#1–2026
IAEA Bulletin
What is the nuclear fuel cycle? Nuclear fuel innovation continues Uranium: More energy, fewer emissions
The Nuclear Fuel Cycle
enabling safe, secure and sustainable
low carbon power
nuclear quiz
?
Do you know...
1
a. China
Which nuclear fuel has higher uranium-235 enrichment?
b. France
a. LEU
d. United Kingdom
b. HALEU
2
3
Which country has the world’s largest nuclear power share?
e. United States of America
One uranium pellet can produce the same amount of energy as: a. 1 ton of coal b. 120 gallons of oil
4
Which country will be the first to commission a geological disposal facility for the final disposal of spent nuclear fuel? a. Canada b. China
c. 17 000 ft 3 of natural gas d. All of the above
c. Russian Federation
c. Finland d. Japan
e. Sweden
Find the answers in this edition (and at the bottom of page 32)
Contents
HALEU — power for a new generation of reactors, p. 8
Recycling spent nuclear fuel, p, 12
The crucial behind-the-scenes action making nuclear energy possible ........................................ 1 What is the nuclear fuel cycle? ........................... 2 Nuclear fuel innovation continues ...................... 4 HALEU — power for a new generation of reactors .............................................................. 8 Optimizing nuclear power reactor efficiency with LEU+ fuels ................................. 10 Recycling spent nuclear fuel — a circular economy approach ....................... 12 A sustainable solution for spent fuel and high level waste disposal ................................... 14
A sustainable solution for spent fuel and high level waste disposal, p. 14
Uranium: More energy, fewer emissions ........16 The essential role of stakeholder engagement throughout the nuclear fuel cycle ......................18 Ensuring the safety of nuclear fuel cycle facilities .............................................. 20 Safeguarding the nuclear fuel cycle — the role of the additional protocol .................22 Nuclear Jobs ........................................................ 24 IAEA News ............................................................ 26 From the IAEA Archives ..................................... 30
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
The crucial behind-the-scenes action making nuclear energy possible By Rafael Mariano Grossi, IAEA Director General
T
he world wants more nuclear energy. At March’s Nuclear Energy Summit in Paris, additional countries joined the pledge to triple nuclear capacity by 2050, bringing the total commitment to more than 30 States. But ambition must be matched by action, and one of the most important places where action is needed is in the fuel supply chains, or rather networks, that make nuclear power possible. They are the subject of this edition of the IAEA Bulletin.
the environment at fuel cycle facilities are covered alongside safeguards, the verification and assurance layer that runs across every stage. We look at reprocessing and recycling as a circular economy approach to uranium stewardship and waste minimization; and we explore cutting-edge disposal facilities in Finland and Sweden. Finally, we address stakeholder engagement, without which none of these activities would be possible.
Turning nuclear capacity pledges into operating reactors requires a lot to happen behind the scenes. Uranium must be mined, converted, enriched, fabricated and transported. Annual uranium requirements are projected to rise from roughly 59 000 tonnes today to between 90 000 and 142 000 tonnes by 2050, an increase of one and a half to nearly two and a half times. The high-case scenario assumes global nuclear capacity reaching 900 GWe by 2050. Tripling capacity implies closer to 1200 GWe by mid-century. To increase capacity at that scale demands a commensurate expansion of infrastructure across every stage of the fuel cycle.
The IAEA sits at the centre of all of this activity. As the key facilitator of global peaceful nuclear cooperation, the IAEA helps ensure that the nuclear supply chain functions as a coherent international system. With our global reach, we bring every segment — governments, developers, operators, regulators, industry and civil society — under one roof. As we support countries with nuclear capacity building, our essential work on safety, security and safeguards provides the assurance that nuclear technologies are operated peacefully and responsibly.
Fortunately, many IAEA Member States are already rising to that challenge. This Bulletin maps their effort and shows how the IAEA is supporting countries at every stage. It opens with a guide to the nuclear fuel cycle from mining and milling to fuel fabrication, reactor operation, reprocessing, storage and disposal. It examines current and advanced nuclear fuels, including LEU+ and HALEU, that promise significant efficiency gains for both the existing fleet and the next generation of reactors. Safety measures that protect people and
“The fuel supply chain is the backbone of nuclear energy. It may be less visible than the reactors it serves, but it is just as essential.” — Rafael Mariano Grossi, IAEA Director General
In October 2026, we will host the International Conference on the Fuel Supply Chain for Sustainable Nuclear Power Development here in Vienna. It will bring Member States, industry and regulators together to advance coordinated action on circular economy principles, investment, workforce development and public trust. The fuel supply chain is the backbone of nuclear energy. It may be less visible than the reactors it serves, but it is just as essential. As the following pages make clear, the IAEA is working closely with Member States to ensure they have everything they need to deliver on their commitments.
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 1
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
What is the nuclear fuel cycle? nuclear explained
T
he nuclear fuel cycle is the sequence of industrial processes involved in the production of electricity from uranium (or thorium, or mixtures of uranium and plutonium) in nuclear power reactors. It begins with the mining of uranium (or thorium) and ends with the disposal of radioactive waste. At present, commercial nuclear fuel activities are largely based on uranium. The nuclear fuel cycle is often divided into two main parts: fuel preparation, known as the ‘front end’, and spent fuel and radioactive waste management, known as the ‘back end’.
UF6
CONVERSION
After mining, uranium ore is transported to a mill, where it is crushed and ground into a fine powder and then treated with chemicals to extract the uranium. The final product is uranium oxide concentrate, commonly referred to as ‘yellowcake’.
fue
l pr
(fro
3
5
O PE U- 2
Uranium and thorium are found in varying concentrations in the Earth’s crust. Uranium is mined using a number of methods, including open-pit mining, underground mining and in situ leaching.
Natural uranium consists primarily of two isotopes:
OT
MINING AND MILLING
ENRICHMENT
IS
Uranium oxide concentrate is converted into uranium hexafluoride (UF6), a chemical form suitable for enrichment. Uranium hexafluoride can be readily transformed into a gas, allowing isotopes of uranium to be separated.
epa
nt
3–5% U-235
U-238, which makes up about 99.3% of natural uranium, and U-235. U-235 is needed to sustain a nuclear chain reaction. Most nuclear power reactors require uranium in which the concentration of U-235 has been increased from its natural level of about 0.7% to between 3% and 5%. This process is known as enrichment.
end rat ion )
The IAEA supports its Member States in developing and maintaining safe, secure and sustainable nuclear fuel cycle activities, including uranium (or thorium) production, fuel supply and radioactive waste management.
2 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
REPROCESSING AND RECYCLING
WASTE DISPOSAL
In some countries, spent fuel is reprocessed to recover usable materials such as uranium and plutonium, which can be recycled to produce new nuclear fuel. This is known as a closed fuel cycle, in which materials are recycled.
The rest of the elements present in spent fuel are considered high level waste.
wa
re
ste spen ma t fu (ba el ck nag & en e me d) nt
g
n
FUEL FABRICATION Following enrichment, uranium hexafluoride is converted into uranium dioxide powder, which is pressed into small pellets. These pellets are heated to form a hard ceramic material and loaded into metal tubes to form fuel rods. Fuel rods are assembled into robust structures called fuel assemblies, which are then used in nuclear reactors. Some nuclear reactors operate with fuels based on natural (not enriched) uranium.
The final step of the nuclear fuel cycle is the management and disposal of radioactive waste. High level waste, including spent fuel or waste from reprocessing, must be isolated from the biosphere for long periods. Deep geological disposal is widely seen as a safe and effective method for long term management of high level radioactive waste.
li c y c ) re le & yc g lc in e s fu s d e e c os ro cl p (
SPENT FUEL STORAGE After its use in the reactor, the fuel is removed and referred to as spent fuel as it is no longer usable in its present form in the reactor. Initially, spent fuel is stored in water-filled pools at reactor sites because water provides effective cooling and radiation shielding. After a period of time, spent fuel can be moved to another pool facility or to dry storage systems. Spent fuel is highly radioactive and continues to generate heat, so it must be carefully managed.
USE IN A REACTOR Fuel assemblies are arranged in the reactor core, where a controlled nuclear chain reaction takes place. The energy released is used to produce heat, which generates steam to drive turbines and produce electricity. Fuel typically remains in the reactor for several years. During this time, the concentration of fissile material decreases, while fission products, activation products and transuranium elements (generated through neutron capture reactions) accumulate.
LO W C A
RBON E
NERGY
Infographic: R.Kenn/IAEA | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 3
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
Nuclear fuel innovation continues By Maria Podkopaeva
A
s reactor technologies have diversified, and as countries have pursued different energy strategies, nuclear fuels have evolved into a broad family of designs. Decades of research into performance and safety have further expanded these options, and innovation continues today.
Fuels used today The most common fuel in use today is low enriched uranium (LEU) in the form of oxide, typically containing 3–5% uranium-235 (U-235). It is used in most commercial reactors.
LEU
Recently, LEU+ fuels — traditional fuels with U-235 enrichment between 5% and 10% — have been approved by safety authorities and used in commercial nuclear power plants for the first time.
LEU+
High assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) fuels have U-235 enrichment below 20% and are crucial for advanced reactor types under development around the world.
HALEU
HEU
URANIUM
DATA
High enriched uranium (HEU), with over 20% U-235, is mostly reserved for fuels for research and
For over 50 years, the IAEA together with the Nuclear Energy Agency has been collecting data and providing analyses on global uranium resources, production and demand. Here are a few recent data points and projections.
Source: Uranium 2024: Resources, Production and Demand (IAEA, 2025).
4 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
naval reactors, although it comes with proliferation risks. Mixed oxide (MOX) fuel, MOX made by blending plutonium recovered from reprocessed spent fuel with natural or depleted uranium, allows for the recycling and multi-recycling of nuclear materials. It is used in a number of light water reactors and fast reactors worldwide.
Advanced fuels under development or in testing To improve safety and efficiency, researchers are ATFs developing accident tolerant/ advanced technology fuels (ATFs). These are fuels and materials with enhanced designs that can better withstand extreme conditions, such as loss of cooling, while improving performance
Uranium is the primary fuel source for nuclear power, accounting for over 99% of global commercial nuclear fuel demand.
99%
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
during normal operation. They aim to slow the degradation of core materials and provide operators with more time to respond in the unlikely event of an accident. ATFs are presently being tested in several countries. Other advanced fuel types are being explored for next generation reactors. For fast reactors, oxide fuels are already mature and have reached a technology readiness level suitable for industrial deployment in some countries.
Oxide fuels
The selection of fuel type requires balancing trade-offs among properties such as fuel density, melting point, thermal conductivity and irradiationinduced swelling. For high temperature gas cooled reactors and most microreactor designs, tristructural isotropic (TRISO) particle fuel is under consideration. TRISO fuel consists of a uranium- or thorium‑bearing kernel surrounded by four ceramic layers,
TRISO
As demand for electricity grows, global nuclear capacity is expected to increase, which in turn will increase demand for uranium.
forming a miniature containment system with very high fission product retention, even at elevated temperatures. The multilayered coating makes TRISO fuel one of the most robust nuclear fuels, capable of retaining fission products under all operating conditions.
Emerging and experimental fuels Fuel innovation is moving into new territories as researchers explore new materials, fuel compositions and reactorcompatible designs. Thorium-based fuels use abundant thorium-232 to breed Thorium-based fuels fissile uranium-233 (U-233) in a reactor. They offer the potential to diversify nuclear fuel resources and support long term fuel supply, but they require specific nuclear fuel cycle facilities. Molten salt reactors use liquid Liquid fuels fuels composed of fissile materials, such as enriched uranium, plutonium, transuranic elements from reprocessed spent fuel, or U-233 derived
+100% high demand case
URANIUM DEMAND
2022
+45% low demand case
2050
The world’s known uranium reserves total 8 million tonnes. This is sufficient to meet both low- and high-growth nuclear capacity needs through 2050 and beyond. Meanwhile exploration to identify new uranium reserves is ongoing around the world.
By 2050, demand for uranium is expected to grow by about 45% in the low demand case and by over 100% in the high demand case.
Infographic: R.Kenn/IAEA | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 5
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
from thorium dissolved in molten salts. Fuels for molten salt reactors are currently at the proof of principle stage of technology readiness levels, though their qualification is progressing rapidly.
Artificial intelligence and nuclear fuel: Design, production and management The growing complexity of nuclear fuel engineering — driven by advanced materials, high precision fabrication, stringent safety requirements and extensive quality control — demands increasingly sophisticated analytical tools. Traditional methods are reaching their limits as data volumes grow. Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly being applied in fuel engineering,
6 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
including in fuel design, operation and manufacturing. Key applications include core design optimization, fuel performance simulation, predictive analysis of radiation in the primary nuclear power plant pool, and automated generation of spent fuel pool maps. In manufacturing, AI supports technological process simulation, visual inspection and predictive quality management. It also contributes to material discovery, experimental design, data management and workforce training. While challenges remain — from data limitations to regulatory adaptation — the integration of AI into nuclear fuel engineering is becoming an increasingly important component of safe, efficient and innovative fuel development.
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
IAEA LEU BANK The IAEA Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Bank was established in October 2019 as an assurance of supply mechanism of last resort for eligible Member States. Located at the Ulba Metallurgical Plant in Oskemen, Kazakhstan, the IAEA LEU Bank holds a reserve of 90 tonnes of LEU hexafluoride, which can be used to make fuel for light water reactors — the most widely used type of reactor worldwide — in the event of market disruptions or other extraordinary circumstances impacting LEU supply. The establishment and operation of the IAEA LEU Bank are supported by voluntary contributions from Member States and other donors. Its physical stock of LEU was completed in December 2019 — the IAEA’s largest ever procurement endeavour to date. IAEA LEU Fuel Bank in Oskemen, Kazakhstan. (Photo: K.Laffan/IAEA)
IAEA Publications Did you know the exploration process to confirm a new uranium deposit takes on average 10 to 15 years?
Scan to read about what is required to implement a successful uranium production programme.
Browse all IAEA Publications
free online
To order a book write to sales.publications@iaea.org
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 7
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
HALEU: Power for a new generation of reactors By Matt Fisher
A
dvanced reactor deployments are set to reshape the energy landscape as global nuclear power capacity scales up in the coming decades. Most next generation reactors will require fuels with high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU), which can significantly improve operational efficiency. Nearly all of the more than 400 nuclear power reactors operating today use fuels made with low enriched uranium (LEU), containing no more than 5% of the fissile isotope uranium-235 (U-235). HALEU, however, can be enriched up to 19.95% U-235.
Cascades of gas centrifuges at the Ural Electrochemical Plant, Novouralsk, Russian Federation. (Photo: Ural Electrochemical Combine)
8 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
“HALEU’s higher enrichment level will enable smaller core designs, such as those for small modular reactors and microreactors, as well as greater fuel burnup and more time between refuelling periods,” said Olena Mykolaichuk, Director of the IAEA’s Division of Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Waste Technology. “This could, in turn, increase the capacity factors of nuclear power plants.” Capacity factor refers to the amount of electricity produced over a period
of time relative to maximum output – an area where nuclear power already outperforms other energy sources by a wide margin.
Fuelling a nuclear future HALEU can be produced through gas centrifuge enrichment, similar to LEU, or by downblending highly enriched uranium from legacy stockpiles. Enrichment to the HALEU range requires more uranium feedstock and separative work units — the mechanical effort needed to achieve the desired U-235 enrichment. This means running larger centrifuge cascades with higher energy expenditure. However, the advanced fuels that can be fabricated using HALEU offer energy system optimization benefits that justify these initial costs. A variety of HALEU-based fuels are under development globally, including those for fast reactors and tristructural isotropic (TRISO) particle fuels, which consist of uranium encapsulated within poppy seed-sized kernels. Originally conceived of decades ago but yet to achieve major commercial deployment,
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
TRISO fuels are exceptionally robust. They can withstand temperatures of up to 1700°C, improving reactor safety margins while facilitating efficient high temperature operation.
Expanding HALEU production to meet deployment goals Boosting the commercial supply of HALEU is critical for achieving advanced reactor rollout targets and sustainable nuclear power development. The Russian Federation currently operates the BN-600 and BN-800 fast reactors, which use, or can use, HALEUbased fuels. The country possesses the full infrastructure required for HALEU fuel cycle services, including conversion, enrichment, fuel manufacturing and transport, with plans to expand production capacity to meet future demand, including for small modular reactor deployment. China also has the infrastructure to begin large scale HALEU production. Production efforts are underway in France, the United Kingdom and the United States of America, supported by major investment. In 2024, the UK committed approximately US $400 million to HALEU production, and in 2025 the European Investment Bank provided a loan of about US $500 million to the French nuclear fuel company Orano to support enrichment expansion activities. In January 2026, the US Department of Energy announced an allocation of US $2.7 billion over ten years for uranium enrichment. In France, Orano is expanding its Georges Besse II enrichment plant, with four additional centrifuge cascades expected to come online by 2030. The company also plans to build a major US enrichment facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In the UK, Urenco is developing a HALEU production facility at its Capenhurst site, which is expected to produce 10 tonnes of the material annually by 2031.
US demand for HALEU could rise to 50 tonnes per year by 2035, according to the US Department of Energy. The country is actively working to strengthen its supply chain through the HALEU Availability Program, which seeks to obtain HALEU from domestic companies and produce small amounts from Department of Energy assets. Nuclear fuel supplier Centrus Energy has already produced more than 900 kilograms of HALEU under a contract established through this programme, and several other companies have been selected to perform enrichment or reconversion work.
Addressing regulatory issues for sustainability HALEU’s higher enrichment level has important implications for safeguards, safety and security, including during transport. While LEU materials enriched below 10% are classified as Category III materials regardless of quantity, HALEU materials with enrichment above 10% become Category II materials in quantities over 10 kilograms, with more stringent requirements for physical security at reactor sites and fuel cycle facilities. Existing transport containers will need to be modified, or new ones manufactured, in line with the security level for Category II materials. Broader criticality safety margins for facilities and transport packages will also be necessary to comply with licensing regulations. The greater enrichment of U-235 in HALEU also means that IAEA inspections would need to be more rigorous, as weaponsgrade high enriched uranium could be produced with less feedstock and on a shorter timescale than LEU. Sustained investment and regulatory approval are vital to scale up HALEU production to meet rising demand and ensure a stable fuel supply for the reactors of the future.
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 9
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
Optimizing nuclear power reactor efficiency with LEU+ fuels By Jeffrey Donovan
F
or decades, the fuel powering most of the world’s nuclear reactor fleet followed a quiet rule: uranium enrichment should remain below 5% uranium-235 (U-235), the isotope most easily split by neutrons to produce energy. That low enriched uranium (LEU) threshold — adopted in the early days of commercial nuclear power as a conservative standard — gradually became the cornerstone around which the entire fuel cycle was built. After the 2011 accident at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, the LEU line started to shift. Researchers around the world began to develop ‘accident tolerant fuels’ (ATFs) that are more resistant to damage during severe accidents. However, these fuels also absorb more of the neutrons needed to sustain the nuclear chain reaction, so they require slightly higher concentrations of U-235 to maintain the same level of reactor performance.
Reconsidering the 5% ceiling The push towards improved fuel design is feeding a broader effort to enhance the performance of the existing reactor fleet. In seeking to compensate for neutron absorption, researchers began reconsidering the long-standing 5% ceiling. With electricity demand rising — driven by industrial growth, electrification and artificial intelligence infrastructure — the nuclear sector is now increasingly focused on LEU+, which raises enrichment levels to roughly 5–8% U-235. This enables the deployment of safer fuel technologies while improving how efficiently reactors use fuel. Today’s light water reactor fuel typically operates at burnup levels of around 50–60 gigawatt-days per tonne of uranium, a measure of how much energy
10 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
can be extracted from fuel before it must be replaced. “Using LEU+ fuel, especially when combined with ATF, could significantly improve the performance of light water reactors,” said Anzhelika Khaperskaia, the IAEA’s technical lead for fuel engineering and fuel cycle facilities. “It could allow today’s reactors to operate more efficiently, without physically modifying them.” By extending the time between refuelling outages from 18 months to around two years, reactors can operate longer and generate more electricity. This does not mean reactors get ‘more from less’, however. Producing LEU+ requires additional enrichment work, so fuel production costs could be higher. Some operators consider this a worthwhile trade-off if a reactor converts fuel into more electricity more efficiently.
Testing LEU+ Several countries have begun testing LEU+ fuel. In a first for a commercial reactor in the United States of America, fuel assemblies containing LEU+ were loaded into Vogtle Unit 2 in Georgia in 2025. This test in a live reactor core is part of a programme to collect operational data on LEU+ fuel behaviour. The Russian Federation, meanwhile, has examined fuels enriched above the 5% threshold, in some cases paired with erbium as a burnable absorber to control reactivity. In China, reactor designers are also exploring fuels with slightly higher enrichment levels. Fuels enriched between 5% and 19.75% U-235 are referred to as high assay low enriched uranium (HALEU). While existing reactors could utilize and benefit from fuels like LEU+ on the lower end of that range, many advanced reactor designs under development are expected to rely
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
“LEU+ is a necessary enrichment level on the way to HALEU,” said Seth Grae, Chief Executive Officer of Lightbridge Corporation, a United States-based advanced nuclear fuel developer. “Uranium enrichment companies that are preparing to enrich to LEU+ levels can then take the next step to install the necessary infrastructure to enrich up to HALEU levels.” If broad commercial application is the goal, however, raising enrichment levels is not a minor technicality. The entire fuel supply chain — conversion and enrichment plants, fuel fabrication plants, fresh fuel storage systems and handling procedures, and transport containers — was designed for a world in which 5% enrichment reigned supreme. All of that will require adjustments.
The potential gains from LEU+ might seem small, but they could be worth pursuing. In the meantime, further testing is needed to confirm the safety and effectiveness of higher enriched fuels in the existing reactor fleet. Since enrichment becomes more expensive as levels increase, the case for LEU+ will ultimately depend on whether the operational benefits clearly outweigh the additional production costs. The IAEA is preparing a new coordinated research project that will bring together research institutes, universities, fuel designers and producers, and reactor operators to study ATFs and high-burnup fuel performance. “Combining accident tolerant fuel with higher-burnup LEU+ could play an important role in the next generation of fuel designs for existing reactors and small modular reactors,” Khaperskaia said. “But important technical and economic questions remain, which is why continued research, testing and licensing work are essential.”
(Photo: Urenco USA)
on HALEU. This is driving plans to build new commercial production facilities for the fuel in the United States of America and Europe.
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 11
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
Recycling spent nuclear fuel A circular economy approach By Matt Fisher
A
s nuclear power’s role in the global energy mix grows, so does the need for sustainable practices to maximize its prospects. With spent nuclear fuel retaining about 90% of its potential energy, reprocessing and recycling can support sustainability — increasing fuel supply, optimizing waste management and preserving natural resources. Since commercial nuclear power first emerged in the 1950s, about 30% of spent nuclear fuel has been reprocessed. Nuclear power generates a range of fission products that are mostly classified as radioactive waste. Transuranium elements, however — especially plutonium generated through neutron capture — together with unburned and depleted uranium, can be used in new fuel. “Securing a sustainable fuel supply is indispensable for the future of nuclear power, and spent fuel recycling can play a key role in meeting projected needs,” said Amparo Gonzalez Espartero, the IAEA’s technical lead for spent fuel management. Around 70% of spent fuel is currently in storage — a resource with significant potential. “Applying a circular economy approach has the dual benefit of preserving natural resources and reducing the waste management burden, while increasing fuel availability.” Plutonium and uranium recovery by extraction (PUREX) is the most common hydrometallurgical reprocessing technique. Spent fuel is dissolved in nitric acid, after which plutonium and uranium are extracted with a solvent of tributyl phosphate dissolved in kerosene. The plutonium and uranium are then purified, precipitated and prepared for fuel fabrication. Advanced techniques such as pyroprocessing, which dissolves spent fuel in high temperature molten salts,
12 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
are under development, but more work is needed for industrial scale implementation.
Closing the fuel cycle for sustainability Recycling can enable a ‘closed’ fuel cycle, in which spent fuel is reprocessed and fed back into reactors. This can be implemented at individual nuclear power plants or as part of a national or international approach. Fast reactors are capable of much higher fuel utilization and are designed to run on recycled fuel, contributing to resource optimization. Although only two fast reactors — both in the Russian Federation — are in commercial operation according to the IAEA’s Power Reactor Information System, more are under construction, and several countries include them in their long term plans. The associated partitioning and transmutation (P&T) strategy aims to partition transuranium elements — known as minor actinides — and some fission products present in the solution resulting from the PUREX process. These elements are then burned up in advanced reactors instead of being disposed of as waste.
France: From mono-recycling to multi-recycling France, which has the world’s largest nuclear power share and reprocessing capacity, has recycled fuel from light water reactors since the 1980s, reducing its natural uranium consumption up to 25% annually through ‘mono-recycling’. Since the 1990s, France has commercially reprocessed over 1000 tonnes of spent fuel annually, with plans to continue at least through 2100. Multi-recycling is envisioned as a key component of France’s future fuel cycle activities.
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
“In March 2026, the French Nuclear Policy Council launched a new programme to develop a fully closed nuclear fuel cycle. In the medium term, it aims to reduce uranium consumption through multi-recycling in pressurized water reactors,” said Frederic Laugier, a back end fuel cycle expert at Électricité de France. “The following phase will aim to eliminate the need for natural uranium imports by 2100 by multi-recycling nuclear fuel in fast reactors and using all unutilized nuclear materials, including depleted uranium. A four-year design phase for the first fast reactor and its nuclear fuel facilities is ready to begin, with a possible construction start by 2030 under consideration.”
The Russian Federation: Working toward a fully closed fuel cycle In the Russian Federation, where commercial recycling has been underway since 1977, steps have been taken to establish a closed fuel cycle, recovering uranium and plutonium for new fuel fabrication. A lead cooled fast reactor is under construction and will be deployed with fuel cycle facilities adjacent to the reactor building, demonstrating what an on-site fully closed fuel cycle might look like.
“To enhance fuel cycle sustainability, P&T seems to play a crucial role. The nuclear industry has learned how to efficiently recycle uranium and plutonium from spent fuel, and we will have to master the same for minor actinides and long lived fission products from spent nuclear fuel,” said Mikhail Baryshnikov, Director of the Department for Innovations and Technologies at TENEX. “It is necessary to demonstrate and scale up P&T technologies to an industrial level with the support of radiochemical plants, commercial reactors, unified packaging, national standards and international legislation.”
Spent nuclear fuel interim storage pool at the Orano reprocessing plant in Cherbourg, France. (Photo: Eric Larrayadieu/Orano)
Paving the way for more efficient nuclear power Enabling fuel recycling to deliver on its promise requires sustained investment, long term political commitments, regulatory frameworks and international cooperation. As reprocessing expands, robust safety, security and safeguards approaches will remain essential, with newer systems likely to enhance resistance to proliferation through features such as real-time material accountancy. Closing the fuel cycle is key for the long term sustainability of nuclear energy.
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 13
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
A sustainable solution for spent fuel and high level waste disposal By Irena Chatzis
M
anaging spent fuel is essential to the nuclear fuel cycle and the long term sustainability and viability of nuclear power. Some countries are planning for direct disposal (open fuel cycle) or pursuing recycling through reprocessing (closed fuel cycle), while others have yet to determine their long term management strategies. However, all spent fuel management strategies ultimately require a geological disposal facility for spent fuel or high level waste resulting from reprocessing. Nuclear fuel typically remains in a reactor for three to six years; when it is removed, it is highly radioactive, generating both heat and radiation. Initially, it is stored underwater in a spent fuel pool for cooling and radiation shielding. Over time, radioactivity and heat decrease, reducing cooling requirements. Once sufficiently cooled and declared as waste, it can be safely disposed of in a geological disposal facility hundreds of metres underground. These facilities use multiple engineered and natural barriers, including waste containers, sealing systems and stable geological formations, such as granite or clay. These barriers ensure long term containment and isolation for tens of thousands to millions of years — far longer than the waste will pose a radiological hazard — providing a reliable and permanent solution for its safe management.
Finland’s Onkalo repository sets a world first Finland is the first country to commission a geological disposal facility, with operations planned to start in 2026. The Onkalo repository will contain spent fuel from the country’s nuclear power plants, which have been generating low carbon electricity for nearly five decades. Built 400–430 metres below ground,
14 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
Onkalo currently has 10 kilometres of tunnels, with a further 40 kilometres to be excavated over the next century. Using a disposal concept developed together with Sweden, Finland will emplace spent fuel in corrosion resistant copper canisters surrounded by bentonite clay and stable bedrock. The site was selected after years of geological surveys, drilling and continued engagement with local municipalities — an approach rooted in ensuring safety, technical suitability and community acceptance. “Finland is often asked how this has been possible,” said Petteri Tiippana, Director General of the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK). “The foundation was laid over forty years ago with a clear political decision, defined responsibilities and sustained public engagement built on transparency. This created the conditions for the systematic development of the final disposal concept, the required national expertise, safety requirements ensuring adequate long term protection, competent regulatory oversight and proactive interaction between the regulator and the licensee — the combination that has allowed Finland to move from commitment to implementation.” Onkalo is located in Eurajoki, which is also home to a nuclear power plant. “People here are used to nuclear facilities,” said Vesa Lakaniemi, Mayor of Eurajoki. “A strong safety culture and open communication have built deep trust in nuclear energy and the final disposal project. We also know that every step has been carried out with the highest safety standards under the supervision of STUK and the Ministry of Economic Affairs. We are proud of
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
our nuclear heritage and the high level professionalism at Onkalo.” As the first country to move from commitment to implementation, Finland is achieving a global milestone, demonstrating that the geological disposal of spent fuel is both feasible and safe.
Advancing final disposal worldwide Other countries are following Finland’s lead. Sweden began construction of a geological repository in 2025, after over 40 years of research, technical development and public consultations. It will dispose of 12 000 tonnes of spent fuel in 6000 copper canisters in 60 kilometres of tunnels, 500 metres underground. Disposal operations are expected to begin in the 2030s. France’s planned Cigéo repository aims to dispose of 80 000 cubic metres of high level and long lived intermediate level radioactive waste in clay rock 500 metres underground, with operations projected to begin between 2030 and 2035. Switzerland is currently in the licensing
phase for a geological disposal facility for low and intermediate level radioactive waste and high level waste. Canada has advanced through one of the world’s most comprehensive, consent-based siting processes. Using an adaptive phased management approach, the country’s Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) combines robust technical design with decision making supported by public engagement and continuous learning. In 2024, the NWMO selected the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation-Ignace area for its geological disposal facility after years of technical studies and collaborative engagement with the host communities.
Finland’s Onkalo repository already has 10 km of tunnels, with an additional 40 km planned. (Photo: Posiva Oy/Tapani Karjanlahti)
“These developments mark a transformative moment in the history of nuclear energy,” said Nora Zakaria, Head of the IAEA’s Waste Technology Section. “They are not only technical milestones but also the culmination of decades of research, stakeholder engagement and international cooperation, demonstrating that long term solutions for spent fuel and high level waste are not theoretical but real, achievable and already underway.”
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 15
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
Uranium
More energy, fewer emissions
Uranium is the primary material used to make fuel for nuclear reactors. It is an exceptionally energy dense fuel, producing the most power per unit mass compared to all other fuels. Nuclear power plants produce no carbon dioxide (CO2) or air pollutants during operation.
Energy density 20 mm
17 000 ft³ of natural gas (c. 481 m³)
120 gallons of oil (c. 455 L)
12 mm
One uranium pellet can produce the same amount of energy as
One ton of coal (c. 907 kg)
Source: US Department of Energy
16 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
CO2 emissions 253,281 kg
250 000
209,678 kg
This chart compares fuel quantity required to generate the same amount of energy using uranium, gas, oil and coal. It also compares the amount of CO2 emissions each fuel produces.
Fuel quantity
200 000
CO2 emissions (direct for coal/gas/oil, and direct/life cycle for uranium)
URANIUM (enriched 3.5%)
GAS
*based on average calorific value
87,975 kg
100 000
50 000 Source: IAEA
65,664 kg
47,110 kg*
0 - 3064 kg
1.1 kg
127,218 kg
150 000
0
OIL
COAL
Infographic: R.Kenn/IAEA | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 17
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
The essential role of stakeholder engagement throughout the nuclear fuel cycle By Irena Chatzis
E
ffective stakeholder engagement builds the social foundation for long term success throughout the nuclear fuel cycle. While technology and regulations make a programme possible, engagement based on openness, respect and shared responsibility makes it sustainable. “Experience shows that countries that invest early in open dialogue, transparent communication and community participation are better positioned to build the trust and confidence needed for every stage of the nuclear fuel cycle,” said Andrea Borio, Programme Coordinator for the IAEA Department of Nuclear Energy.
Argentina: Understanding stakeholder concerns about uranium mining At the front end of the fuel cycle, uranium mining requires early and continuous dialogue with local communities, Indigenous Peoples, environmental organizations and other stakeholders. Weak stakeholder engagement consistently ranks among the top ten business risks for mining and processing projects. Ultimately, the success and longevity of any uranium mining and processing project depend on strong, sustained support from local and national governments and acceptance by a range of stakeholders. Argentina, which currently operates three nuclear power reactors, is assessing whether to restart domestic uranium production. In 2025, Argentina hosted an IAEA Integrated Uranium Production Cycle Review mission under the Milestones framework, which underscores the importance of stakeholder engagement.
18 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
“Through our engagement with the community nearest to the Cerro Solo uranium project, we learned that their primary concerns relate to potential environmental impacts, especially on water resources,” said Luis Lopez, Senior Advisor at Argentina’s National Atomic Energy Commission. “They also highlighted the need for clear information and for training and capacity building opportunities to help them qualify for skilled jobs.”
Sweden: Inviting community participation in site selection While uranium projects must be developed where mineral deposits exist, selecting a site for a deep geological disposal facility for spent nuclear fuel, once declared radioactive waste, is based on technical and safety criteria and demonstrated social acceptance. In 1992, the Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Company (SKB) launched a voluntary siting process for Sweden’s spent fuel repository, inviting all municipalities to participate. The selection process was guided by mutual respect, joint decision making and a commitment to deliver social and economic benefits to the host community. Some communities withdrew following local referendums, while others continued through successive evaluation stages. Ultimately, the village of Forsmark was selected for its stable, low fracture bedrock and minimal groundwater flow — and strong local support. “Stakeholder engagement is a core pillar of achieving safe, socially legitimate final repositories. Long term solutions for radioactive waste require not only engineering but also trust, transparency
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
and genuine collaboration with the communities and municipalities that will live alongside these facilities,” said Jenny Rees, SKB’s Head of Media Relations. “Engagement and transparency must begin early and remain consistent. Meaningful dialogue with municipalities, regulators, civil society and the public has helped us identify concerns and engage in dialogue, adapt our plans, and ultimately strengthen the safety and acceptance of the project.”
IAEA support for stakeholder engagement The IAEA supports stakeholder engagement capacity building, including through its technical cooperation programme and review missions. It regularly organizes Nuclear Stakeholder
Engagement Schools and offers a Stakeholder Engagement Advisory Service for Nuclear Power Programmes that helps countries assess and enhance their engagement efforts. The IAEA also provides an annual platform for dialogue and exchange among nuclear host communities worldwide.
Stakeholders learn about SKB’s facilities today and in the future. (Photo: SKB/Frida Fotografi)
IAEA publications such as Stakeholder Engagement in Nuclear Programmes and Communication and Stakeholder Involvement in Radioactive Waste Disposal offer guidance on engaging with various stakeholder groups, while the IAEA Safety Standards provide recommendations for national authorities, operators and other stakeholders on communicating and consulting with the public and other interested parties.
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 19
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
Ensuring the safety of nuclear fuel cycle facilities By Selma Ali and Lakshman Valiveti
E
nsuring the safety of workers and the surrounding community is the top priority in every stage of the nuclear fuel cycle — be it uranium mining, nuclear fuel manufacturing, nuclear power generation, fuel reprocessing or waste management. Safety protocols ensure that radiation levels stay within safe and legal limits and are kept as low as reasonably achievable.
Defence in depth and a graded approach The risk level of nuclear fuel cycle facilities depends on the quantities, types and forms of radioactive materials handled, as well as their operating and storage conditions. Facilities employ a wide range of technologies, and radioactive material may flow through interconnected units distributed throughout a facility. Hazardous chemicals used in various fuel cycle processing stages may pose additional risks. To ensure safe operation, nuclear fuel cycle facilities apply the concept of ‘defence in depth’ throughout their design and operation. This includes using multiple physical confinement barriers, such as gloveboxes, containers, hot cells and engineered enclosures; dynamic confinement based on ventilation or exhaust systems; and administrative controls. Safety measures are applied using a graded approach commensurate with the risks associated with the facility. The aim is to ensure that the analysis, documentation and safety measures are appropriate to the facility’s nature and characteristics, and to the level of its radiological and non-radiological risks.
20 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
Factors contributing to incidents According to data collected by the IAEA’s incident reporting system for nuclear fuel cycle facilities, human factors (e.g. operator mistakes and violations of operating procedures) are the largest contributors to incidents. This highlights the need for increased attention to the training and qualifications of operating personnel. Another factor is facility ageing, which affects the safety and reliability of structures, systems and components. Most of the world’s nuclear fuel cycle facilities were built decades ago. Today, many countries are implementing ageing management activities, including refurbishment and modernization. Feedback from Member States also indicates the need to enhance regulatory supervision of nuclear fuel cycle facilities, including regulatory inspection, safety review and assessment. “One of the key challenges in regulating fuel cycle facilities is assessing safety when each facility is unique in its operations and there is no prevailing information on best practices,” said Julian Amalraj, a senior project officer and inspector at the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. “The IAEA plays a crucial role here through the publication of various standards, guidance and informational publications, which document and share best practices and operating experience to ensure that countries have the latest information to enhance safety.”
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
“A more recent challenge,” Amalraj said, “has been assessing new technologies like artificial intelligence, robotics, automation and new types of fuel and associated manufacturing processes that support small modular reactors.”
How the IAEA supports safety enhancements in nuclear fuel cycle facilities The IAEA develops safety standards and supports national capacity building and experience sharing to promote safety enhancements in nuclear fuel cycle facilities worldwide. The IAEA Safety Standards Series No. SSR-4, Safety of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities, establishes safety requirements for all stages of the lifetime of a nuclear fuel cycle facility. IAEA Safety Guides provide recommendations for meeting safety requirements for uranium conversion and enrichment, nuclear fuel fabrication, criticality safety, storage and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel. Other publications provide information on ageing management, periodic safety review and regulatory inspection programmes for nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The IAEA/Nuclear Energy Agency Fuel Incident Notification and Analysis System (FINAS) promotes the exchange of experience and lessons learned from incidents in nuclear fuel cycle facilities.
A summary of operating experience from incidents voluntarily reported to FINAS by member countries provides insights for safety enhancement. Upon request, the IAEA supports countries with Safety Evaluation of Fuel Cycle Facilities during Operation (SEDO) peer review missions, to help them enhance the operational safety of their nuclear fuel cycle facilities. “We put a lot of effort into ensuring safety and making continual improvements,” said Andrei Muşetoiu, Director of the Piteşti Nuclear Fuel Plant in Romania, which hosted a SEDO mission in 2024. “The SEDO mission provided us with valuable recommendations for further improvement, and we are committed to implementing them.” The IAEA also holds technical meetings, workshops and other events on issues relevant to the safety of nuclear fuel cycle facilities. “The IAEA supports countries in achieving and maintaining a high level of safety at both existing and planned nuclear fuel cycle facilities,” said Anna Hajduk Bradford, Director of the IAEA Division of Nuclear Installation Safety. “Our aim is to ensure that globally, people, society and the environment are protected from harmful effects of ionizing radiation.
IAEA SEDO mission team experts and Piteşti Nuclear Fuel Plant staff discuss operational safety aspects during a plant visit on 19 November 2024. (Photo: FCN Piteşti)
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 21
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
Safeguarding the nuclear fuel cycle The role of the additional protocol By Quynh Diem Le
E
very year the IAEA carries out over 3000 in-field verification activities, applying safeguards at almost 1400 nuclear facilities and other locations around the world. IAEA safeguards allow for independent verification that nuclear material and technology are used exclusively for peaceful purposes. For the vast majority of States, the IAEA applies safeguards on the basis of comprehensive safeguards agreements (CSAs) concluded with non-nuclear-weapon States parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Under the CSA, the IAEA has the right and obligation to apply safeguards on all such nuclear material in all peaceful nuclear activities within the State’s territory, under its jurisdiction or carried out under its control anywhere.
Strengthening IAEA safeguards implementation In the 1990s, the IAEA recognized that, while safeguards were effective in verifying declared nuclear material and activities in States with CSAs, it was not well equipped to detect nuclear material and activities that these States may not have declared. To remedy this, the IAEA embarked on a broad programme to strengthen the effectiveness and efficiency of safeguards implementation, particularly in States with CSAs. Working closely with a dedicated committee of technical experts and representatives of Member States, the IAEA developed the Model Additional Protocol (AP), which the IAEA Board of Governors approved in 1997. The AP is not a stand-alone instrument, but rather a protocol to a safeguards
22 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
agreement that provides the IAEA with additional tools for verification, including broader access to locations and to information on a State’s nuclear fuel cycle. If a CSA and an AP are in force and implemented, the IAEA is able to conclude that, for these States, all nuclear material remained in peaceful activities – the so-called ‘broader conclusion’. The conclusion of an additional protocol is voluntary, and it becomes legally binding once it enters into force. As of April 2026, APs were in force in 146 States, including 140 States with CSAs.
A broader view of the fuel cycle Under a CSA, the State is required to provide the IAEA with an initial inventory of all nuclear material, design information about facilities, information about locations outside facilities and any changes to these. When an AP is in force or provisionally applied, the State is also required to provide information about nuclear fuel cycle research and development activities not involving nuclear material; all buildings on a nuclear site; uranium mines and uranium and thorium concentration plants; and manufacture and export of nuclearrelated equipment and non-nuclear material. The AP gives the IAEA access to any building on a nuclear site at short notice; all locations identified in a State’s declaration related to the nuclear fuel cycle; and any other locations specified by the IAEA for the collection of locationspecific environmental samples. “When uranium is extracted and processed, the resulting product – yellowcake – is in some cases relatively
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
close in chemical form to uranium used for nuclear fuel fabrication or enrichment,” said Bruno Chesnay, an IAEA Senior Safeguards Inspector. “Including uranium mines within the framework of the declaration and access process brings nuclear material at the earliest stage of the nuclear fuel cycle under the scope of IAEA safeguards.”
Facilitating the implementation of the additional protocol “When a State decides to conclude an AP, it takes on an expanded set of provisions,” said Fatma Elif Aksoy, an
IAEA Legal Officer. “The IAEA offers States legislative and regulatory assistance to help make implementation of the AP as smooth as possible.” Recently, Ghana and the Republic of Korea hosted IAEA courses on AP implementation. IAEA support to State or regional authorities responsible for safeguards implementation is particularly beneficial if they need to update national legislation — for example, to ensure that they have full authority to collect and verify relevant information at the national level — before preparing the declarations required for the AP.
IAEA inspectors in training at a nuclear facility. (Photo: IAEA)
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 23
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
Nuclear Jobs nuclear jobs
We profile people working in the nuclear sector in their own words CARMEN GOOD | Uranium production
(Photo: IAEA)
Carmen Good is an IAEA uranium production specialist with 15 years of experience in health, safety and environmental protection in Australia’s uranium and coal mining industries. At the IAEA, she supports countries developing uranium production programmes. In her previous role, Carmen coordinated monthly site inspections and implemented programmes on safety, radiation protection and environmental protection.
Her motivation “I wanted to work in a field that is necessary for advancing human development, so energy commodities was an obvious choice. Although uranium mining is a challenging environment, I focus on its benefit to society and its sustainability.”
Health and safety “There are so many possibilities to work on health and safety and environmental protection in this sector, especially if you enjoy interacting with people. Jobs range from occupational health and safety to stakeholder engagement, from protecting public health to emergency response, transport safety and so much more.”
Protection, engagement and education “Mining is a high-risk industry, so we need to control radiation exposure, but we also need to protect people from other risks. The uranium mining industry has a well-established set of radiation protection protocols. If these are properly implemented, the risk of exposure is actually very low.” More significant (Photo: C. Good)
24 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
occupational hazards include working underground, in extreme temperatures and around heavy equipment. “Addressing all these risks is a matter of education as well as protection, so engaging with all stakeholders is essential.” In Australia, Carmen worked with mine workers, government agencies, Indigenous Peoples in the local community and a national park that surrounded the mining property to listen and respond to their concerns. “Safety should be very transparent.”
Carmen’s advice for job seekers While a degree in nuclear science or engineering is desirable, “there are other ways to get into nuclear work,” says Carmen, who holds a bachelor’s degree in environmental science. In her case, gaining health and safety work experience was more important, but she notes that in some countries specialized degrees may be required. Laboratory and field technicians have transferable skills, and they can learn the science through bridging courses. Some fields, such as nuclear emergency response, require specific training. For research, specialized positions and leadership roles, advanced education is often required. Students in many countries must go abroad to study nuclear science; Carmen says that some governments provide special programmes to support them, pointing to Kazakhstan as an example. The IAEA’s Marie Skłodowska-Curie Fellowship Programme also provides young women around the world with scholarships for master’s programmes in nuclear fields.
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
ANZHELIKA KHAPERSKAIA | Fuel engineering and fuel cycle infrastructure Anzhelika Khaperskaia is the IAEA’s technical lead for fuel engineering and fuel cycle facilities. She manages complex international nuclear engineering initiatives, advancing research, capacity building and knowledge exchange on fuel technologies and fuel cycle facilities for current and next generation reactors. Previously, she led several projects to develop and implement advanced fuel cycle technologies and infrastructure at Rosatom, the Russian Federation’s State Atomic Energy Corporation. These included programmes for multiple recycling of uranium and plutonium; advanced spent fuel reprocessing; and spent fuel storage, transport and recycling. She also managed the launch of a long term project to design and build a molten salt reactor and its fuel cycle.
Plus, fission products such as caesium137 and strontium-90 and valuable platinum group metals can be separated from high level waste after reprocessing for use in fields such as nuclear medicine and industry.”
Her motivation
• The ability to see the ‘big picture.’ Gaining experience in both science and industry can provide this kind of broader perspective.
“There are so many interesting aspects to working in the fuel cycle, especially if you like technical challenges. You can work on each step in the cycle, from research and development to technology and infrastructure design, construction, commissioning and operation. It’s where science meets engineering.”
New fuels for new reactors “The nuclear industry offers great prospects. New types of reactors are being developed that will need new fuels and new back end technologies. Artificial intelligence and robotics are opening up new possibilities in all phases of the industry, including the fuel cycle, such as fully remote fuel fabrication.” Nuclear power plants with closed fuel cycles are a promising new development. “Fast neutron reactors operating in a closed fuel cycle have the potential to extract 60–70 times more energy from uranium than traditional thermal reactors.
“Some countries already view spent nuclear fuel as a valuable resource. In the future, we may see the development of more advanced technologies to recover and recycle all valuable isotopes from spent fuel. This could be the beginning of a new era for the nuclear sector.”
(Photo: N. An/IAEA)
Anzhelika’s advice for job seekers To work on the nuclear fuel cycle, Anzhelika recommends: • A solid academic base – a PhD in nuclear engineering or a related field is an asset.
• Developing soft skills such as flexibility and communication. She also stresses the value of opportunities for international cooperation offered by organizations such as the IAEA. “You share knowledge and experience, see different approaches and gain a global perspective.”
(Photo: Wälischmiller Engineering GmbH)
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 25
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
(Photo: D. Calma/IAEA)
IAEA News
Global leaders affirm central role for nuclear at 2026 Nuclear Energy Summit World leaders, government ministers and heads of industry, international organizations and international financial institutions gathered in Paris on 10 March for the 2026 Nuclear Energy Summit, underscoring the central role that nuclear power plays in providing clean, reliable, affordable and secure energy. Hosted by the Government of France in cooperation with the IAEA, the Summit issued two statements reaffirming a commitment to expanding nuclear energy as part of the global transition to low carbon energy systems and calling for stronger international cooperation and increased access to financing. Leaders at the summit emphasized that expanding nuclear power will require coordinated international action, strong regulatory frameworks and sustained investment. “Nuclear power is key to reconciling both independence, and thus energy sovereignty, with decarbonization, and thus carbon neutrality,” said French President Emmanuel Macron. “We need to keep mobilizing this funding and continue attracting private investment.
26 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
In this regard, I am pleased to see that major private investors and large international funds are turning to nuclear because it is profitable, but I think we need to step up our efforts so that the banks and insurers invest more in nuclear power.” Nuclear energy is now widely recognized as an essential part of the solution, said IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi. “The momentum we are seeing today is the result of a growing recognition that reliable, low carbon electricity will be essential to meet the world’s rising energy demand.” Mr Grossi highlighted progress in addressing access to financing. Noting that nuclear projects had historically been excluded from many international financial institutions, he said the situation is beginning to change, pointing to a landmark cooperation agreement the IAEA signed with the World Bank last year. Since then, the IAEA has expanded engagement with development banks and regional financial institutions to help unlock funding for nuclear energy projects. Nuclear newcomers around the globe stand to eventually benefit from such developments. — By Jeffrey Donovan
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
IAEA radium recycling initiative supports advanced cancer care Croatia, Guatemala and the Philippines recently transferred disused radium sources to be recycled for use in cancer treatment through the IAEA’s Global Radium-226 Management Initiative. This legacy material will be transformed into actinium-225, a rare radioisotope used to treat breast and prostate cancer. “What was once seen purely as a burden has now become a story of hope,” said Ronald Piquero, Senior Science Research Specialist at the Philippine Nuclear Research Institute. Radium-226 was widely used in medicine and industry in the twentieth century, but safer and more effective alternatives have since replaced it. About 100 countries have legacy stocks sitting idle in safe, secure storage. Launched in 2021, the Global Radium-226 Management Initiative links countries holding legacy radium226 sources with institutions equipped to produce radiopharmaceuticals using this material as feedstock. Participating radiopharmaceutical producers convert old sources into actinium-225 using cyclotrons — small particle accelerators that bombard the target material with charged particles, changing its fundamental composition in the process. The IAEA plays an active role in transfer preparations by assisting with source inventory, characterization, conditioning and radiation monitoring. About 80 countries are involved in the initiative. To date, 17 countries have transferred sources, and at least six transfers are planned for 2026. The initiative is considering additional disused sources, including strontium-90 and caesium-137, for potential future recycling efforts.
“The Global Radium-226 Management Initiative is a remarkable example of international partnership, shared commitment and common values. It offers a strategic opportunity to address a historical challenge while contributing to global health,” said Norasalwa Zakaria, Head of the IAEA’s Waste Technology Section. “We invite all Member States with legacy radium-226 sources to join this effort. Together we can transform a nuclear legacy into a resource that supports cancer treatment and saves lives.” — By Matt Fisher
IAEA releases updated regulations for safe transport of radioactive material Every year, millions of shipments of nuclear and radioactive material move safely and securely within and across national borders by road, rail, sea and air. This includes radiopharmaceuticals delivered to hospitals and sealed sources transported for industrial use. The IAEA Regulations for the Safe Transport of Radioactive Material provide the internationally recognized framework that enables radioactive material to be transported safely and efficiently across all modes of transport. In more than 60 years, this robust global safety framework has not recorded a single transport incident causing a significant radiological hazard to people or the environment. A recent update to these regulations reflects current scientific knowledge and operational experience while providing clear and practical requirements for safe transport. Key changes strengthen provisions for package durability
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 27
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
The revised safety regulations will be incorporated into international modal regulations for maritime and air transport, and regional modal regulations for transport by road, rail and inland waterways. Countries also incorporate them into national regulations, creating a strong, harmonized global framework for transport safety that protects people, property and the environment. — By Loretta Manu
Nuclear scientists return to Lake Tanganyika 50 years after first scientific mission
This effort echoes a pioneering 1973 expedition, when Harmon Craig and colleagues from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, in collaboration with the Food and Agriculture Organization, worked with national institutions to study the lake’s chemistry and circulation. The measurements from their expedition provide an important scientific baseline for understanding how the lake has changed over the past half century. The IAEA-supported mission in February 2026 required careful coordination, including alignment with historic sampling locations, verifying equipment and ensuring consistency with earlier measurements. Despite these challenges, the team was able to collect
(Photo: AdobeStock)
Along the shores of Lake Tanganyika, the world’s second largest lake by volume and depth, rising waters are disrupting economic activity and daily life. Shared by Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Tanzania and Zambia, the lake supports fisheries, agriculture, transport and tourism across the region. Over the past five years, its water levels have risen by more than a metre. Beaches have closed and some lakeside housing is now fully submerged. Shoreline roads and hotels have also been affected.
With support from the IAEA’s technical cooperation programme, scientists from Burundi are working with IAEA experts to study changes in the lake’s conditions. They are using isotope-based tracing techniques to better understand how water circulates within the lake, how its layers interact and how conditions may be changing over time.
(Photo: IAEA)
for radioactive material such as radiopharmaceuticals, ensuring long term safety.
28 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
around 160 samples from different lake depths, as well as from nearby rivers and groundwater sources, for detailed laboratory analysis. Preliminary observations indicate that the depth of oxygenated waters has decreased significantly since 1973. At that time oxygen extended to about 100 metres, while new measurements suggest that oxygen now reaches only about 80 metres, indicating potential changes in mixing processes and ecological conditions within the lake. Researchers also observed that the water layer between 50 metres and 80 metres appears to be a zone of oxygen stress, where oxygen levels are almost half of the oxygenated zone. — By Tareq Aldakheelallah
IAEA supports research reactor safety and utilization efforts in Africa Research reactors provide practical training and hands-on experience in nuclear science and technology, including for nuclear power plant operators. When they are operated efficiently and safely, they can become powerful engines for scientific growth and innovation. Currently eight African countries — Algeria, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Egypt, Ghana, Libya, Morocco, Nigeria and South Africa — operate research reactors to support sustainable farming, produce radioisotopes for cancer treatments, test the structural integrity of buildings and industrial equipment, and identify sources of industrial air pollution. Some are also using research reactors to test their ability to successfully run nuclear power programmes.
Through regional and national technical cooperation projects and peer review missions, the IAEA helps these countries train staff, carry out regular safety reviews, and develop and implement plans to enhance the safety and utilization of research reactors. It also provides technical expertise to countries embarking on research reactor projects and promotes regional collaboration and knowledge sharing. Ghana and Nigeria have signed an agreement to collaborate on training and research, and all eight countries are working towards the establishment of an African Network on Research Reactors. In September 2025, the eight countries operating research reactors reached a major milestone with the signing of the charter of the Regional Advisory Safety Committee for Research Reactors in Africa (RASCA). This step is expected to enhance activities related to safety operation and research reactor safety. “Our participation in the RASCA programme marks an important milestone in strengthening our safety management systems,” said Sammy Malaka, Reactor Manager of South Africa’s SAFARI-1 research reactor. “What stands out about this regional project on research reactors is the shared commitment to harnessing nuclear science and technology to address Africa’s socioeconomic priorities,” said Gashaw Wolde, Acting Director of the IAEA’s Division of Africa. “By investing in skilled people, infrastructure and collaboration, African research reactors are now better positioned to serve their countries.” — By Ellen Swabey-Van de Borne and Azza Kashlan
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 29
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
From the IAEA Archives
The President of Austria, Rudolf Kirchschläger, opened the International Conference on Nuclear Power and its Fuel Cycle in Salzburg, Austria, on 2 May 1977. (Photo: W. K. Sturm/IAEA)
1977: Integrating the nuclear fuel cycle In 1977, the IAEA convened a landmark conference that broadened the world’s focus on nuclear energy from power generation to the entire fuel cycle, shaping the priorities of the nuclear energy sector in the decades since. The International Conference on Nuclear Power and its Fuel Cycle recognized that the stages of the nuclear fuel cycle are closely interconnected, providing strong technical and commercial incentives for integrated planning. It explored practical challenges, such as public acceptance, financing and regional cooperation. Since few countries could be fully self-sufficient in nuclear power generation, the conference concluded that there could be a role for multinational and international management and control of fuel cycle facilities and services.
to strengthen the IAEA’s role in the fuel cycle, particularly in the back end, such as providing guidelines and advice on technical and safety issues. The conference also called for strengthening the IAEA safeguards system in sensitive areas of the fuel cycle and recognized the importance of introducing measures supplementary to the existing international safeguards, such as conventions governing physical security arrangements.
The conference also highlighted the importance of safety and the need to align the peaceful use of nuclear energy with preventing the misuse of nuclear materials. Proposals were made Conference delegates from Brazil, Pakistan and Japan. (Photo: W. K. Sturm/IAEA)
30 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026 | 31
THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE
The mission of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is to help prevent the global spread of nuclear weapons and to enable all countries to benefit from the peaceful, safe and secure use of nuclear science and technology. Established in 1957 as an autonomous organization within the United Nations system, the IAEA is the world’s focal point for cooperation in the nuclear field and serves as the global platform for strengthening nuclear safety and security. It supports the peaceful use of nuclear sciences and applications to improve energy, water and food security, agricultural practices, human health, industry and the environment.
www.iaea.org
The IAEA Bulletin is produced by the Office of Public Information and Communication International Atomic Energy Agency
Extracts from the IAEA material contained in the IAEA Bulletin may be freely used elsewhere provided
Vienna International Centre
acknowledgement of their source is made.
PO Box 100, 1400 Vienna, Austria
If the attribution indicates that the author is not an
Telephone: (43-1) 2600-0
IAEA staff member, permission to republish other
iaeabulletin@iaea.org Editor: Neha Sud Managing Editor: Mary Albon
than for the use of review must be sought from the author or originating organization. Views expressed in any signed article appearing
Design & Production: Ritu Kenn
in the IAEA Bulletin do not necessarily represent
The IAEA Bulletin is available online
and the IAEA accepts no responsibility for them.
those of the International Atomic Energy Agency
in all United Nations languages at www.iaea.org/bulletin
Quiz Answers: 1-b HALEU; 2-d All of the above; 3-b France; 4-c Finland 32 | IAEA Bulletin, #1– 2026
This is Nuclear.
What does blue sky have to do with nuclear? Nuclear energy, the second largest source of low carbon electricity, reduces pollution and keeps our skies blue.
Partner With Us
for a better future The IAEA welcomes
Member States, industry, financial institutions and other stakeholders to partner with us on our flagship initiatives and contribute their expertise, modelling tools, industrial knowledge, advocacy and financial resources.
WOMEN IN NUCLEAR
ENVIRONMENT
FOOD & AGRICULTURE
ENERGY
Learn more about the IAEA’s flagship initiatives
26-08413 | ISSN 0020-6067
HEALTH