DOCSLIB.ORG

System Studies on the Fusion-Fission Hybrid Systems and Its Fuel Cycle

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
System Studies on the Fusion-Fission Hybrid Systems and Its Fuel Cycle applied sciences Article System Studies on the Fusion-Fission Hybrid Systems and Its Fuel Cycle Mikhail Shlenskii 1,* and Boris Kuteev 2,* 1 Plasma Physics Department, National Research Nuclear University Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Kashirskoe Hwy 31, 115409 Moscow, Russia 2 Tokamak Department, National Research Center “Kurchatov Institute”, Akademika Kurchatova pl. 1, 123098 Moscow, Russia * Correspondence: [email protected] (M.S.); [email protected] (B.K.) Received: 8 November 2020; Accepted: 24 November 2020; Published: 26 November 2020 Abstract: This paper is devoted to applications of fusion-fission hybrid systems (FFHS) as a powerful neutron source implementing transmutation of minor actinides (MA: Np, Am, Cm) extracted from the spent nuclear fuel (SNF) of nuclear reactors. Calculations which simulated nuclide kinetics for the metallic fuel containing MA and neutron transport were performed for particular facilities. Three FFHS with fusion power equal to 40 MW are considered in this study: demo, pilot-industrial and industrial reactors. In addition, needs for a fleet of such reactors are assessed as well as future FFHSs’ impact on Russian Nuclear Power System. A system analysis of nuclear energy development in Russia was also performed with the participation of the FFHSs, with the help of the model created at AO “Proryv”. The quantity of MA that would be produced and transmuted in this scenario is estimated. This research shows that by the means of only one hybrid facility it is possible to reduce by 2130 the mass of MA in the Russian power system by about 28%. In the case of the absence of partitioning and transmutation of MA from SNF, 287 t of MA will accumulate in the Russian power system by 2130. Keywords: fusion-fission hybrid system (FFHS); fusion neutron source (FNS); minor actinides; partitioning and transmutation (P&T); closed nuclear fuel cycle 1. Introduction 1.1. Prerequisites for Minor Actinides Transmutation One of the most crucial issues for nuclear engineering is to create a closed nuclear fuel cycle that would provide the use of nuclear energy for a long time (more than 1000 years) and improve the safety, ecology and economics of nuclear technology. This issue includes the problem of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and radioactive waste (RW) management. Minor actinides (MA—Np, Am, Cm) comprise about 0.1–0.15% of SNF mass, have high radiotoxicity and a relatively long half-life [1,2]. One of the ways to manage MA is to dispose of them in geologic repositories. However, there is another approach where MA are transmuted into lighter nuclides. This paper describes the important problems of MA management and a way to solve those using FFHSs. The value of radiotoxicity shows the real harmful potential of a particular nuclide—thus it is used by a majority of authors. Radiotoxicity is a result of the multiplication of nuclide radioactivity and effective dose coefficient (or DPUI—Dose Per Unit Intake, Sv/Bq) [2]: Radiotoxicity = A e(50) (1) · Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8417; doi:10.3390/app10238417 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8417 2 of 15 Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 16 wherewhere A isis the nuclide’s activity activity (Bq) (Bq) for for a a particular particular moment, moment, (50)e(50) isis thethe eeffectiveffective dosedose coecoefficientfficient (Sv(Sv/Bq)/Bq) thatthat isis thethe dosedose (Sv)(Sv) resultingresulting fromfrom thethe intakeintake ofof 11 BqBq fromfrom aa specificspecific nuclidenuclide over over 50 50 years. years. As reported in [[1,2]1,2] the typical SNF of a light wa waterter reactor (LWR) consists of more than 95% U, about 1% Pu, only 0.1% MA and about 3–4% fissionfission products (FP). Plutonium and MA (despite their small percentage)percentage) provideprovide the the main main contribution contribution to to the the long-term long-term radiotoxicity radiotoxicity of radioactiveof radioactive waste waste [2], (Figure[2], (Figure1). The 1). radiotoxicity The radiotoxicity of fission of fission products produc declinests declines much faster much compared faster compared to that of to actinides. that of Itactinides. reaches theIt reaches radioactive the radioactive equilibrium equilibrium with respect wi toth the respect uranium to the ore uranium in about 300ore yearsin about [2]. 300 If SNF years is not[2]. reprocessedIf SNF is not and reprocessed transmuted, and it reachestransmuted, the natural it reaches radiotoxicity the natural level radiotoxicity only after 100,000 level only years after [2]. At100,000 the same years time, [2]. At in the same European time, Union in the alone,European nuclear Union power alone, plants nuclear produce power annually plants produce around 2500annually tons around of SNF [25001], almost tons of the SNF same [1], amount almost the is produced same amount in the is USA produced [3]. in the USA [3]. Figure 1. Radiotoxicity ofof SNFSNF (spent(spent nuclearnuclear fuel)fuel) and and its its components components (for (for PWR, PWR, UOX, UOX, 60 60 GW GW·d/t)d/t) [1 ]. · [1]. The concept of radiation equivalent treatment of radioactive nuclides in nuclear fuel cycle [4] is quiteThe attractive concept because of radiation it could equivalent provide a treatment great reduction of radioactive of safety nuclides requirements in nuclear and costs fuel forcycle the [4] RW is repositoryquite attractive ([5], p. because 516, [6]). it Thiscould concept provide implies a great disposing reduction of of radioactive safety requirements waste that has and a radiotoxicitycosts for the levelRW repository equal to the ([5], natural p. 516, U or [6]). Th oreThis level concept (or at implies least reduced disposing radiotoxicity of radioactive level). waste that has a radiotoxicityHowever, level nowadays, equal to manythe natural EU countries U or Th (andore level not just(or at EU least countries) reduced have radiotoxicity chosen a level). phase-out scenarioHowever, for nuclear nowadays, energy many (like Sweden EU countries [7] and (and Germany) not just and EU/or countries) have decided have not chosen to reprocess a phase-out SNF andscenario simply for tonuclear dispose energy of it (like in geologic Sweden repositories [7] and Germany) (like the and/or USA have [1,7]). decided There arenot severeto reprocess problems SNF withand simply this approach. to dispose It requiresof it in geologic controlling repositories SNF for an (like impractical the USA length[1,7]). There of time, are meaning severe problems it is very expensivewith this approach. (due to the It requires time and controlling storage space SNF needed), for an impractical probably unsafe,length of not time, to mentionmeaning the it is direct very disposalexpensive of (due SNF willto the deprive time and humanity storage of space a great needed), source ofprobably power. unsafe, not to mention the direct disposalBecause of SNF of nuclearwill deprive power humani RW problem,ty of a great “pure” source thermonuclear of power. fusion reactors seem like a good alternativeBecause as of they nuclear produce power much RW less problem, RW during “pure” their th operationermonuclear if the fusion correct reactors materials seem are like chosen a good [8]. However,alternative the as fusionthey produce reactor ismuch a very less complex RW during facility their that operation is in fact ine if ffithecient correct in utilizing materials very are valuable chosen thermonuclear[8]. However, the neutrons. fusion Atreactor the same is a timevery fusion-fission complex facility hybrid that systems is in fact have inefficient relatively in easily utilizing achieved very plasmavaluable parameters thermonuclear compared neutrons. to “pure” At the thermonuclear same time fusion-fission fusion reactors hybrid [9]. systems have relatively easilyThus achieved reprocessing plasma parameters the spent nuclear compared fuel to via “pure” separating thermonuclear minor actinides, fusion reactors Pu and [9]. U seems a promisingThus reprocessing way forward the in developmentspent nuclear of fuel the via nuclear separating power. minor Pu and actini U coulddes, Pu be and used U in seems fission a reactorspromising again. way forward Fission productsin development could beof usedthe nuclear as sources power. of radiation,Pu and U reducingcould be theused amount in fission of radioactivereactors again. waste. Fission As mentioned products above, could FPbe lose used their as radiotoxicitysources of radiation, much faster reducing than actinides. the amount The last of radioactive waste. As mentioned above, FP lose their radiotoxicity much faster than actinides. The last problem, concerning MA, could be solved via the transmutation of MA in fission reactions which produce fission products. This strategy is called partitioning & transmutation (P&T) [1]. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 8417 3 of 15 problem, concerning MA, could be solved via the transmutation of MA in fission reactions which Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 16 produce fission products. This strategy is called partitioning & transmutation (P&T) [1]. AA very very hard hard spectrum spectrum is requiredis required for for the the fission fission of most of most MA dueMA todue the to threshold the threshold character character of their of fissiontheir fission cross-sections cross-sections (Figure 2(Figure). In Figure 2). 2In, twoFigure types 2, oftwo neutron types cross-sectionof neutron cross-section are shown: fission are shown: and capture.fission and The capture. ratio of theirThe ratio average of their values average for a particularvalues for neutrona particular spectrum neutron (α )spectrum is crucial ( toα) eisff ectivecrucial transmutation.to effective transmutation. Table1 shows Table that the 1 shows capture-to-fission that the capture-to-fission ratio for the spectrum ratio for of the a light spectrum water of reactor a light iswater bigger reactor than 1is forbigger most than actinides 1 for most while actinides for the fastwhile reactor for the spectrum fast reactor this spectrum ratio less this than ratio 1 for less most than actinides.1 for most At actinides.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Status of ITER Neutron Diagnostic Development
    INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING and INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY NUCLEAR FUSION Nucl. Fusion 45 (2005) 1503–1509 doi:10.1088/0029-5515/45/12/005 Status of ITER neutron diagnostic development A.V. Krasilnikov1, M. Sasao2, Yu.A. Kaschuck1, T. Nishitani3, P. Batistoni4, V.S. Zaveryaev5, S. Popovichev6, T. Iguchi7, O.N. Jarvis6,J.Kallne¨ 8, C.L. Fiore9, A.L. Roquemore10, W.W. Heidbrink11, R. Fisher12, G. Gorini13, D.V. Prosvirin1, A.Yu. Tsutskikh1, A.J.H. Donne´14, A.E. Costley15 and C.I. Walker16 1 SRC RF TRINITI, Troitsk, Russian Federation 2 Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan 3 JAERI, Tokai-mura, Japan 4 FERC, Frascati, Italy 5 RRC ‘Kurchatov Institute’, Moscow, Russian Federation 6 Euratom/UKAEA Fusion Association, Culham Science Center, Abingdon, UK 7 Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan 8 Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden 9 PPL, MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA 10 PPPL, Princeton, NJ, USA 11 UC Irvine, Los Angeles, CA, USA 12 GA, San Diego, CA, USA 13 Milan University, Milan, Italy 14 FOM-Rijnhuizen, Netherlands 15 ITER IT, Naka Joint Work Site, Naka, Japan 16 ITER IT, Garching Joint Work Site, Garching, Germany E-mail: [email protected] Received 7 December 2004, accepted for publication 14 September 2005 Published 22 November 2005 Online at stacks.iop.org/NF/45/1503 Abstract Due to the high neutron yield and the large plasma size many ITER plasma parameters such as fusion power, power density, ion temperature, fast ion energy and their spatial distributions in the plasma core can be measured well by various neutron diagnostics. Neutron diagnostic systems under consideration and development for ITER include radial and vertical neutron cameras (RNC and VNC), internal and external neutron flux monitors (NFMs), neutron activation systems and neutron spectrometers.
    [Show full text]
  • An Integrated Model for Materials in a Fusion Power Plant: Transmutation, Gas Production, and Helium Embrittlement Under Neutron Irradiation
    Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience An integrated model for materials in a fusion power plant: transmutation, gas production, and helium embrittlement under neutron irradiation This article has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text article. 2012 Nucl. Fusion 52 083019 (http://iopscience.iop.org/0029-5515/52/8/083019) View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more Download details: IP Address: 193.52.216.130 The article was downloaded on 13/11/2012 at 13:27 Please note that terms and conditions apply. IOP PUBLISHING and INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY NUCLEAR FUSION Nucl. Fusion 52 (2012) 083019 (12pp) doi:10.1088/0029-5515/52/8/083019 An integrated model for materials in a fusion power plant: transmutation, gas production, and helium embrittlement under neutron irradiation M.R. Gilbert, S.L. Dudarev, S. Zheng, L.W. Packer and J.-Ch. Sublet EURATOM/CCFE Fusion Association, Culham Centre for Fusion Energy, Abingdon, Oxfordshire OX14 3DB, UK E-mail: [email protected] Received 16 January 2012, accepted for publication 11 July 2012 Published 1 August 2012 Online at stacks.iop.org/NF/52/083019 Abstract The high-energy, high-intensity neutron fluxes produced by the fusion plasma will have a significant life-limiting impact on reactor components in both experimental and commercial fusion devices. As well as producing defects, the neutrons bombarding the materials initiate nuclear reactions, leading to transmutation of the elemental atoms. Products of many of these reactions are gases, particularly helium, which can cause swelling and embrittlement of materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Fusion & High Energy Density Plasma Science
    Fusion & High Energy Density Plasma Science Opportunities using Pulsed Power Daniel Sinars, Sandia National Laboratories Fusion Power Associates Dec. 4-5, 2018 Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC., a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA-0003525. Sandia is the home of Z, the world’s largest pulsed power facility, and its adjacent multi-kJ Z-Beamlet and Z-PW lasers Pulsed power development area Z Periscope ZBL/ZPW Chama ZPW ZBL Chamber Jemez Chamber Chaco Pecos Target Chamber Chaco Chaco Probe Chambers Laser Beam Using two HED facilities, we have demonstrated the scaling of magneto-inertial fusion over factors of 1000x in energy 3 Our fusion yields have been increasing as expected with increased fuel preheating and magnetization Progress since 1st MagLIF in 2014 Demonstrated platform on Omega • Improved laser energy coupling • Improved magnetic field from ~0.3 kJ to 1.4 kJ strength from 9 T to 27 T • Demonstrated 6x improvement • Achieved record MIF yields on in fusion performance, reaching Omega of 5x109 DD in 2018 2.5 kJ DT-equivalent in 2018 4 We believe that Z is capable of producing a fusion yield of ~100 kJ DT-equivalent with MagLIF, though doing it with DT would exceed our safety thresholds for both T inventory & yield Preheat Energy = 6 kJ into 1.87 mg/cc DT § 2D simulations indicate a 22+ MA and 25+ T with 22.6 MA 6 kJ of preheat could produce ~100 kJ 21.1 MA § Presently, we cannot produce these inputs 17.4 MA S.
    [Show full text]
  • NIAC 2011 Phase I Tarditti Aneutronic Fusion Spacecraft Architecture Final Report
    NASA-NIAC 2001 PHASE I RESEARCH GRANT on “Aneutronic Fusion Spacecraft Architecture” Final Research Activity Report (SEPTEMBER 2012) P.I.: Alfonso G. Tarditi1 Collaborators: John H. Scott2, George H. Miley3 1Dept. of Physics, University of Houston – Clear Lake, Houston, TX 2NASA Johnson Space Center, Houston, TX 3University of Illinois-Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL Executive Summary - Motivation This study was developed because the recognized need of defining of a new spacecraft architecture suitable for aneutronic fusion and featuring game-changing space travel capabilities. The core of this architecture is the definition of a new kind of fusion-based space propulsion system. This research is not about exploring a new fusion energy concept, it actually assumes the availability of an aneutronic fusion energy reactor. The focus is on providing the best (most efficient) utilization of fusion energy for propulsion purposes. The rationale is that without a proper architecture design even the utilization of a fusion reactor as a prime energy source for spacecraft propulsion is not going to provide the required performances for achieving a substantial change of current space travel capabilities. - Highlights of Research Results This NIAC Phase I study provided led to several findings that provide the foundation for further research leading to a higher TRL: first a quantitative analysis of the intrinsic limitations of a propulsion system that utilizes aneutronic fusion products directly as the exhaust jet for achieving propulsion was carried on. Then, as a natural continuation, a new beam conditioning process for the fusion products was devised to produce an exhaust jet with the required characteristics (both thrust and specific impulse) for the optimal propulsion performances (in essence, an energy-to-thrust direct conversion).
    [Show full text]
  • Fission and Fusion Can Yield Energy
    Nuclear Energy Nuclear energy can also be separated into 2 separate forms: nuclear fission and nuclear fusion. Nuclear fusion is the splitting of large atomic nuclei into smaller elements releasing energy, and nuclear fusion is the joining of two small atomic nuclei into a larger element and in the process releasing energy. The mass of a nucleus is always less than the sum of the individual masses of the protons and neutrons which constitute it. The difference is a measure of the nuclear binding energy which holds the nucleus together (Figure 1). As figures 1 and 2 below show, the energy yield from nuclear fusion is much greater than nuclear fission. Figure 1 2 Nuclear binding energy = ∆mc For the alpha particle ∆m= 0.0304 u which gives a binding energy of 28.3 MeV. (Figure from: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/nucbin.html ) Fission and fusion can yield energy Figure 2 (Figure from: http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/nucbin.html) Nuclear fission When a neutron is fired at a uranium-235 nucleus, the nucleus captures the neutron. It then splits into two lighter elements and throws off two or three new neutrons (the number of ejected neutrons depends on how the U-235 atom happens to split). The two new atoms then emit gamma radiation as they settle into their new states. (John R. Huizenga, "Nuclear fission", in AccessScience@McGraw-Hill, http://proxy.library.upenn.edu:3725) There are three things about this induced fission process that make it especially interesting: 1) The probability of a U-235 atom capturing a neutron as it passes by is fairly high.
    [Show full text]
  • Neutronic Model of a Fusion Neutron Source
    STATIC NEUTRONIC CALCULATION OF A FUSION NEUTRON SOURCE S.V. Chernitskiy1, V.V. Gann1, O. Ågren2 1“Nuclear Fuel Cycle” Science and Technology Establishment NSC KIPT, Kharkov, Ukraine; 2Uppsala University, Ångström Laboratory, Uppsala, Sweden The MCNPX numerical code has been used to model a fusion neutron source based on a combined stellarator- mirror trap. Calculation results for the neutron flux and spectrum inside the first wall are presented. Heat load and irradiation damage on the first wall are calculated. PACS: 52.55.Hc, 52.50.Dg INTRODUCTION made in Ref. [5] indicates that under certain conditions Powerful sources of fusion neutrons from D-T nested magnetic surfaces could be created in a reaction with energies ~ 14 MeV are of particular stellarator-mirror machine. interest to test suitability of materials for use in fusion Some fusion neutrons are generated outside the reactors. Developing materials for fusion reactors has main part near the injection point. There is a need of long been recognized as a problem nearly as difficult protection from these neutrons. and important as plasma confinement, but it has The purpose is to calculate the neutron spectrum received only a fraction of attention. The neutron flux in inside neutron exposing zone of the installation and a fusion reactor is expected to be about 50-100 times compute the radial leakage of neutrons through the higher than in existing pressurized water reactors. shield. Furthermore, the high-energy neutrons will produce Another problem studied in the paper concerns to hydrogen and helium in various nuclear reactions that the determination of the heat load and irradiation tend to form bubbles at grain boundaries of metals and damage of the first wall of the device, where will be a result in swelling, blistering or embrittlement.
    [Show full text]
  • Revamping Fusion Research Robert L. Hirsch
    Revamping Fusion Research Robert L. Hirsch Journal of Fusion Energy ISSN 0164-0313 Volume 35 Number 2 J Fusion Energ (2016) 35:135-141 DOI 10.1007/s10894-015-0053-y 1 23 Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media New York. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be self- archived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”. 1 23 Author's personal copy J Fusion Energ (2016) 35:135–141 DOI 10.1007/s10894-015-0053-y POLICY Revamping Fusion Research Robert L. Hirsch1 Published online: 28 January 2016 Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016 Abstract A fundamental revamping of magnetic plasma Introduction fusion research is needed, because the current focus of world fusion research—the ITER-tokamak concept—is A practical fusion power system must be economical, virtually certain to be a commercial failure. Towards that publically acceptable, and as simple as possible from a end, a number of technological considerations are descri- regulatory standpoint. In a preceding paper [1] the ITER- bed, believed important to successful fusion research.
    [Show full text]
  • Fusion: the Way Ahead
    Fusion: the way ahead Feature: Physics World March 2006 pages 20 - 26 The recent decision to build the world's largest fusion experiment - ITER - in France has thrown down the gauntlet to fusion researchers worldwide. Richard Pitts, Richard Buttery and Simon Pinches describe how the Joint European Torus in the UK is playing a key role in ensuring ITER will demonstrate the reality of fusion power At a Glance: Fusion power • Fusion is the process whereby two light nuclei bind to form a heavier nucleus with the release of energy • Harnessing fusion on Earth via deuterium and tritium reactions would lead to an environmentally friendly and almost limitless energy source • One promising route to fusion power is to magnetically confine a hot, dense plasma inside a doughnut-shaped device called a tokamak • The JET tokamak provides a vital testing ground for understanding the physics and technologies necessary for an eventual fusion reactor • ITER is due to power up in 2016 and will be the next step towards a demonstration fusion power plant, which could be operational by 2035 By 2025 the Earth's population is predicted to reach eight billion. By the turn of the next century it could be as many as 12 billion. Even if the industrialized nations find a way to reduce their energy consumption, this unprecedented increase in population - coupled with rising prosperity in the developing world - will place huge demands on global energy supplies. As our primary sources of energy - fossil fuels - begin to run out, and burning them causes increasing environmental concerns, the human race faces the challenge of finding new energy sources.
    [Show full text]
  • On Fusion Driven Systems (FDS) for Transmutation
    R-08-126 On fusion driven systems (FDS) for transmutation O Ågren Uppsala University, Ångström laboratory, division of electricity V E Moiseenko Institute of Plasma Physics, National Science Center Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology K Noack Forschungszentrum Dresden-Rossendorf October 2008 Svensk Kärnbränslehantering AB Swedish Nuclear Fuel and Waste Management Co Box 250, SE-101 24 Stockholm Tel +46 8 459 84 00 CM Gruppen AB, Bromma, 2008 ISSN 1402-3091 Tänd ett lager: SKB Rapport R-08-126 P, R eller TR. On fusion driven systems (FDS) for transmutation O Ågren Uppsala University, Ångström laboratory, division of electricity V E Moiseenko Institute of Plasma Physics, National Science Center Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology K Noack Forschungszentrum Dresden-Rossendorf October 2008 This report concerns a study which was conducted for SKB. The conclusions and viewpoints presented in the report are those of the authors and do not necessarily coincide with those of the client. A pdf version of this document can be downloaded from www.skb.se. Summary This SKB report gives a brief description of ongoing activities on fusion driven systems (FDS) for transmutation of the long-lived radioactive isotopes in the spent nuclear waste from fission reactors. Driven subcritical systems appears to be the only option for efficient minor actinide burning. Driven systems offer a possibility to increase reactor safety margins. A comparatively simple fusion device could be sufficient for a fusion-fission machine, and transmutation may become the first industrial application of fusion. Some alternative schemes to create strong fusion neutron fluxes are presented. 3 Sammanfattning Denna rapport för SKB ger en övergripande beskrivning av pågående aktiviteter kring fusionsdrivna system (FDS) för transmutation av långlivade radioaktiva isotoper i kärnavfallet från fissionskraftverk.
    [Show full text]
  • The Tokamak As a Neutron Source
    PREPARED FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, UNDER CONTRACT DE-AC02-76-CHO-3073 PPPL-2656 PPPL-2656 UC-420 THE TOKAMAK AS A NEUTRON SOURCE BY H.W. HENDEL AND D.L JASSBY November 1989 PMNCITON PLASMA PHYSICS LASOffATORY PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY NOTICE Available from: National Technical Information Service U.S. Department of Commerce 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield. Virginia 22161 703-487-4650 Use the following price codes when ordering: Price: Printed Copy A04 Microfiche A01 THE TOKAMAK AS A NEUTRON SOURCE by H.W. Hendel and D.L. Jassby PPPL—2656 DE90 001821 Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Princeton University Princeton, N.J. 08543 ABSTRACT This paper describes the tokamak in its role as a neutron source, with emphasis on experimental results for D-D neutron production. The sections summarize tokamak operation, sources of fusion and non-fusion neutrons, principal nsutron detection methods and their calibration, neutron energy spectra and fluxes outside the tokamak plasma chamber, history of neutron production in tokamaks, neutron emission and fusion power gain from JET and TFTR (the largest present-day tokamaks), and D-T neutron production from burnup of D-D tritons. This paper also discusses the prospects for future tokamak neutron production and potential applications of tokamak neutron sources. DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as JH account or work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsi­ bility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or repre^r-s that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Fusion Public Meeting Slides-03302021-FINAL
    TitleDeveloping Lorem a Regulatory Ipsum Framework for Fusion Energy Systems March 30, 2021 Agenda Time Topic Speaker(s) 12:30-12:40pm Introduction/Opening Remarks NRC Discussion on NAS Report “Key Goals and Innovations Needed for a U.S. Fusion Jennifer Uhle (NEI) 12:40-1:10pm Pilot Plant” Rich Hawryluk (PPPL) Social License and Ethical Review of Fusion: Methods to Achieve Social Seth Hoedl (PRF) 1:10-1:40pm Acceptance Developers Perspectives on Potential Hazards, Consequences, and Regulatory Frameworks for Commercial Deployment: • Fusion Industry Association - Industry Remarks Andrew Holland (FIA) 1:40-2:40pm • TAE – Regulatory Insights Michl Binderbauer (TAE) • Commonwealth Fusion Systems – Fusion Technology and Radiological Bob Mumgaard (CFS) Hazards 2:40-2:50pm Break 2:50-3:10pm Licensing and Regulating Byproduct Materials by the NRC and Agreement States NRC Discussions of Possible Frameworks for Licensing/Regulating Commercial Fusion • NRC Perspectives – Byproduct Approach NRC/OAS 3:10-4:10pm • NRC Perspectives – Hybrid Approach NRC • Industry Perspectives - Hybrid Approach Sachin Desai (Hogan Lovells) 4:10-4:30pm Next Steps/Questions All Public Meeting Format The Commission recently revised its policy statement on how the agency conducts public meetings (ADAMS No.: ML21050A046). NRC Public Website - Fusion https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/advanced/fusion-energy.html NAS Report “Key Goals and Innovations Needed for a U.S. Fusion Pilot Plant” Bringing Fusion to the U.S. Grid R. J. Hawryluk J. Uhle D. Roop D. Whyte March 30, 2021 Committee Composition Richard J. Brenda L. Garcia-Diaz Gerald L. Kathryn A. Per F. Peterson (NAE) Jeffrey P. Hawryluk (Chair) Savannah River National Kulcinski (NAE) McCarthy (NAE) University of California, Quintenz Princeton Plasma Laboratory University of Oak Ridge National Berkeley/ Kairos Power TechSource, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Neutronics Analyses for a Stellarator Power Reactor Based on the HELIAS Concept
    Neutronics analyses for a stellarator power reactor based on the HELIAS concept André Häußlera, Felix Warmerb, Ulrich Fischera aKarlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Neutron Physics and Reactor Technology (INR), 76344 Eggenstein- Leopoldshafen, Germany bMax Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP), 17491 Greifswald, Germany A first neutronics analysis of the Helical-Axis Advanced Stellarator (HELIAS) power reactor is conducted in this work. It is based on Monte Carlo (MC) particle transport simulations with the Direct Accelerated Geometry Monte Carlo (DAGMC) approach which enables particle tracking directly on the CAD geometry. A suitable geometry model of the HELIAS reactor is developed, including a rough model of a breeder blanket based on the Helium Cooled Pebble Bed (HCPB) breeder blanket concept. The resulting model allows to perform first neutronic calculations providing a 2D map of the neutron wall loading, a 3D distribution of the neutron flux, and a rough assessment of the tritium breeding capability. It is concluded that the applied methodology, making use of MC particle transport simulations based on the DAGMC approach, is suitable for performing nuclear analyses for the HELIAS power reactor. Keywords: STELLARATOR; HELIAS; NEUTRONICS; CAD; MCNP; DAGMC 1. Introduction design (CAD). The developed models are usually not directly applicable for Monte Carlo (MC) particle The Helical-Axis Advanced Stellarator (HELIAS) is transport codes and need preprocessing with regard to a conceptual design of a fusion power reactor proposed the geometrical simplification and adaption to the by the Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (IPP) in requirements of neutronic simulations including the Greifswald, Germany. HELIAS-5B is a specific 5-field- decomposition of complex CAD models.
    [Show full text]