Yellowcake is refined, and then dissolved in concentrated hydrofluoric acid to give an intermediate compound with 4 fluorine atoms (UF4). Further treatment with fluorine gas attaches two more atoms to give uranium hexafluoride (UF6).
Uranium hexafluoride is not found in nature because it is unstable. By making the uranium so easy to manipulate, we have also made it so easy to blend into the surrounding environment; into water, air, soil and our bodies. In other words, the genie is out of the bottle. UF6 must be treated with kid gloves.
Concentrating the oofle dust
So subtle is the weight difference between U235 and U238, that separation and concentration becomes a very onerous task. Batteries of high-speed precision centrifuges are coupled together in their thousands in order to achieve commercial throughput. All must be gas tight and maintained at the correct temperature, so that UF6 does not condense back into fluid. All must be made from materials that will not react or combine with UF6. A centrifuge plant is a very considerable capital cost. The total energy investment is significant.
Advertisement
Mass-balancing oofle dust
To stoke a nuclear fire, we require a concentration of 35 (U235) atoms in every thousand. This means that for every tonne of nuclear fuel produced, there MUST be 9 tonnes of depleted uranium hexafluoride (dUF6) to be disposed of. There is no way out of this simple mass-balance: dUF6 still retains 3 atoms of U235 per thousand.
Commercial-in-confidence, shhhhh!
The US alone has in excess of 720,000 tonnes of depleted uranium hexafluoride in storage in enormous "parking lots". It is contained in large, thick-walled special steel containers, which must be re-painted and tested for leaks continuously. The containers hold almost all of the dUF6 that was created since 1946.
Laughingly, the US DoE describes this intractable mess as "a future resource", but there is no way out. The energy and capital cost of changing this poison into something benign makes the nuclear option a loser. Ask yourself, if there was a buck to be made, would that "resource" still be there after six decades?
The true cost of value-adding
For every tonne of reactor-grade UF6 produced, Australia must keep 9 tonnes of dUF6 as a gift to future generations. Yet a steel cylinder does not a time-machine make.
Can the economists of McBank, McMine or McTreasury even hope to guess at a price for our uranium exports, which takes this into account? Will they even bother to try?
Far better to "externalise" the problem. That's how we have always done business, isn't it?
Advertisement
Try this thought-experiment
You are a match-tester. Your job is to strike every match on the production line in order to see which ones don't work.
The fact that your boss has shares in a cigarette lighter factory makes you feel a little uneasy. But he pays a handsome salary, so you put your thoughts behind you, buy a good suit and convince yourself and your wife that your efforts are somehow a noble contribution to the progress of mankind.
By the current rules of the corporate-nuclear game, you would be right.
The bottom line
The getting of wisdom is not too hard. Although we have only touched upon the initial stages of the nuclear chain, many of the in-principle designs and blueprints for nuclear power are freely available on the Web. Rube Goldberg is particularly recommended. Google him.
Over to you.
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
19 posts so far.