Disagree to a point with Klass
Proliferation is kind of the boogeyman of reprocessing. So far no nuclear weapons have been developed from the fuel of a commercial power plant. In fact weapons have generally come before power and not vice versa. Of course that doesn?t make it impossible. When you look at the facts though I don?t see there being much to worry about.
1. Plutonium bombs are EXTREMELY difficult to make compared to a uranium bomb. The difference is between shooting uranium at more uranium versus creating a perfect sphere implosion that compresses ALL of the plutonium at exactly the same time and rate. Not 100% impossible but extremely unlikely for a terrorist cell to be able to do. So just looking at it from this standpoint a terrorist would much rather choose a uranium bomb.
2. There is already a lot (tons as you stated) of weapons grade plutonium in the rest of the world (mostly Russia). So much so that a terrorist would be stupid to try to take it from the US. And with all the protection measures in place it just isn?t feasible.
3. Research is coming a long way and is just about at the point where we can reprocess the spent fuel without making the plutonium vulnerable. Especially since the plutonium can be used as part of the fuel to run current LWR reactors (although it hasn?t caught on here as much as was hoped yet).
There are other reason, but I think we are better off focusing on the cost/savings comparison as well as the cost/benefit analysis. Even if it cost more than storage would the reduction in the amount and overall volume and radioactivity of spent fuel justify it (I think it would)? Sure there are still waste streams that need to be taken care of but the end product may not be any more volume intensive than the toxic waste produced by the production and disposal of solar panels.
