International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation
Remarks at the First Plenary Session of the Organizing Conference.
October 19, 1977

About 25 years ago, I was a student doing graduate work in nuclear physics and reactor technology, not too many years after the first atomic weapons had been used to destroy human beings. My study was the peaceful use of this tremendous force, working under Admiral Rickover in the development of atomic submarine powerplants.

And now we’ve come to a time when we can look back with a clear historic perspective at what has transpired during this quarter century. It’s a great honor for us to have you leaders come from, I believe, 36 nations and 3 international organizations, to think back to 1945, to remember our own President Eisenhower’s proposal called Atoms for Peace, part of which was adopted, the later establishment of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which has provided for us, so far, a very effective mechanism by which explosions could be reduced and power could be produced.

We then went into a time of at least embryonic discussions of nuclear test bans, and now we have one that still permits the testing of weapons which have the equivalent of 150,000 tons of TNT. Even this has been recognized as an achievement. And, of course, we are discussing with the Soviet Union means by which we can eliminate, sometime in the future, our dependence upon atomic weapons altogether. We’ve lived under a threat which so far has not yet been realized, and I pray that it never shall.

In the last 32 years, there have been no people killed by the use of atomic weapons. But with the rapidly increasing price of oil and the scarcity of fuel which we have taken for granted in years gone by, there’s an increasing pressure for expanding atomic power use. And commensurate with that use is also the threat of the proliferation of nuclear explosives among nations that have forgone voluntarily that opportunity up until now.

We have seen regional actions taken in the southern part of this hemisphere. The Treaty of Tlatelolco is now being ratified by the last nations, we hope, to prevent the deployment of any atomic explosions-or explosives in that part of the world. We hope that this will prevail in many other parts of the world.

We’ve also seen progress made recently between ourselves and the Soviet Union. We are eager to see drastic reductions in the deployment of nuclear weapons. And we are now negotiating with the Soviet Union and with Great Britain for a complete elimination of the testing of atomic explosions.

At the same time, the challenge presents itself to this group and to me, as one of the world leaders, to find a means by which the consuming nations who need atomic power to produce electricity andto serve peaceful purposes—to draw a distinction between that need, which is legitimate, and the threat of the development of atomic explosions themselves.

I have a feeling that the need for atomic power itself for peaceful uses has perhaps been greatly exaggerated. And I hope that all the nations represented here and others will assess alternatives to turning to this source of power, if for no other reasons than because of economic considerations.

Recent studies that I have read show that we can gain the equivalent of a barrel of oil per day by conservation measures at very little or any cost, often zero cost or up to $3,500. North Sea oil costs capital investment about $10,000 for every barrel of oil per day derived from that source. Our own Alaskan oil will cost $20,000 in capital investment for every barrel of oil per day, or its equivalent derived at the ultimate site of use. And for the equivalent of a barrel of oil per day at the end-use site for atomic power, the capital investment is between $200,000 and $300,000.

So, there’s a tremendous cost even for the potential peaceful use of atomic power. Even so, we recognize that there will be a need, and we are eager to cooperate.

It’s important that we understand your problems, that those nations that supply enriched uranium—ourselves, the Canadians, others—those who have major deposits of uranium ore that have presently not been exploited, like Australia, understand the need of nations that are not well blessed with uranium fuel supplies. It’s important that you understand from those of us who unfortunately are nuclear weapon nations, our special commitment to reducing this threat.

I believe that in this brief session that you will have this week, followed by weeks and months of tedious, I’m sure, argumentative but productive discussions and debates, that common knowledge will benefit us all.

It’s important that we combine our ingenuity, our foresight, our own experience, our research and development efforts, so that we don’t duplicate the very expensive efforts to use atomic power in a useful way. And this exchange of ideas among us will be very helpful.

It’s important that we know what potential nuclear fuel cycles are available to us, the quantity and the location of uranium and thorium and other nuclear fuels, the methods used for extraction, the methods used and the costs for enrichment, possible distribution systems, the proper design and use, standardization of powerplants, safety of people who live near them, proper siting considerations, the political objections to atomic powerplants themselves, the possible need for breeder reactors, the handling of spent fuel, the need or absence of a need for reprocessing the spent fuel, and international safeguards that will prevent the development of explosives.

We are eager to cooperate as a nation which is a consumer and also a supplier. We want to be sure that where there is a legitimate need and where there’s a mutually agreed upon nonproliferation restraint, that there be an adequate supply of nuclear fuel.

I think an international fuel bank should be established, so that if there is a temporary breakdown in the bilateral supply of nuclear fuel, that there might be a reservoir of fuel to be supplied under those circumstances. And we’ll certainly contribute our own technical ability and our own portion of the enriched uranium supplies for that purpose.

We are very eager, also, to help solve the problem of the disposal of spent nuclearfuel itself. We can’t provide storage for the major portion of the world’s spent fuel, but we are willing to cooperate. And when a nation demonstrates to us your need for spent nuclear fuel storage, we hope to be prepared to accept that responsibility, working closely with you.

All the costs of the nuclear fuel cycle should be accurately known as well as possible. And there should be an open-minded approach to this very controversial and very difficult subject.

I hope, as the President of our country, to learn from you, and I will welcome your advice and your counsel. I welcome your caution and, on occasion, your criticism about American policies. And I believe that we’ll find a common ground on which we can work together in harmony to make sure that our people do have a better quality of life, that alternate fuel supplies are evolved in an effective and adequate way, that energy is conserved to an optimum degree, and that the threat of nuclear destruction is minimized.

I want to congratulate all of you on being willing to come here to meet together, because there has been an inclination to avoid controversy. This question is inherently controversial. The interests on occasion are highly divergent, and many of these matters have not been discussed adequately in the past.

I’m very grateful that the International Atomic Energy Agency is here because there is no conflict between this effort and the tremendous contribution that that Agency has been making and will make in the future.

We want to do everything we can to strengthen the safeguard system already established. And if there is a recommendation from this group that the functions of the International Atomic Energy Agency should be expanded, we will certainly be willing to contribute our own financial and other support to make that possible.

In closing, let me thank you for being willing to participate in this international discussion. I am very eager to study your own debates and derive information from you. We will cooperate in every possible way that we can to give our people of the world adequate power sources and, at the same time, to keep their lives from being endangered.
Thank you very much.

NOTE: The President spoke at 10:15 a.m. in the Loy Henderson Conference Room at the State Department. The organizing conference of the International Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation was hosted by the State Department.