Why Does the U.S. need this program?

To Secure America's Energy Future

America needs affordable, reliable and secure sources of energy – today and in the future – to maintain growth and development. We will use about 30 percent more energy in 2030 than we did in 2005, and will have to compete with other countries for resources. Developing countries like India and China are using energy at a rapidly growing rate; by 2015, they will consume more energy than developed nations such as the U.S., Britain and Japan.


To Protect the Environment

Fossil fuels - oil, coal and natural gas - make up about 85 percent of the energy America uses today as well as 80 percent of worldwide consumption. These fuels produce carbon dioxide and other gases when they burn, polluting the environment. At this rate, relying on fossil fuels to meet our growing energy needs will lead to even greater environmental impacts.

DOE says operating nuclear power plants have much owe impacts on the air, land, water and wildlife because they produce no harmful gases. It is, according to the agency, the only non-fossil alternative that can support large-scale electricity production on a 24/7 basis.


To Stop the Spread of Nuclear Weapons

Many countries are looking to nuclear power to fuel economic growth and meet future energy needs-more than 250 new nuclear plants are under construction, planned, or under consideration around the world. As developing countries start nuclear programs of their own, there is a chance that nuclear technologies or materials could be misused or diverted to make a nuclear weapon. Rapid, unmanaged growth of nuclear fuel production and recycling would increase that chance.

GNEP addresses this threat in several ways:

• It recycles used nuclear fuel without producing the pure plutonium used to make nuclear weapons

• It puts in place a secure global system for building commercial  nuclear plants. Nations that already make and recycle nuclear fuel would provide services to countries that cannot, as long as those countries agree not to produce or recycle fuel on their own.

Because the global demand for electricity will rise so rapidly in the next 25 years, we must begin now to establish fuel suppliers and recipients as well as arrangements for storing, processing and managing the world’s used nuclear fuel.

How is GNEP different?

GNEP is different from earlier nuclear energy policies and programs because it:

• Is international in scope
• Completely changes the way the U.S. manages nuclear waste: used fuel would be recycled instead of thrown away
• Provides an international framework to reduce the misuse of nuclear materials Creates partnerships between governments and private industry across the globe
• Depends on interested communities to nominate themselves for consideration as a GNEP site, rather than having the government make those decisions and announce a list of candidate sites in advance.

What could this mean for Idaho?

Selection of the Idaho site for any or all of the three GNEP facilities would reinforce INL’s position as the cornerstone of U.S. nuclear energy research, development and demonstration – and Idaho’s reputation as a high-tech business destination. Serving as a GNEP site would enable Idaho to play an important role in providing abundant, clean-air energy and shaping how and where new nuclear power systems are built around the world. In addition, the capital costs of the three facilities will amount to billions of dollars, creating thousands of construction and ongoing research and operations  jobs in the process.

What about the Idaho Settlement Agreement?

While the agreement sets firm dates by which specific cleanup milestones have to be reached and bars the shipment of commercial used nuclear fuel to Idaho, it also directs DOE to designate INL as the department’s lead laboratory for spent fuel to direct the research, development and testing of treatment, shipment and disposal technologies.

When will DOE make a decision?

A comment period is now underway (through April 4) so the public can help DOE define the scope of a study of the environmental impacts of GNEP. The completed study, expected in the spring of 2008, will identify a preferred alternative. DOE expects to announce a decision by the Secretary of Energy on GNEP in the summer of 2008.