-Interest Groups to Energy Bill Conferees, October, 2002) .............................................................................. NCI Comments on NRC's Revised Draft EIS for MOX Fuel Fabrication Plant (Dr. Edwin Lyman, NCI President, Letter to Nuclear Regulatory Commission, August 30, 2002) .............................................................................. Safeguards Concerns About Proposed U.S. Plutonium Fuel Plant (Dr. Edwin Lyman, NCI President, Presentation at the 43^rd Annual Meeting of the Institute of Nuclear Materials Management (INMM), Orlando, Florida, June 24, 2002) .............................................................................. G-8 Nations to Waste Billions on Russian Plutonium Fuel (NCI Press Release, June 27, 2002) .............................................................................. U.S.-Russia Nuclear Agreement Does Not Eliminate Warheads or Provide for Effective Plutonium Disposal (NCI Press Release, May 14, 2002) .............................................................................. NRC to NCI: Revised MOX Environmental Impact Statement Is Warranted (April 26, 2002) Additional required information for MOX fuel plant is consistent with what NCI is demanding of DOE, NRC says Federal Register Notice (PDF format) .............................................................................. DOE Officially Abandons Direct Disposal of Military Plutonium Without Conducting Environmental Review (April 19, 2002) NCI Press Release DOE Federal Register Notice (PDF format) NCI Condemns DOE Decision to Ship Plutonium to Savannah River over South Carolina's Opposition (NCI Press Release, April 16, 2002) .............................................................................. Japan Can Construct Nuclear Weapons Using Its Power Plant Plutonium (April 9) Opposition leader Ozawa's statement is technically accurate, politically dangerous, says NCI News Articles .............................................................................. Japan, Nuclear Weapons and Reactor-Grade Plutonium (March 27) Marvin Miller of MIT tells NCI seminar that Japanese scientists could use reactor-grade plutonium to make sophisticated weapons .............................................................................. NCI to Energy Secretary Abraham: Make Sure Disposal of U.S. and Russian Plutonium Proceeds at Same Pace NCI Press Release (March 27, 2002) DOE Reply to NCI (May 17, 2002) .............................................................................. NCI Press Release: DOE Report Reveals New Plutonium Disposition Hurdles (Feb. 25) .............................................................................. NCI Memo: The Revised Plutonium Disposition Strategy: DOEs House Of Cards (Feb. 22) .............................................................................. DOE Report to Congress: Disposition of Surplus Defense Plutonium at Savannah River Site (Feb. 8; PDF file, 340kb) Plutonium in Your Neighborhood? DOE is now looking for at least two more reactors to burn plutonium fuel. .............................................................................. Intelligence Report (NIC) to Congress Safety and Security of Russian Nuclear Facilities & Military Forces (Feb. 2002) .............................................................................. NCI letter to Secretary of Energy Abraham Request for "Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement" (SEIS) on Plutonium Disposition (Feb. 8) .............................................................................. NCI letter to DOE's General Gordon (NNSA Administrator) Supplemental EIS Legally Mandated Due to "Substantial Changes" in Plutonium Disposition Program (March 2002) .............................................................................. DOE "Supplement Analysis" on Plutonium Storage in K-Reactor at the Savannah River Site Reveals Plan for Indefinite Plutonium Storage in S. Carolina (Feb. 2002) .............................................................................. NCI Press Release U.S. Plan to Use Bomb Plutonium as Nuclear Fuel Faces Enormous Legal, Economic and Safety Hurdles (Jan. 23, 2002) U.S. Settles on Plan to Recycle Plutonium New York Times (Jan. 23, 2002) DOE Press Release (Jan. 23, 2002) .............................................................................. Past, Present and Future Nuclear Engineering International publishes guest article by NCI President Paul Leventhal on how civilian plutonium could cause mass destruction across the nuclear industry and the world. .............................................................................. NCI Press Release Closure of DOE's Fast Flux Test Facility is a Long-Overdue Death Sentence for U.S. Plutonium Breeder Reactor Program (Dec. 20, 2001) .............................................................................. DOE News Release Department of Energy to Permanently Deactivate Fast Flux Test Facility Research Reactor (Dec. 19) .............................................................................. NCI Press Release: U.S. MOX Plant Challenge Accepted by NRC Licensing Board (Dec. 13) .............................................................................. NCI Press Release: DOE Agrees to Conduct Threat Assessment on Plutonium Fuel (MOX) Shipment from Japan to BNFL's Sellafield Site (Nov. 16) .............................................................................. NCI Press Release: U.S. Must Assess Security Threat Before Deciding on Shipment of Plutonium Fuel (MOX) from Japan to England (Nov. 14) .............................................................................. NCI Letter: Review of MOX Shipment from Japan to Great Britain (Oct. 25) .............................................................................. NCI Letter: A Summit Topic: Russia's Plutonium (Paul L. Leventhal, NCI President, letter to the editor, New York Times Nov. 13) .............................................................................. Congress Urged To Restore Full Funding To Dispose Of Surplus Weapons Plutonium As Waste (August 30, 2001) .............................................................................. The Future of Immobilization Under the U.S.-Russian Plutonium Disposition Agreement (Dr. Edwin Lyman, NCI Scientific Director, Paper Presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Institute of Nuclear Materials Management, Indian Wells, CA, July 18, 2001) .............................................................................. Japanese Village Sends Loud Message On Plutonium That Bush and Cheney Would Do Well To Hear (NCI press release, May 27, 2001) .............................................................................. Bush Plan for Nuclear Power and Plutonium Invites Nuclear Accidents and Proliferation (Statement by Paul Leventhal, NCI President, May 17, 2001) .............................................................................. More Nuclear Power Means More Risk (Paul Leventhal, NCI President, op-ed column, New York Times, May 17, 2001) .............................................................................. Research on Accelerator Transmutation of Waste and Pyroprocessing is a Colossal Waste of Taxpayer Money (Dr. Edwin Lyman, NCI Scientific Director, May 24, 2001) .............................................................................. Nuclear Control Institute Comments for Sellafield Mixed-Oxide Fuel Plant (SMP) Consultation (Steven Dolley, NCI Research Director, and Paul Leventhal, NCI President, May 23, 2001) .............................................................................. Nuclear Control Institute Comments on the Scope and Content of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Environmental Impact Statement for the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility (Dr. Edwin Lyman, NCI Scientific Director, May 21, 2000) .............................................................................. The Future of Nuclear Power: A Public Interest Perspective (Dr. Edwin Lyman, NCI Scientific Director, Presentation to the NECPUC Symposium, Mystic, Connecticut, May 21, 2001) .............................................................................. Cheney: "Reprocessing...needs to be looked at" (Excerpt from NBC "Meet the Press" interview with Vice President Dick Cheney, May 20, 2001) .............................................................................. Nuclear Control Institute Calls on Nuclear Industry to Abandon Use of Plutonium, Highly Enriched Uranium (NCI Press Release, April 9, 2001) .............................................................................. NCI, IEER: NRC Should Hold Formal Hearings on Duke Cogema Stone Webster Application for Authorization to Construct a MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility (Nuclear Control Institute and Institute for Energy & Environmental Research, Letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 9, 2001) .............................................................................. NCI, NGOs to CNSC: Suspend Plans to Test Warhead-Plutonium MOX Fuel for CANDU Reactors (Letter from NCI, BREDL and 19 other public-interest groups to Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, January 23, 2001) .............................................................................. NCI, IEER: NRC Should Hold Formal Hearings on Duke Cogema Stone Webster Application for Authorization to Construct a MOX Fuel Fabrication Facility (Nuclear Control Institute and Institute for Energy & Environmental Research, Letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, March 9, 2001) .............................................................................. NCI, NGOs to CNSC: Suspend Plans to Test Warhead-Plutonium MOX Fuel for CANDU Reactors (Letter from NCI, BREDL and 19 other public-interest groups to Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, January 23, 2001) .............................................................................. IAEA Safeguards Shortcomings: A Critique Paul Leventhal (September 12, 1994) .............................................................................. Are IAEA Safeguards on Plutonium Bulk-Handling Facilities Effective? (Marvin Miller, MIT, August 1990)

	Earlier NCI Documents

July 25
DOE review fosters hope for FFTF supporters Hanford News
July 23
In pictures: Nuclear ship protest BBC (UK)
July 22
78 Nations Condemn Nuclear Shipments ENS
Greenpeace in High - Sea Protest Against Nuclear Ship New York Times
Two Nuclear Cargo Ships Evade Boats New York Times Pu
July 18
Fijian leader says nuclear waste transports through Pacific must be opposed AP
County to fake nuclear accident Augusta Chronicle
Waste shipment faces long wait Augusta Chronicle
July 17
Belgium seeks more info on US plutonium request Reuters
July 16
Nuclear fuel corp. misused 1.6 bil yen to win favor Mainichi Daily News
July 14
BNFL in record 2bn loss Observer (UK)
July 12
Shipping Plutonium [to the editor] New York Times
Belgium split by U.S. plutonium recycling bid Reuters
July 09
Atomic Energy Ministry estimates investments for spent nuclear fuel processing RosBusinessConsulting
July 07
Destroyer holed Broadcast Channel 4 News (UK)
British warship hits rocks off Australia, skipper admits human error AP
Anti-nuclear activists set sail from Sydney to protest ship carrying nuclear material Washington Post
July 05
Japanese Shipment of Nuclear Fuel Raises Security Fears New York Times
July 04
UK court asked to halt nuclear shipment from Japan online.ie
Nuclear Cargo Ship Leaves Japan, Security Tight Reuters
July 03
Nuclear shipment gets go-ahead BBC (UK)
July 02
Nuclear shipment gets go-ahead BBC (UK)
June 25
Activists worry Japan's plutonium stockpile may be used for weapons AP
Six tons of plutonium starts making its way across the USA USA Today
Hodges' help needed [editorial] Augusta Chronicle
June 24
SRS set for key post-Cold War role The State (Columbia SC)
June 23
Plutonium shipments top-secret The State (Columbia SC)
Weigh station may be first to know plutonium has entered state The State (Columbia SC)
SRS neighbors have mixed views Augusta Chronicle
June 22
Plutonium is ready to roll: Rocky Flats could start to ship today under court ruling Rocky Mountain News
June 21
Hodges loses another round The State (Columbia SC)
Court grants appeal to Hodges Augusta Chronicle
White House backs Thurmond amendment on plutonium disposal Greenville News
June 19
S.C. Governor Loses Fight Against Plutonium Washington Post
S.C. Gov. Banned From Shipment Block Las Vegas SUN
June 16
Troopers on relaxed watch for plutonium Charlotte Observer
June 15
Plutonium dispute escalates Charlotte Observer
S.C. closes borders to plutonium Boston Globe
June 14
S. Carolina May Block Plutonium AP
Plutonium suit dismissed The State (Columbia SC)
June 12
SRS radioactive waste spills Augusta Chronicle
Hodges worried about plutonium Charlotte Observer
June 06
S.C. shuns role as nuke host Boston Globe
Shipping nuclear waste Rocky Mountain News
June 05
Concerns voiced about shipping spent nuclear fuel Charlotte Observer
June 04
If reimbursed, S.C. can help store plutonium [op ed] Charlotte Observer
June 03
June 02
Plants run out of nuclear storage space Gannett News Service
June 01
Hodges files to protect protest Augusta Chronicle
May 31
Minatom Jumps the Gun on Reactor Cooperation Program With US DOE Bellona (Norway)
Residents join plutonium fight Augusta Chronicle
May 30
A nuclear hardball team [editorial] Denver Post
May 28
Clamp on Drills Seen Raising Risk at U.S. Reactors Macon NT
Nunn and Lugar Look to Safeguard Weapons Moscow Times
12 Million Could Die at Once in an India-Pakistan Nuclear War New York Times IP
Employees at Indian Pt. Back Safety of Reactors New York Times
India: Talks Impossible for Now New York Times IP
May 27
Making the feds pay extra Rocky Mountain News
S.C. can't stop plutonium shipments, federal attorneys say AP
Nuclear caravan safety stressed Charlotte Observer
May 26
It's time for the nuclear trash man to show up Augusta Chronicle

Earlier News Articles

You can also auto-search our web site for Plutonium & Reprocessing.