DOCSLIB.ORG

Status Report on Actinide and Fission Product Transmutation Studies

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

IAEA-TECDOC-948 Status reporton actinide fissionand product transmutation studies INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY June 1997 The IAEA does not normally maintain stocks of reports in this series However, microfiche copie f thesso e reportobtainee b n sca d from INIS Clearinghouse International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramerstrasse 5 PO Box 100 A 1400 Vienna, Austria Orders should be accompanied by prepayment of Austrian Schillings 100, for e fore chequa th f m th IAEf m o n i o m r eAo microfiche service coupons orderee whicb y hdma separately fro INIe mth S Clearinghouse originatine Th g Sectio f thino s publicatio IAEe th An i was: Nuclear Power Technology Development Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wag rame rstrasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria STATUS REPOR ACTINIDN TO FISSIOD EAN N PRODUCT TRANSMUTATION STUDIES IAEA, VIENNA,"!997 IAEA-TECDOC-948 ISSN 1011-4289 ©IAEA, 1997 Printed by IAEA in Austria June 1997 FOREWORD e managemenTh issuef y radioactivo t ke today'n e i s th f o se e politicawaston s publid ei an l c discussions on nuclear energy. In each country with nuclear power, the decision as to which strategy one should pursue in a national programme depends on a wide range of economic, political and historical considerations, but all have in common that the safety of the population and radiation exposur humano et accordancn i s si e with radiation protection principles accepted worldwide. Public acceptanc f nucleaeo r power generatio more b y e easilnma y obtaine isolatioe th f di n time required for deca radionuclidee f mosyo th f o t hign si h level wast reduces ei 200-30o dt 0 years. One of the fields that looks into the future possibilities of nuclear technology is the neutronic transmutatio f actinideno f somo d e san mos t important fission products. Rather than waitin r theigfo r radioactiv eprincipln i deca s i t i y e possibl reduco t e e perioth e f toxicitdo f theso y e isotopey b s transforming them into short live r stablo d e nuclide n fissioi s n reactor n accelerator-drivei r o s n subcritical facilities. Thirathea fiels w i s f activitIAEAe ne o dr th e Specialistr yfo Th . f Fasso Meetine t Us n go Reactor r Actinidsfo e Transmutation hel Obninskn di , Russian Federation, 22-24 September 1992, ma consideree yb da startin g event e TechnicaTh . l Committee Meetin Viennn gi n Safeto ad an y Environmental Aspects of Partitioning and Transmutation of Actinides and Fission Products, 29 November - 2 December 1993, followed. A Special Scientific Programme on the Use of High Energy Accelerators for Transmutation of Actinides and Power Production in conjunction with the 38th IAEA General Conference was held in Vienna on 21 September 1994. More than one hundred participants attended the meeting. Nowadays more and more studies are carried out on transmutation of actinides in various internationacountrien a t a d san l level. OECD/NE initiates Aha d recentl SystemT P& ya s Studd yan expectes ii t d tha resulte stude th tth f yso wil publishee b l d withi nexe yearso nth tw t . Since there ear R&D activitie thin i s s field outsid OECDe eth IAEe th ,s take Aha e initiativ nth documeno t e e th t research activities on transmutation of actinides and fission products in those Member States. The Technical Committee Meeting on Feasibility of Transmutation of Actinides in Advanced Reactors, held in Vienna from 5 to 7 December 1994, has recommended the preparation of the status report on transmutation of actinides and fission products studies in non-OECD countries and provided an input preparatioe foth r reporte th f no . The status report was prepared by a Technical Committee meeting held in September 1995. The aim of the report is to present an up-to-date general overview of current and planned research on transmutation in non-OECD countries, thus fostering bilateral and multilateral co-operation of interested Member States. The IAEA would like to thank all those individuals who participated in the Technical Committee meeting d thoso providean s wh e d written contributions fro e varioumth s countries. Specia. RabotnoN o t l e thankvdu froe Russiae sar m th n Federation compileo wh , inpue dth t from the experts and to I. Gibson from the United Kingdom, who reviewed and edited the final draft. EDITORIAL NOTE In preparing this publication for press, staff of the IAEA have made up the pages from the original manuscript views (s).The expressed necessarilynot do reflect governmentsthosethe of of nominatingthe Member States nominating ofthe or organizations. Throughout textthe names Memberof States retainedare theyas were when textthe was compiled. Theof use particular designations countriesof territoriesor does imply judgementnot any by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities institutionsand delimitation ofthe or of their boundaries. The mention namesof specificof companies productsor (whetherindicatednot or as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA. CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................7 2. CONCEPTS FOR THE FUTURE OF THE NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE.......................... 11 2.1. Introduction........................................................................................... 11 2.2. Summary of national activities.................................................................... 11 2.2.1. Belgium....................................................................................... 11 2.2.2. China.......................................................................................... 13 2.2.3. Czech Republic.............................................................................. 14 2.2.4. France......................................................................................... 16 2.2.5. India........................................................................................... 17 2.2.6. Japan .......................................................................................... 20 2.2.7. Republi Korea..........................................................................f co 2 2 . 2.2.8. Russian Federation.......................................................................... 22 2.2.9. International organizations...............................................................5 2 . 3. TRANSMUTATION RESEARCH.........................................................................29 3.1. Nuclear physic nuclead san r data................................................................9 2 . 3.1.1. China.......................................................................................... 29 3.1.2. India........................................................................................... 29 3.1.3. Russian Federatioa........................................................................1 3 . 3.2. Thermophysic thermohydraulics...........................................................d san 4 3 . 3.2.1. Russian Federation.........................................................................4 3 . 3.3. Reactor physics and core design.................................................................. 37 3.3.1. China.......................................................................................... 37 3.3.2. Republic of Korea........................................................................... 41 3.3.3. Russian Federation.........................................................................2 5 . 3.4. Radiochemistry....................................................................................... 59 3.4.1. India...........................................................................................59 3.4.2. Russian Federation.........................................................................0 6 . 3.5. Accelerator driven transmutation technologies (ADTT).....................................5 6 . 3.5.1. International status.........................................................................5 6 . 3.5.2. Czech Republic.............................................................................. 68 3.5.3. Russian Federation.........................................................................5 7 . 3.6. Fuel cycle P&T................................................................................r sfo 9 7 . 3.6.1. Genera lrecycling......................................................... issueA M f so 9 7 . 3.6.2. India..........................................................................................6 8 . 3.6.3. Russian Federation.......................................................................... 86 . 4 FUTURE TRENDS..........................................................................................9 9 . REFERENCES.....................................................................................................^! ABBREVIATIONS ................................................................................................ 109 CONTRIBUTORS TO DRAFTING AND REVIEW........................................................ Ill NEXT PAQE(S) left BLANK 1. INTRODUCTION Management of radioactive waste (RW) in an environmentally safe manner is an important issue being addressed by all the countries developing a nuclear industry. In many countries it has become serioua s political issue attracting intense critical attentio generae th f no l public. Therefore,
Recommended publications
  • Breeder Reactors: a Renewable Energy Source Bernard L

    Breeder Reactors: a Renewable Energy Source Bernard L

    Am. J. Phys. 51(1), Jan. 1983 Breeder reactors: A renewable energy source Bernard L. Cohen Department of Physics. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260 Since energy sources derived from the sun are called “renew- giving an equilibrium Q = S/8. Assuming that equilibrium has been able,” that adjective apparently means that they will be available in reached, 8–1 = Q/S = (4.6×109 tonne)/ (3.2×104 tonne/yr) = 140 000 undiminished quantity at present costs for as long as the current yr. Since this is such a short time geologically, it is reasonable to relationship between the sun and Earth persists, about 5 billion assume that equilibrium has been reached, and that the value of Q years. It is the purpose of this note to show that breeder reactors at t = 0 is immaterial to the discussion. Moreover, the fact that 8–1 using nuclear fission fulfill this definition of a renewable energy is so much longer than the time for dilution of material through the source, and in fact can supply all the world’s energy needs at world’s oceans, less than 1000 yr,5 means that nonuniformity of present costs for that time period. uranium concentration is not a long-term problem. The world’s uranium resources are sufficient to fuel light-water If we were to withdraw uranium at a rate R, the differential reactors for only a few tens of years, and since uranium is used equation for Q would become about 100 times more efficiently as an energy source in breeder dQ/dt = S – R – 8Q, 8 reactors than in light-water reactors, it is frequently said that the leading to an equilibrium Q = (S – R)/ = Q00(1 – R/S), where Q is amount of uranium available can support the world’s energy needs the present value of Q.
  • Table 2.Iii.1. Fissionable Isotopes1

    Table 2.Iii.1. Fissionable Isotopes1

    FISSIONABLE ISOTOPES Charles P. Blair Last revised: 2012 “While several isotopes are theoretically fissionable, RANNSAD defines fissionable isotopes as either uranium-233 or 235; plutonium 238, 239, 240, 241, or 242, or Americium-241. See, Ackerman, Asal, Bale, Blair and Rethemeyer, Anatomizing Radiological and Nuclear Non-State Adversaries: Identifying the Adversary, p. 99-101, footnote #10, TABLE 2.III.1. FISSIONABLE ISOTOPES1 Isotope Availability Possible Fission Bare Critical Weapon-types mass2 Uranium-233 MEDIUM: DOE reportedly stores Gun-type or implosion-type 15 kg more than one metric ton of U- 233.3 Uranium-235 HIGH: As of 2007, 1700 metric Gun-type or implosion-type 50 kg tons of HEU existed globally, in both civilian and military stocks.4 Plutonium- HIGH: A separated global stock of Implosion 10 kg 238 plutonium, both civilian and military, of over 500 tons.5 Implosion 10 kg Plutonium- Produced in military and civilian 239 reactor fuels. Typically, reactor Plutonium- grade plutonium (RGP) consists Implosion 40 kg 240 of roughly 60 percent plutonium- Plutonium- 239, 25 percent plutonium-240, Implosion 10-13 kg nine percent plutonium-241, five 241 percent plutonium-242 and one Plutonium- percent plutonium-2386 (these Implosion 89 -100 kg 242 percentages are influenced by how long the fuel is irradiated in the reactor).7 1 This table is drawn, in part, from Charles P. Blair, “Jihadists and Nuclear Weapons,” in Gary A. Ackerman and Jeremy Tamsett, ed., Jihadists and Weapons of Mass Destruction: A Growing Threat (New York: Taylor and Francis, 2009), pp. 196-197. See also, David Albright N 2 “Bare critical mass” refers to the absence of an initiator or a reflector.
  • 小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category

    小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category

    小型飛翔体／海外 ［Format 2］ Technical Catalog Category Airborne contamination sensor Title Depth Evaluation of Entrained Products (DEEP) Proposed by Create Technologies Ltd & Costain Group PLC １．DEEP is a sensor analysis software for analysing contamination. DEEP can distinguish between surface contamination and internal / absorbed contamination. The software measures contamination depth by analysing distortions in the gamma spectrum. The method can be applied to data gathered using any spectrometer. Because DEEP provides a means of discriminating surface contamination from other radiation sources, DEEP can be used to provide an estimate of surface contamination without physical sampling. DEEP is a real-time method which enables the user to generate a large number of rapid contamination assessments- this data is complementary to physical samples, providing a sound basis for extrapolation from point samples. It also helps identify anomalies enabling targeted sampling startegies. DEEP is compatible with small airborne spectrometer/ processor combinations, such as that proposed by the ARM-U project – please refer to the ARM-U proposal for more details of the air vehicle. Figure 1: DEEP system core components are small, light, low power and can be integrated via USB, serial or Ethernet interfaces. 小型飛翔体／海外 Figure 2: DEEP prototype software ２．Past experience (plants in Japan, overseas plant, applications in other industries, etc) Create technologies is a specialist R&D firm with a focus on imaging and sensing in the nuclear industry. Createc has developed and delivered several novel nuclear technologies, including the N-Visage gamma camera system. Costainis a leading UK construction and civil engineering firm with almost 150 years of history.
  • Security of Supply of Medical Radioisotopes - a Clinical View Dr Beverley Ellis Consultant Radiopharmacist

    Security of Supply of Medical Radioisotopes - a Clinical View Dr Beverley Ellis Consultant Radiopharmacist

    Security of Supply of Medical Radioisotopes - a clinical view Dr Beverley Ellis Consultant Radiopharmacist Nuclear Medicine Centre Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust Nuclear Medicine § Approx 35 million clinical radionuclide imaging procedures worldwide § Globally 2nd most common imaging technique after CT (higher than MR) 20 million in USA 9 million in Europe 3 million in Japan 3 million in rest of the world Approx 700, 000 nuclear medicine procedures per year in UK Myocardial Perfusion - Ischaemia Stress Stress SA Rest Stress VLA Rest Stress HLA Rest Rest Tc-99m Bone Scans Normal Metastases Mo-99/Tc-99m Generator Supply Tc-99m Radiopharmaceutical Production Mo-99 Shortages Design of Clinical Services to Reduce Tc-99m Use § Optimisation of generator management – Efficiency savings – Delivery and extraction schedules – Patient scheduling § Improved communication – Customers – Suppliers § Improved software – gamma cameras – Produce comparable quality images using less radioactivity Global Situation § OECD/Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) – Set up High Level Group (HLG-MR) in 2009 – Security of supply of Mo-99 and Tc-99m – Established 6 principles e.g. full cost recovery and outage reserve capacity – Issued a series of publications Global Situation § AIPES (Association of Imaging Producers & Equipment supplies) (Now called Nuclear Medicine Europe) – Support coordination of research reactor schedules Global Situation § Increased Mo-99 Production Capacity – Mo-99 suppliers – acquire additional capacity to cover shortfalls (Outage
  • Compilation and Evaluation of Fission Yield Nuclear Data Iaea, Vienna, 2000 Iaea-Tecdoc-1168 Issn 1011–4289

    Compilation and Evaluation of Fission Yield Nuclear Data Iaea, Vienna, 2000 Iaea-Tecdoc-1168 Issn 1011–4289

    IAEA-TECDOC-1168 Compilation and evaluation of fission yield nuclear data Final report of a co-ordinated research project 1991–1996 December 2000 The originating Section of this publication in the IAEA was: Nuclear Data Section International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria COMPILATION AND EVALUATION OF FISSION YIELD NUCLEAR DATA IAEA, VIENNA, 2000 IAEA-TECDOC-1168 ISSN 1011–4289 © IAEA, 2000 Printed by the IAEA in Austria December 2000 FOREWORD Fission product yields are required at several stages of the nuclear fuel cycle and are therefore included in all large international data files for reactor calculations and related applications. Such files are maintained and disseminated by the Nuclear Data Section of the IAEA as a member of an international data centres network. Users of these data are from the fields of reactor design and operation, waste management and nuclear materials safeguards, all of which are essential parts of the IAEA programme. In the 1980s, the number of measured fission yields increased so drastically that the manpower available for evaluating them to meet specific user needs was insufficient. To cope with this task, it was concluded in several meetings on fission product nuclear data, some of them convened by the IAEA, that international co-operation was required, and an IAEA co-ordinated research project (CRP) was recommended. This recommendation was endorsed by the International Nuclear Data Committee, an advisory body for the nuclear data programme of the IAEA. As a consequence, the CRP on the Compilation and Evaluation of Fission Yield Nuclear Data was initiated in 1991, after its scope, objectives and tasks had been defined by a preparatory meeting.
  • Wo 2009/108331 A2

    Wo 2009/108331 A2

    (12) INTERNATIONAL APPLICATION PUBLISHED UNDER THE PATENT COOPERATION TREATY (PCT) (19) World Intellectual Property Organization International Bureau (10) International Publication Number (43) International Publication Date 3 September 2009 (03.09.2009) WO 2009/108331 A2 (51) International Patent Classification: AO, AT, AU, AZ, BA, BB, BG, BH, BR, BW, BY, BZ, A61K 38/22 (2006.01) CA, CH, CN, CO, CR, CU, CZ, DE, DK, DM, DO, DZ, EC, EE, EG, ES, FI, GB, GD, GE, GH, GM, GT, HN, (21) International Application Number: HR, HU, ID, IL, IN, IS, JP, KE, KG, KM, KN, KP, KR, PCT/US2009/001213 KZ, LA, LC, LK, LR, LS, LT, LU, LY, MA, MD, ME, (22) International Filing Date: MG, MK, MN, MW, MX, MY, MZ, NA, NG, NI, NO, 25 February 2009 (25.02.2009) NZ, OM, PG, PH, PL, PT, RO, RS, RU, SC, SD, SE, SG, SK, SL, SM, ST, SV, SY, TJ, TM, TN, TR, TT, TZ, UA, (25) Filing Language: English UG, US, UZ, VC, VN, ZA, ZM, ZW. (26) Publication Language: English (84) Designated States (unless otherwise indicated, for every (30) Priority Data: kind of regional protection available): ARIPO (BW, GH, 61/066,959 25 February 2008 (25.02.2008) US GM, KE, LS, MW, MZ, NA, SD, SL, SZ, TZ, UG, ZM, Not furnished 25 February 2009 (25.02.2009) US ZW), Eurasian (AM, AZ, BY, KG, KZ, MD, RU, TJ, TM), European (AT, BE, BG, CH, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, (71) Applicant and ES, FI, FR, GB, GR, HR, HU, IE, IS, IT, LT, LU, LV, (72) Inventor: FORSLEY, Lawrence, Parker, Galloway MC, MK, MT, NL, NO, PL, PT, RO, SE, SI, SK, TR), [US/US]; 70 Elmwood Avenue, Rochester, NY 1461 1 OAPI (BF, BJ, CF, CG, CI, CM, GA, GN, GQ, GW, ML, (US).
  • Relative Fission Product Yield Determination in the Usgs

    Relative Fission Product Yield Determination in the Usgs

    RELATIVE FISSION PRODUCT YIELD DETERMINATION IN THE USGS TRIGA MARK I REACTOR by Michael A. Koehl © Copyright by Michael A. Koehl, 2016 All Rights Reserved A thesis submitted to the Faculty and the Board of Trustees of the Colorado School of Mines in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Nuclear Engineering). Golden, Colorado Date: ____________________ Signed: ________________________ Michael A. Koehl Signed: ________________________ Dr. Jenifer C. Braley Thesis Advisor Golden, Colorado Date: ____________________ Signed: ________________________ Dr. Mark P. Jensen Professor and Director Nuclear Science and Engineering Program ii ABSTRACT Fission product yield data sets are one of the most important and fundamental compilations of basic information in the nuclear industry. This data has a wide range of applications which include nuclear fuel burnup and nonproliferation safeguards. Relative fission yields constitute a major fraction of the reported yield data and reduce the number of required absolute measurements. Radiochemical separations of fission products reduce interferences, facilitate the measurement of low level radionuclides, and are instrumental in the analysis of low-yielding symmetrical fission products. It is especially useful in the measurement of the valley nuclides and those on the extreme wings of the mass yield curve, including lanthanides, where absolute yields have high errors. This overall project was conducted in three stages: characterization of the neutron flux in irradiation positions within the U.S. Geological Survey TRIGA Mark I Reactor (GSTR), determining the mass attenuation coefficients of precipitates used in radiochemical separations, and measuring the relative fission products in the GSTR. Using the Westcott convention, the Westcott flux, ; modified spectral index, ; neutron temperature, ; and gold-based cadmium ratiosφ were determined for various sampling√⁄ positions in the USGS TRIGA Mark I reactor.
  • The Supply of Medical Isotopes

    The Supply of Medical Isotopes

    The Supply of Medical Isotopes AN ECONOMIC DIAGNOSIS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS The Supply of Medical Isotopes AN ECONOMIC DIAGNOSIS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS The Supply of Medical Isotopes AN ECONOMIC DIAGNOSIS AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS This work is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. The opinions expressed and arguments employed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views of OECD member countries. This document, as well as any data and any map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Please cite this publication as: OECD/NEA (2019), The Supply of Medical Isotopes: An Economic Diagnosis and Possible Solutions, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9b326195-en. ISBN 978-92-64-94550-0 (print) ISBN 978-92-64-62509-9 (pdf) The statistical data for Israel are supplied by and under the responsibility of the relevant Israeli authorities. The use of such data by the OECD is without prejudice to the status of the Golan Heights, East Jerusalem and Israeli settlements in the West Bank under the terms of international law. Photo credits: Cover © Yok_onepiece/Shutterstock.com. Corrigenda to OECD publications may be found on line at: www.oecd.org/about/publishing/corrigenda.htm. © OECD 2019 You can copy, download or print OECD content for your own use, and you can include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgement of OECD as source and copyright owner is given.
  • Use of DD-108 Neutron Generator with ISU Sub-Critical Assembly

    Use of DD-108 Neutron Generator with ISU Sub-Critical Assembly

    From: Ramsey, Kevin To: Maxwell Daniels Cc: Campbell, Vivian; Font, Ossy; Yin, Xiaosong; Gonzalez, Hipolito; Johnson, Robert; Tripp, Christopher Subject: Use of DD-108 neutron generator with ISU sub-critical assembly Date: Thursday, July 20, 2017 3:46:00 PM We have evaluated your proposal to use a neutron generator to pulse your sub-critical assembly, and concluded that you may use the neutron generator under the current authorization in Materials License SNM-1373. Our finding that you may proceed without an amendment is based on the following understanding. If your understanding differs, please inform us. It is our understanding that you want to use the Adelphi Technology DD-108 Neutron Generator described at http://www.adelphitech.com/products/dd108.html. The technical brochure located at http://www.adelphitech.com/pdfs/DD108-9_generator_Flier_24-Nov- 14_A.PDF states that the device uses deuterium gas to produce 2.45 MeV neutrons. The NRC does not regulate the possession and use of deuterium, so there is no need to add the device to one of your NRC licenses. PLEASE NOTE – NRC regulates tritium and a license amendment would be needed to possess and use a tritium neutron generator. Our criticality safety evaluation concluded that using a neutron source will affect the fission rate, but will not affect the neutron multiplication or criticality analysis. From the description and pictures of the neutron generator, it appears that it would only contain a small amount of deuterium. As long as this is not permitted to come into physical contact with the SNM, there should be no issue.
  • An Advanced Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Core Concept Using Uranium-Free Metallic Fuels for Maximizing TRU Burning Rate

    An Advanced Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Core Concept Using Uranium-Free Metallic Fuels for Maximizing TRU Burning Rate

    sustainability Article An Advanced Sodium-Cooled Fast Reactor Core Concept Using Uranium-Free Metallic Fuels for Maximizing TRU Burning Rate Wuseong You and Ser Gi Hong * Department of Nuclear Engineering, Kyung Hee University, Deogyeong-daero, GiHeung-gu, Yongin, Gyeonggi-do 446-701, Korea; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-31-201-2782 Received: 24 October 2017; Accepted: 28 November 2017; Published: 1 December 2017 Abstract: In this paper, we designed and analyzed advanced sodium-cooled fast reactor cores using uranium-free metallic fuels for maximizing burning rate of transuranics (TRU) nuclides from PWR spent fuels. It is well known that the removal of fertile nuclides such as 238U from fuels in liquid metal cooled fast reactor leads to the degradation of important safety parameters such as the Doppler coefficient, coolant void worth, and delayed neutron fraction. To resolve the degradation of the Doppler coefficient, we considered adding resonant nuclides to the uranium-free metallic fuels. The analysis results showed that the cores using uranium-free fuels loaded with tungsten instead of uranium have a significantly lower burnup reactivity swing and more negative Doppler coefficients than the core using uranium-free fuels without resonant nuclides. In addition, we considered the use of axially central B4C absorber region and moderator rods to further improve safety parameters such as sodium void worth, burnup reactivity swing, and the Doppler coefficient. The results of the analysis showed that the final design core can consume ~353 kg per cycle and satisfies self-controllability under unprotected accidents. The fuel cycle analysis showed that the PWR–SFR coupling fuel cycle option drastically reduces the amount of waste going to repository and the SFR burner can consume the amount of TRUs discharged from 3.72 PWRs generating the same electricity.
  • How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Dismantle the Bomb New Approaches to Nuclear Warhead Verification

    How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Dismantle the Bomb New Approaches to Nuclear Warhead Verification

    HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND DISMANTLE THE BOMB NEW APPROACHES TO NUCLEAR WARHEAD VERIFICATION Alex Glaser,* Sébastien Philippe,* and Robert J. Goldston** *Princeton University **Princeton University and Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory Duke University, January 19, 2017 Revision 1 CONSORTIUM FOR VERIFICATION TECHNOLOGY PNNL Oregon State MIT U Michigan INL Yale U Wisconsin Columbia Penn State Princeton and PPPL U Illinois LBNL LLNL Sandia NNSS Duke ORNL NC State LANL Sandia U Florida (not shown: U Hawaii) Five-year project, funded by U.S. DOE, 13 U.S. universities and 9 national labs, led by U-MICH Princeton participates in the research thrust on disarmament research (and leads the research thrust of the consortium on policy) A. Glaser, S. Philippe, R. Goldston, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Dismantle the Bomb, Duke University, January 19, 2017 2 INTERNATIONAL PARTNERSHIP FOR NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT VERIFICATION Established in 2015; currently 26 participating countries Working Group One: “Monitoring and Verification Objectives” (chaired by Italy and the Netherlands) Working Group Two: “On-Site Inspections” (chaired by Australia and Poland) Working Group Three: “Technical Challenges and Solutions” (chaired by Sweden and the United States) www.state.gov/t/avc/ipndv A. Glaser, S. Philippe, R. Goldston, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Dismantle the Bomb, Duke University, January 19, 2017 3 WHAT’S NEXT FOR NUCLEAR ARMS CONTROL? 2015 STATEMENT BY JAMES MATTIS “The nuclear stockpile must be tended to and fundamental questions must be asked and answered: • We must clearly establish the role of our nuclear weapons: do they serve solely to deter nuclear war? If so we should say so, and the resulting clarity will help to determine the number we need.
  • Fast-Spectrum Reactors Technology Assessment

    Fast-Spectrum Reactors Technology Assessment

    Clean Power Quadrennial Technology Review 2015 Chapter 4: Advancing Clean Electric Power Technologies Technology Assessments Advanced Plant Technologies Biopower Clean Power Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Value- Added Options Carbon Dioxide Capture for Natural Gas and Industrial Applications Carbon Dioxide Capture Technologies Carbon Dioxide Storage Technologies Crosscutting Technologies in Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage Fast-spectrum Reactors Geothermal Power High Temperature Reactors Hybrid Nuclear-Renewable Energy Systems Hydropower Light Water Reactors Marine and Hydrokinetic Power Nuclear Fuel Cycles Solar Power Stationary Fuel Cells U.S. DEPARTMENT OF Supercritical Carbon Dioxide Brayton Cycle ENERGY Wind Power Clean Power Quadrennial Technology Review 2015 Fast-spectrum Reactors Chapter 4: Technology Assessments Background and Current Status From the initial conception of nuclear energy, it was recognized that full realization of the energy content of uranium would require the development of fast reactors with associated nuclear fuel cycles.1 Thus, fast reactor technology was a key focus in early nuclear programs in the United States and abroad, with the first usable nuclear electricity generated by a fast reactor—Experimental Breeder Reactor I (EBR-I)—in 1951. Test and/or demonstration reactors were built and operated in the United States, France, Japan, United Kingdom, Russia, India, Germany, and China—totaling about 20 reactors with 400 operating years to date. These previous reactors and current projects are summarized in Table 4.H.1.2 Currently operating test reactors include BOR-60 (Russia), Fast Breeder Test Reactor (FBTR) (India), and China Experimental Fast Reactor (CEFR) (China). The Russian BN-600 demonstration reactor has been operating as a power reactor since 1980.