 |
Background Info |
|
 |
|
 |
What is Reprocessing?
Reprocessing refers to the chemical separation of fissionable uranium and plutonium from irradiated nuclear fuel. The World War II-era Manhattan Project developed reprocessing technology in the effort to build the first atomic bomb. With the development of commercial nuclear power after the war, reprocessing was considered necessary because of a perceived scarcity of uranium. Breeder reactor technology, which transmutes non-fissionable uranium into fissionable plutonium and thus produces more fuel than consumed, was envisioned as a promising solution to extending the nuclear fuel supply. Commercial reprocessing attempts, however, encountered technical, economic, and regulatory problems. In response to concern that reprocessing contributed to the proliferation of nuclear weapons, President Carter terminated federal support for commercial reprocessing. Reprocessing for defense purposes continued, however, until the Soviet Union’s collapse brought an end to the Cold War and the production of nuclear weapons. The Department of Energy’s latest initiative to promote new reactor technology using “proliferation-resistant” reprocessed fuel raises significant funding and policy issues for Congress.
Source: "Nuclear Fuel Reprocessing: U.S. Policy Development," Congressional Research Service Report for Congress, 2008.
What is wrong with GNEP? (Click on each to learn more)
-Reprocessing is exorbitantly costly
-Reprocessing generates toxic waste and does nothing to solve the problem of nuclear waste
-Reprocessing undermines nuclear nonproliferation efforts
What can you Do?
In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Department of Energy (DOE) has drafted a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and is in the middle of a comment period in which you can tell DOE what you think about their plan. You do not have to be an expert. You just need to care about the future of your community and country. Check back on this page to see information on upcoming hearings in or near your community.
|
 |
| | |
| |
|
|
| | | published Tuesday, August 11, 2009 | 3730 Views :: 16 Comments |
August 11, 2009
By ROGER SNODGRASS, Monitor Editor
There are currently several nails in the coffin of a nuclear policy that has
strongly favored commercial reprocessing and recycling of plutonium. Ivan
Oelrich wants to make sure it doesn’t pop open again.
A recurring idea in the political tug-of-war between proponents and
opponents of nuclear energy, nuclear reprocessing is intended to achieving a
plutonium fuel cycle, and thereby provide a plentiful supply of nuclear fuel
and a more easily-stored waste product.
Originally published in the Los Alamos Monitor: http://www.lcni5.com/cgi-bin/c2.cgi?075+article+News+20090808213804075075001
|
| read more.. |
|
| |
2009 Fact Sheet Global Nuclear Energy Parnership: Environomental and Security Risks |  |
| | published Monday, February 23, 2009 | 433 Views :: 0 Comments |
In 2003 the Bush Administration launched the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP), which it also called the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative. GNEP is designed to revive the practice of reprocessing irradiated nuclear fuel to separate out the plutonium. At the same time, however, it would endanger the environment, encourage nuclear bomb-making, squander U.S. taxpayer and ratepayer dollars, and deepen the nuclear waste problem.
Download 2009 Fact Sheet: GNEP4 final.pdf
|
|
| | | published Tuesday, February 17, 2009 | 3717 Views :: 1 Comments |
What happens to the U.S. arsenal if we don’t do life extensions?
Practically speaking, essentially nothing. DOE has never identified an
uncorrectable aging issue in the nuclear arsenal that would compromise
the ability of weapons to “function as designed.” Eventually,
surveillance may discover an aging anomaly that would call a warhead ’s
reliability into question. By then, the U.S. should be retiring
warheads as it meets its obligations under the Nonproliferation Treaty.
In contrast, DOE asserts the only viable alternative to life extension
for current warheads is building new bombs—the Reliable Replacement
Warheads. Whether by LEP or the RRW
program, planning for maintenance of a modernized nuclear arsenal for
many decades to come is contrary to our Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty
(NPT) disarmament obligation.
-From ANA's 2008 DC Days Fact Sheet
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, December 08, 2008 | 8697 Views :: 10 Comments |
WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) issued a notification in the Federal Register today that it is extending the comment period on the Draft Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) by 90 days. The public comment period will now end on March 16, 2009.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Monday, December 08, 2008 | 5373 Views :: 7 Comments |
Audio transcripts of GNEP hearing in Bolingbrook, Illinois provided by IndyMedia reporter and Greens candidate Rita Sand Maniotis
http://chicago.indymedia.org/media/all/display/31025/index.php
http://chicago.indymedia.org/media/all/display/31026/index.php
http://chicago.indymedia.org/media/all/display/31027/index.php
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Thursday, December 04, 2008 | 3745 Views :: 4 Comments |
By John Huotari | john.huotari@oakridger.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OAK RIDGE, Tenn. — Critics had some harsh words for the U.S. Department of Energy on Tuesday regarding a draft environmental impact statement prepared for a proposed program meant to safely, securely and sustainably expand the use of nuclear energy.
DOE has prepared the statement for what is known as the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, and officials had a public hearing on the program at the New Hope Center at the Y-12 National Security Complex.
See complete article: http://www.oakridger.com/localnews/x776470482/Nuke-programs-EIS-blasted
|
| read more.. |
|
| |
Heart of America Northwest Citizen Guide to GNEP PEIS | |
| | published Wednesday, December 03, 2008 | 247 Views :: 0 Comments | |
| | | published Monday, December 01, 2008 | 5948 Views :: 1 Comments |
Federal Plan to Double Nuclear Power Relies on Dumping More Highly Radioactive Waste at Hanford Energy Department Hearings This Week Exclude Seattle, Portland and Spokane – only NW hearings to be in Tri-Cities (Monday) and Hood River (Tuesday)
Download pdf: Heart of America Northwest Press Release 08.11.17.pdf
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Tuesday, November 25, 2008 | 3737 Views :: 2 Comments |
Alliance for Nuclear Accountability
Testimony by Susan Gordon
November 20, 2008
Global Nuclear Energy Partnership PEIS
The
Alliance for Nuclear Accountability (ANA) is a network of more than 36
local, regional and national organizations representing the concerns of
communities in the shadows of the U.S. nuclear weapons sites and
radioactive waste dumps. Many of our member organizations are in areas
targeted for reprocessing facilities and are gravely concerned that
their communities will become nuclear waste dumps just like West
Valley, New York, Pocatello, Idaho, Richland, Washington, and Aiken,
South Carolina.
|
| read more.. |
|
| | | published Friday, November 21, 2008 | 5073 Views :: 3 Comments | |
|
|
|
|
|
Resources |
|
|
| | | |
|