I see you have stumbled across what my thinking was here-
ost #:
68336335It's just another example of where you got it wrong when you said the US would never recycle UNF?
They will and they are looking very closely at it see here-:
https://www.energy.gov/articles/doe...eading-used-nuclear-fuel-recycling-initiativeThis was what GEH originally proposed with it's PRISM progran and yes it was not going to be used in the US back then, it was being designed for the UK, but time have changed for the better it would seem, but much of the work fro both GEH and GLE had already traveled along this road before and what experience they both got will be of great use, I looked at a flow diagram today that showed UNF going through a pyro-processing plant where some material went straight to fuel manufacture for some types of reactors but some also went back to a Uranium enrichment plant, that part was some of the original plan for GLE that GEH had in the first place, they bought Glove boxes and also had extensive work done on shielding, I presume that is still there at Wilmington and the same would go for the pyro-processing plant that GEH built there.
I can't see Paducah being allowed to do this, but GEH and GLE were already working on it until the UK pulled the pin, I see Wilmington as being a likely contender again here, hopefully the reason behind this happens like Eric Loewen said all thosen years ago about the US having enough Uranium in situ to produce all the electricity in the US for 100 years and if they used the Plutonium enough for 900 years, I said back then that I believed the US would go for it, you said no way, although Russia may have made up their mind for them now?
I do see Paducah still going ahead but looking at the timelines I can't see them in Production for at least 3 maybe even 4 years?
The US needs HALEU next year and Centrus won't be producing anywhere near enough for quite some time, even if they do get to add a large number of extra centrifuges.
(20min delay)