Latest News

The US is still in need of nuclear fuel, but the highly dangerous plutonium will not solve this problem.

The US is still in need of nuclear fuel, but the highly dangerous plutonium will not solve this problem.
The US is still in need of nuclear fuel, but the highly dangerous plutonium will not solve this problem.

The Trump administration has begun talks with companies about converting Cold War plutonium to fuel for new nuclear reactors. This is part of a multifaceted strategy to make sure there is enough electricity to power the U.S. boom in data centers.

The scheme is at risk of extensive delays and exorbitant costs for security, to the point that it could be unfeasible. This is due to the fact that plutonium can be extremely dangerous.

In the wrong hands, a grapefruit-sized piece of this?material? could be used to create an atomic bomb as powerful as the one that the United States dropped in World War Two on Nagasaki. The dust from the radioactive element has a half life of 24000 years and is deadly to inhale.

Ross Matzkin Bridger, who was responsible for securing the plutonium material around the globe at the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration, said: "This is weapons usable plutonium." "I am very concerned about the fact that taxpayers will be taking on a large part of the risk."

Last month, the Trump administration announced that it had selected five companies to begin advanced discussions about developing 19,7 metric tonnes of different forms of plutonium. This includes?from dismantled nuclear warheads into reactor fuel.

The U.S. government has had a difficult time storing plutonium. Now, the industry is rushing to find new ways to meet President Donald Trump's ambitious goal of quadrupling the U.S. nuclear power capacity by the year 2050. This is due to the surge in power demand for data centers.

U.S. Representative Bill Foster (an Illinois Democrat, and the only physicist serving in the U.S. Congress) said that "my brain goes into high alert" whenever he hears of the proposal.

Foster stated that the program would likely have sky-high costs for security to keep it "robust" against terrorism and that stakeholders should carefully examine the economics of such plants before moving ahead.

The U.S. DOE stated that it expects the majority of employees at an facility handling plutonium to require the highest level of security clearances.

A spokesperson for the Office of Nuclear Energy stated that the companies would be required to submit plans on material safety and security for stabilization, packaging and transportation of plutonium.

The spokesperson stated that "DOE doesn't expect to pay for specialized protections against proliferation, health and security required to process excess plutonium."

Selected Companies

Oklo is a company that wants to use plutonium as fuel. They believe the material will be useful until the U.S. increases its domestic uranium supply, which includes a type of uranium called HALEU. This is a more enriched fuel than the fuel currently used in U.S. nuclear reactors. Bonita Chester said that the Oklo spokesperson would not have to pay large costs to the taxpayers if the plutonium fuel was used. This would avoid the need for a costly and risky government program to dilute the material and dispose of it.

When the Trump administration announced its fuel plan last year, it halted all disposal efforts.

Chester said that Oklo would "invest in transportation, the associated fuel manufacturing infrastructure, as well all licensing requirements including safety, security and safeguards", as well as any license requirements. She didn't provide any estimate of the costs.

Energy Secretary Chris Wright served on Oklo’s board before joining the administration.

Wright did not participate in the selection process of Oklo. He forfeited his unvested shares and "recused" himself from any matters relating to Oklo.

Carl Perez is the CEO of Exodys Energy. The company plans to build an industrial facility on federal land in order to process excess plutonium and turn it into nuclear fuel. He said that no facility could obtain U.S. licenses and authorizations without addressing worker safety, overall safety and material safeguards according recognized standards.

Greg Piefer is the CEO and founder of SHINE Technologies. He said that SHINE Technologies has extensive experience in handling and processing nuclear materials. Once plutonium produces power, it's no longer dangerous.

He said that burning weapons-grade Plutonium was one of the responsiblest things to do.

Standard Nuclear and Flibe Energy - the two other companies involved in the advanced discussions - did not respond when asked for comments.

ROCKY HISTORY

The history of the United States in converting plutonium into fuel has been rocky. In 2000, the U.S. agreed to convert it into MOX fuel to be used in reactors. In 2018, Trump's first government canceled the MOX program, saying that it would have cost $48 billion extra than the $7.6 million already spent.

Oklo intends to use plutonium for its so-called "fast reactors" that it has developed and which it claims are more efficient than reactors expected to run on MOX. Oklo's calculations show that 1 metric ton plutonium could power 1 million American households for an entire year.

The U.S. has only used fast reactors for research and not power generation.

Ernest Moniz was the U.S. Energy Secretary under former President Barack Obama. He said that it is cheaper and easier to dilute this material and dispose of it. "I expect that the government will be paying for much of this, including the security around weapons-grade Plutonium." (Reporting and editing by Richard Valdmanis, Nia Williams, and Timothy Gardner)

(source: Reuters)