DOCSLIB.ORG

Nuclear Power

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nuclear Power No.59 z iii "Ill ~ 2 er0 Ill Ill 0 Nuclear Family Pia nning p3 Chernobyl Broadsheet ·, _ I. _ . ~~~~ George Pritchar d speaks CONTENTS COMMENT The important nuclear development since the Nuclear Family Planning 3 last SCRAM Journal was the Government's The CEGB's plans, and the growing opposition, after Sizewell B by go ahead for Sizewell B: the world's first HUGH RICHARDS. reactor order since Chernobyl, and Britain's News 4-6 first since the go ahead was given to Torness Accidents Will Happen 1 and Heysham 2 in 1978. Of great concern is Hinkley Seismic Shocker 8-9 the CEGB's announced intention to build "a A major article on seismic safety of nuclear plants in which JAMES small fanilty• of PWRs, starting with Hinkley GARRETT reveals that Hinkley Point C. At the time of the campaign In the Point sits on a geological fault. south west to close the Hinkley A Magnox Trouble at Trawsfynydd 10-11 station, and .a concerted push in Scotland to A summary of FoE's recent report on increasing radiation levels from prevent the opening of Torness, another Trawsfynydd's by PATRICK GREEN. nuclear announcement is designed to divide Pandora's POX 12 and demoralise the opposition. But, it should The debate over plutonium transport make us more determined. The article on the to and from Dounreay continues by facing page gives us hope: the local PETE MUTTON. authorities on Severnside are joining forces CHERNOBYL BROADSHEET to oppose Hinkley C, and hopefully they will Cock-ups and Cover-ups work closely with local authorities in other "Sacrificed to • • • Nuclear Power" threatened areas - Lothian Region, The Soviet Experience Northumberland, the County Council Coalition "An Agonising Decision• 13 against waste dumping and the Nuclear Free GEORGE PRITCHARD explains why Zones - to formulate a national anti-nuclear he left Greenpeoce and took a job strategy. And remember: only the Tories with a compc:lny looking at undersea nuclear waste disposalp support the PWR - in the coming general Birds in a Flap over Barrage 16-17 election we have the opportunity to vote out The ecological arguments against Size well B, Hinkley C, Torness, Heysham 2, the Severn Barrage by MIKE LEVEN. and all the rest. Vote tactically. When the Wind Blows 18 A review of the Sritish Wind Energy Can nuclear waste be safely disposed of under Association's annual conference in Edinburgh by MIKE TOWNSLEY. the seabed? An important question surely. Appropriate Technology 19-21 SCRAM has always believed that there must Reviews 22-23 be three conditions on any method of dealing Little Black Rabbit 24 with nuclear waste: the source of that waste, the nuclear power and weapons programmes, must be stopped; the waste must be HUGH RICHARDS is a member of the Welsh monitorable; and it must be retrievable should Anti-Nuclear Allaince. anything go wrong. Instead of considering this JAMES GARRETT is a freelance journalist working in Bristol. angle, the Press preferred to cover the PATRICK GREEN is Friends of the Earth's fact that George Pritchard left Greenpeace Radiation Consultant. to work as Trade Union liaison, on the advice PETE MUTTON is a member of the Highland of the Unions, with the company which is Anti-Nuclear Group. investigating the subject. They didn't know all MIKE LEVEN is a Town Planner and vice Choir of the Edinburgh branch of the the facts. To further the debate, thls issue Scottish Ornithological Society. of SCRAM includes an interview with George Prltchard, in which he describes his Views expressed in articles appearing in this resignation as "on agonising decision", and Journal are not necessarily those of SCRAM. explains his reasons. Until their study is This Journal is produced for the British Anti­ published, SCRAM cannot oppose or support the Nuclear and Safe Energy movements by the proposal; but we must keep an open mind. Scottish Campaign to Resist the Atomic Menace. And we all must remember that the company Editor: Steve Martin concerned is not in a position to stop the News Editor: Thorn Dlbdin nuclear power programme: it is only the Appropriate Technology: Mike T ownsley politicians, responding to pressure from the people, who can do that. We welcome contributions of articles, news graphics and photographs. Distorted logic. A recent report by the Deadline for the next issue: Bradford School of Peace Studies reveals that, Articles (800 words/page), 5 June conventional strikes on nuclear power stations News & graphics, 12 June could produce as much fallout as a nuclear ISSN 0140 7340 Bi-monthly. exchange. The megadeath enthusiasts therefore argue that we might as well keep the nuclear SCRAM, 11 Forth Street, Edinburgh EH1 3LE. weapons, when they should conclude that we Tel: 031 557 4283/4. must get rid of nuclear power stations too. 2 SCRAM Journal May/June 1987 as the Severn barrage or CHP, Nuclear Family Planning reach the stage of economic alternatives, they should be included With the go ahead for Sizewell B now given, attention has in the analysis (para 2.179). These conclusions make a substantial case shifted to the next PWRs. HUGH RICHARDS has followed for re-examining the economics of the debate and describes the changes in CEGB policy over the PWR against alternatives. the years. He also urges everyone to support the Severnside On 15 March 1985, eight days after the end of the Inquiry, Lord Local Authorities in their objection to Hinkley Point C. Marshall announced the existing What happens after Sizewell B? The the CEGB regard the site os Magnox reactors at Trawsfynydd Central Electricity Generating Board "conveniently situated" at the point would probably close in 1955, and (CEGB) have said that they want a where the national grid crosses the one option would be a PWR on the "small family" of Pressurised Water Severn. site, using either cooling towers or Reactors (PWRs). But their often On 25 August 1982 the CEGB direct cooling from an enlarged inconsistent notions about family announced the list of candidates lake. Wylfa was also added to the planning, and the Chairman's after Sizewell: Dungeness, Hinkley, list. tendency to make strategic decisions Bradwell, Druridge (Northumberland), We anticipate strong pressure "on the hoof", have created Winfrith (Dorset) and Sizewell C. Of from the CEGB and the Government confusion. To understand the these, Hinkley C was to be regarded to truncate any public inquiries into implications fo~ England and Wales as a "firm commitment". the CEGB's "small family". The it is necessary to return to an By March '83 changed economic first task of ahe combined opposition earlier riddle: what is a programme? circumstances meant, according to will be to resist the "streamliners" That is the question we have the Department of Energy at the who would restict the terms of the asked ever since the December 1979 Sizewell Inquiry, that there was no inquiries to local planning Government announcement of a longer a sound planning basis for a considerations. 15GW nuclear "programme" (equal 15GW programme. No fixed At Hinkley the battle lines are to a dozen Sizewells) over 1982-92. progrort:~me existed, and nuclear already being drawn. Somerset Part of the CEGB's confidential plant ordering would be on a step­ County Council have asked the 1978/79 Deveiopment Review of by·step basis (Layfield, chapter 91, Severnside Local Authorities to "Station Siting Possibili~ies" was para 91.2) consider taking part in a joint submitted to the Sizewell Inquiry by opposition to the anticipated the Suffolk Preservation Society. CEGB POLICY CHANGED application for a PWR. Sites considered were for inclusion The four County Councils in the in programmes for start up in the The CEGB began the Inquiry "Standing Conference on Regional period 1985-90. The assumption was maintaining that Sizewell 8 was a Policy in South Wales", namely that site work on a PWR would single project: there was no final Gwent and the three Glamorgans - start in 1982, followed by a further sequence of reactor types on South, Mid and West - are opposed four stations, or more, depending on identified sites. In December 1984 to the further development of whether Advanced Gas-cooled Lord Marshall stated: "Layfield nuclear power and are worried Reactor (AGR) or PWR plant were permitting, we shall build 6 PWRs about the effects on south Wales of chosen. 11 sites were considered, by the end of the century in the a serious. accident at Hinkley Point. with comments on factors ranging south of the country." By the end Avon County Council and the City from safety to local reaction. of the Inquiry they stated that Councils of Gloucester, Bristol and Connah's Quay was regarded as Sizewell B should be considered as Exeter have all passed motions unacceptable to the Nil (Nuclear the first of a small family, of 3, 4 opposing the further development of Installations Inspectorate) because of or 5 PWRs. nuclear power. Devon County population density. Didcot was seen In his report, Layfield was Council have avoided a head-on as possible for an AGR, but there scathing in his comments on the approach by commissioning an were worries about polluting the CEGB's approach. He said the alternative energy strategy for the Thames with liquid radioactive significance they attached to County from the SW Energy Group. discharges, particularly those Sizewell B, for its future plans, Somerset County Council have following an "incident". Fawley and could and should have been made allocated £250,000 to fight Hinkley Hartlepool were not favoured clear from the outset {para 91.11 ). C at the Public Inquiry, and believe because of adjacent petrochemical He regarded the case for Sizewell os that safety and general evironmental works, and strong Nil concern about one for a single station.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2.10. Neutron Activation of Paintings
    2.10. Neutron activation of paintings Possible applications: • Pigment analysis by activation techniques • Neutron radiography by neutron absorption ⇒ Autoradiography Requires neutron irradiation of the entire painting using homogenous neutron flux followed by subsequent point by point raster activation measurement. Technical approach with reactors Neutron guide line is needed for providing sufficient neutron flux (~1014 neutrons/cm2/s) for activation of bulky materials outside the reactor core! 4,7 m shielding door shielding neutrons painting 2.5 m Activation with subsequent X-ray and γ-ray detection 63Cu(n,γ)64Cu, Cu(x) 202Hg(n,γ)203Hg, Hg(x) X-ray data provides pigment position γ-ray data provides pigment characteristics Timescale and Radiation Sensitivity Anthony van Dyck, Saint Rosalie praying for the Plague stricken of Palermo 1624 radiograph Pigment identification by analysis of time dependence for characteristic activity 3rd run Pigment identification by analysis of time dependence for characteristic activity 6th run Pigment identification by analysis of time dependence for characteristic activity 8th run Young man in the background Maryan Wynn Ainsworth et al. Art and Autoradiography; Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; (1987) 12-18 Van Dyck Self-Portrait Head also visible in X-ray radiograph Self-Portrait of van Dyck 1622 St. Sebastian ca 1649 Painting in the Gemäldegalerie Berlin original by Georges de la Tour (1593-1652) French Court Painter Original in Louvre, question about authorship of copy, George de la Tour himself or by his son Entienne de la Tour? Neutron radiated 109 n/cm2s Neutron induced γ activity is recorded in different time steps: e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the Flood Greenhouse Effect Plutonium Flights of Fancy Ministry
    ., Th~ Safe Energy ,J - Journal - July I August 19 88 75p Before the Flood Greenhouse Effect Plutonium Fl ights of Fancy Ministry of Truth - Chernobyl Lies CONTENTS COMMENT Flights of Fancy? 3 In the words of Or Tom Wheldon, at the Fourth STEVE MARTIN reviews the regulatory Annual Low Level Radiation and Health Conference log-jam in the US over planned held in Stirling, to say that radiation has existed in plutonium flights from Europe to Japan. the environment since the dawn of humankind and News 4-7 is therefore not a problem is just as daft as saying Ministry of Truth 8-9 that crocodiles have been around since the begin­ PATRICK GREEN accuses MAFF of ning with no perceived adverse effects - they will trying to rewrite history in their evidence to the Agriculture Com­ still bite your leg off, given half a chance. mittee. The Irresistible Force 10-11 The second report on the incidence of childhood meets the Immovable Object leukaemia near Dounreay from COMARE, of which ANDREW HOLMES asks what will Or Wheldon is a member, is a valuable contribution happen to nuclear research after privatisation. to the debate; but don't forget what happened to Snug as a Bug ••• 12 the 1976 Flowers Report. For the uninitiated, DON ARNOTT assesses the evidence Flowers recommended, among other things, that no that bacteria have been found in the large scale nuclear power ordering programme be burned-out core of the Three Mile Is­ land reactor. embarked on until the nuclear waste problem had Milk of Human Kindness? 14-15 been solved.
    [Show full text]
  • Low Enriched Uranium Conversion Preliminary Safety Analysis Report for the MIT Research Reactor
    LEU PSAR 6 DEC 2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................... a ••••••• i 1.0 MIT Research Reactor·······························································"······························· 1-1 1.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Summary and Conclusions of Principal Safety Considerations .............................. 1-1 1.2.1 Consequences from Operation and Use ............................................................. 1-1 1.2.2 Safety Considerations on Choice of Site, Fue~ and Power Level.. ..................... 1-2 1.2.3 Inherent Safety Features ................................................................................... 1-3 1.2.4 Design Features for Safe Operation and Shutdown............................................ 1-4 1.2.5 Potential Accidents ........................................................................................... 1-5 1.3 General Description of the Facility ........................................................................ 1-6 1.4 Shared Facilities and Equipment.. ....................................................................... 1-10 1.5 Comparison with Similar Facilities ..................................................................... 1-11 1.6 Summary of Operation ......................................................................................... 1-11 1.7 Nuclear Waste Policy Act
    [Show full text]
  • Peptide Receptor Radionuclide Therapy with Indigenous
    Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2020;10(4):178-211 www.ajnmmi.us /ISSN:2160-8407/ajnmmi0115339 Review Article One decade of ‘Bench-to-Bedside’ peptide receptor radionuclide therapy with indigenous [177Lu]Lu-DOTATATE obtained through ‘Direct’ neutron activation route: lessons learnt including practice evolution in an Indian setting Sandip Basu1,2, Sudipta Chakraborty2,3, Rahul V Parghane1,2, Kamaldeep2,4, Rohit Ranade1,2, Pradeep Thapa1,2, Ramesh V Asopa1,2, Geeta Sonawane1,2, Swapna Nabar1,2, Hemant Shimpi1,2, Ashok Chandak1,2, Vimalnath KV3, Vikas Ostwal2,5, Anant Ramaswamy2,5, Manish Bhandare2,6, Vikram Chaudhari2,6, Shailesh V Shrikhande2,6, Bhawna Sirohi5,7, Ashutosh Dash2,3, Sharmila Banerjee1,2 1Radiation Medicine Centre, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Tata Memorial Hospital Annexe, Parel, Mumbai, India; 2Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India; 3Radiopharmaceuticals Division, BARC, Mumbai, India; 4Health Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India; 5Department of Medical Oncology, Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India; 6Department of Surgical Oncology, Gastrointestinal and Hepato- Pancreato-Biliary Service, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India; 7Apollo Proton Cancer Centre, Chennai, India Received May 30, 2020; Accepted August 14, 2020; Epub August 25, 2020; Published August 30, 2020 Abstract: The present treatise chronicles one decade of experience pertaining to clinical PRRT services in a large- volume tertiary cancer care centre in India delivering over 4,000 therapies, an exemplar of successful
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Overview of Fissile Material Transparency Technology Demonstration Executive Summary
    Technical Overview of Fissile Material Transparency Technology Demonstration Executive Summary There are two major objectives for the Fissile Material Transparency Technology Demonstration (FMTTD). The first is to demonstrate to the Russian delegation that a six- attribute measurement system with information barrier (AMS/IB) can be built with sufficient protection to allow measurement of classified components without revealing classified information. The second is to construct this AMS/IB in such a manner as to convince the Russian delegation that it would be possible for a monitoring party to fully authenticate operation of the system. Six attributes will be measured in the demonstration AMS/IB. These are: (1) plutonium isotopic ratio, (2) plutonium mass, (3) absence of oxide, (4) presence of plutonium, (5) symmetry of the plutonium, and (6) plutonium age. To measure these attributes, the demonstration AMS/IB will use three detection systems (Fig. 1) connected to four analyzing computers. Fig. 1. The three AMS/IB detectors. On the left is the Pu300/600, a medium-sized (50%), germanium- detector based, high-resolution gamma-spectroscopy (HRGS) system. In the center is a neutron multiplicity counter (NMC), with the ability to individually read out each bank of tubes. On the right is the Pu900 , a larger (66%), germanium-detector-based HRGS system. The medium-sized HRGS detector (Fig. 2) and associated analyzer will be used to measure Pu presence, isotopic ratio, and Pu age. The larger HRGS detector and associated analyzer will be used to (1) measure oxygen content, and (2) identify the presence of oxides. 1 Fig. 2. Interior view of the medium-sized HRGS Pu300/600 detector.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of a Severn Barrage a REPORT PREPARED for the NGO STEERING GROUP
    Analysis of a Severn Barrage A REPORT PREPARED FOR THE NGO STEERING GROUP June 2008 © Frontier Economics Ltd, London. i Frontier Economics | June 2008 Analysis of a Severn Barrage Executive summary......................................................................................iv 1 Introduction .........................................................................................7 1.1 Background...................................................................................................7 1.2 Overview.......................................................................................................8 Part 1: What is the role of Government? 2 Approach ..............................................................................................9 3 The role of Government ..................................................................... 11 3.1 Rationale..................................................................................................... 11 3.2 Objectives .................................................................................................. 16 Part 2: How does a barrage compare? 4 Approach ............................................................................................ 19 4.1 General background ................................................................................. 19 4.2 Overview of approach to modelling ...................................................... 21 5 Analysis and discussion .....................................................................26 5.1 Sensitivity
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Renewables
    January 2009 Number 324 MARINE RENEWABLES Britain has an EU mandated target to meet 15% of its account for less than 0.1% of the energy produced energy requirements from renewable sources by 2020. worldwide. The UK has the largest wave and tidal resources in Europe, so marine renewables are a candidate for Figure 1: Wave and Tidal Resources in contributing to this target. Around 15-20% of the UK’s the UK: 2 Coloured bands show wave electricity could potentially be produced from marine resources, with purple denoting the 1 renewable sources, but the technology is not mature. greatest resource. Red circles show This POSTnote considers the technologies available and some of the most significant tidal the environmental, economic and technological power sites. Tidal resources are closer challenges involved in their deployment. to shore than wave. Background Tidal Power • ‘Tidal stream’ devices use the flow of water due to tides to generate electricity. • ‘Tidal range’ devices use the change in height of water Government Support due to tides, using principles similar to a hydroelectric The Renewables Advisory Board (RAB), a government dam. There are only a few tidal ‘barrages’ (see Box 1). advisory body, suggests that to meet the EU target, 32% Tidal lagoons (structures built at sea to capture water of UK electricity must come from renewables by 2020. at high tides) are also possible. The government has set a further target to cut carbon Wave Power emissions by 80% by 2050. This has increased interest Wave devices use the motion of water caused by winds in all low carbon energy sources, including marine.
    [Show full text]
  • SOUTH WEST ENGLAND and the WAVE HUB 10 July 2009 NICK HARRINGTON – HEAD of MARINE ENERGY SOUTH WEST RDA WAVE & TIDAL RESOURCE
    SOUTH WEST ENGLAND AND THE WAVE HUB 10 July 2009 NICK HARRINGTON – HEAD OF MARINE ENERGY SOUTH WEST RDA WAVE & TIDAL RESOURCE • Could provide 15% - 20% of UK demand • European resource 290GW • Worldwide annual revenues of €65 - €200 billion WAVE POWER LEVELS IN kW/m OF CREST LENGTH IN EUROPEAN WATERS Source: Wave Energy Utilization in Europe (European Thematic Network on Marine Energy) TIDAL RESOURCE IN SW ENGLAND DECC TIDAL RESOURCE IN SW ENGLAND Marine “Shoots” Barrage Current 1GW Turbines “SeaGEN” * “Severn” Barrage 8GW “Outer” Barrage 15GW SOUTH WEST WAVE RESOURCE DECC WAVE HUB Source: JP Kenny WAVE HUB WAVE HUB PROVIDES • Consented sea area • Grid connected 5MW per berth at 11kV • Monitoring and testing • Opportunities to collaborate • Access to suppliers and research base • Experience of operations • Can be upgraded to 50MW with 33kV operation UK ROUTE TO COMMERCIALISATION R&D NaREC Demonstration Initial prototype EMEC Refined prototype Wave Hub Pre- commercial device Market entry with commercial product Market penetration TIMETABLE • Landowner agreements signed- June 2009 • Funding unconditional - June 2009 • Developer commitments - June 2009 • Operating and capital budgets confirmed - July 2009 • Decision to proceed - July 2009 • Order sub-sea cable - July 2009 • Set up operating company - Summer 2009 • Onshore works - Autumn 2009 • Tender installation contracts - Autumn/Winter 2009 • Cable and equipment delivery - Spring 2010 • Installation and commissioning - Summer 2010 CHALLENGES Devices • Demonstrate and improve performance
    [Show full text]
  • Display PDF in Separate
    DRAFT ISSUES REPORT A joint project by the Environment Agency and the Severn Estuary Strategy November 1996 ENVIRONMENT AGENCY 103433 ASIANTAETH YR AMGTLCHEDD CYMRU E n v ir o n m e n t A g e n c y w a l e s GWASANAETH LLYFRGELL A GWYBODAETH CENEDLAETHOL NATIONAL LIBRARY & INFORMATION SERVICE PR1F SWYDDFA/MAIN OFFICE Ty Cambria/Cambria House 29 Heol Casnew ydd/29 Newport Road Caerdydd/Cardiff CF24 OTP ENVIRONMENT a g e n c y WELSH REGION CATALOGUE ACCESSION CODE_AO_L: CLASS N O . ______________ M151 Lydney Newport^ n Caldicot Tusker jMonks Ditcl Rock T h o rn b u ry Porion Wjefsh Llantwit Grounds v Major Cardiff M id dle Denny Dinas„ Grounds Athan ^0*2. A von mouth Portishead Clevedo S cully Island Lanaford Grounds t i n # Holm Bristol Steep Hotm Weston-super-Mare KEY Minehead Boundary Built up area Burnham-on-Sea Major River Canal Motorway W illiton A Road Railway Sandbank Bridgwater Contents 1. Introduction.......................................................................................................... 1 2. Overview ........... .......................... ........................ ............................................. 7 3 Planning and management in the estuary. ..................................................... 25 4. Urban development, infrastructure & transport.................................................... 43 5. Agriculture and rural land use ............................................................................. 53 6. Coastal defence ......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Severn Tidal Power
    Department of Energy and Climate Change SEVERN TIDAL POWER Feasibility Study Conclusions and Summary Report OCTOBER 2010 Severn Tidal Power Feasibility Study: Conclusions and Summary Report Contents Executive summary .................................................................................................... 4 How to respond ....................................................................................................... 9 1. Background .......................................................................................................... 10 The UK’s wave and tidal opportunity ..................................................................... 10 Tidal Stream ...................................................................................................... 12 Wave ................................................................................................................. 12 Tidal range ......................................................................................................... 13 The Severn ........................................................................................................... 14 Schemes studied .................................................................................................. 16 Progress since public consultation ........................................................................ 18 2. The scale of the challenge ................................................................................... 21 2020 – Renewable Energy Strategy ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4.3 Production and Atmospheric Release of Activation
    CHAPTER 4.3 PRODUCTION AND ATMOSPHERIC RELEASE OF ACTIVATION PRODUCTS ABSTRACT The primary activation product of interest in terms of airborne release and potential offsite dose is 41Ar. Even though it is a short-lived radionuclide, 41Ar is a noble gas readily released from the reactor stacks, and most has not decayed by the time it moves offsite with normal wind speeds. SRS reactor operations produced and released relatively large quantities of 41Ar, and its production rate in the air blanket surrounding a reactor should have been roughly proportional to the reactor power level. Cummins et al. (1991) provides an SRS-developed estimate of 41Ar releases, which we compare to other measurements, check against reactor power levels, and accept as a generally reasonable estimate of SRS 41Ar releases. While these values represent the best available estimates for 41Ar releases from the SRS reactors, the values presented for the later years (1974–1988) are quite low when compared to reactor power levels and overall average 41Ar production levels. We also observe that the 41Ar release values presented for certain of the early years (1955–1967) are quite high when compared to reactor power levels for the same period. The reason for these apparent discrepancies is not clear, and adds to the uncertainty in our estimates of 41Ar releases. INTRODUCTION Most of the radioactivity produced by the five SRS production reactors involved fission products, created when 235U, 239Pu, or 233U split into two or more smaller atoms. In addition, neutrons captured by some materials inside the reactor created radioactive isotopes called activation products.
    [Show full text]
  • Issues and R&D Needs for Commercial Fusion Energy
    University of California, San Diego UCSD-CER-08-01 Issues and R&D needs for commercial fusion energy An interim report of the ARIES technical working groups M. S. Tillack, D. Steiner, L. M. Waganer, S. Malang, F. Najmabadi, L. C. Cadwallader, L. A. El-Guebaly, R. J. Peipert Jr, A. R. Raffray, J. P. Sharpe, A. D. Turnbull, T. L. Weaver, and the ARIES Team July 2008 Center for Energy Research University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive La Jolla, CA 92093-0417 UCSD-CER-08-01 Issues and R&D needs for commercial fusion energy – An interim report of the ARIES technical working groups – August 2008 M. S. Tillack1, D. Steiner2, L. M. Waganer3, S. Malang4, F, Najmabadi1, L. C. Cadwallader5, L. A. El-Guebaly6, R. J. Peipert Jr7, A. R. Raffray1, J. P. Sharpe5, A. D. Turnbull8, T. L. Weaver7, and the ARIES Team* 1 UC San Diego 2 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 3 Consultant for The Boeing Company 4 FNT Consulting 5 Idaho National Laboratory 6 UW-Madison 7 The Boeing Company 8 General Atomics * Institutions involved in the ARIES Team include University of California San Diego, The Boeing Company, Georgia Institute of Technology, General Atomics, Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Wisconsin, Madison. 1 Table of Contents: 1. Introduction 2. Evaluation methodology 2.1 Technology readiness 2.2 Reference concepts 2.2.1 Reference concepts for energy capture and conversion 2.2.2 Reference concepts for the remainder of the power core 3.
    [Show full text]