Assimilation of a Closed Uranium-Plutonium Nuclear Fuel Cycle Based on Fast Reactors With Liquid-Metal Coolant

Atomic Energy ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 115 (2) ◽  
pp. 78-82
Author(s):  
M. V. Radchenko ◽  
A. Yu. Shadrin ◽  
P. P. Poluektov ◽  
O. V. Shmidt ◽  
A. A. Tuzov
Keyword(s):  
Liquid Metal ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Liquid Metal Coolant ◽  
Uranium Plutonium ◽  
Metal Coolant

scholarly journals Codes of new generation for safety justification of power units with a closed nuclear fuel cycle developed for the “PRORYV” project

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-214
Author(s):  
Leonid A. Bolshov ◽  
Valery F. Strizhov ◽  
Nastasya A. Mosunova
Keyword(s):  
Liquid Metal ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Inert Gas ◽  
Liquid Metal Coolant ◽  
Software Products ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Proryv Project ◽  
New Generation ◽  
Metal Coolant

The article describes the status of development of codes of new generation for the “PRORYV” Project by the end of 2019: twenty-five commercial-grade software products to justify design solutions and safety of power units with fast neutron reactors and liquid metal coolant (sodium and lead) in a closed nuclear fuel cycle. The developed system of codes is multi-physical and multi-scale that allows performing both calculations of the whole installations and high precision calculations of their individual elements. The developed codes offer unique features. Twelve developed codes have already been certified by Rostechnadzor, and six more have been submitted for certification. In addition to creating the software products, a large-scale work is being carried out to conduct experimental studies for code validation that meet modern requirements imposed by the codes: unique measurement techniques have been created; experimental data on flow characteristics of heavy liquid metal coolant (HLMC) in a fuel assembly simulator have been obtained, as well as of “gas-HLMC” interphase interaction after inert gas injection in HLMC and characteristics of heat exchange between the inert gas and HLMC. The results are already used for validation of system and CFD codes used in the “PRORYV” Project.

scholarly journals Application of sensitivity analysis in DYMOND/Dakota to fuel cycle transition scenarios

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
S. Richards ◽  
B. Feng
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Energy Demand ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Parameter Study ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Closed Fuel Cycle ◽  
Demand Growth ◽  
Transition Scenario

The ability to perform sensitivity analysis has been enabled for the nuclear fuel cycle simulator DYMOND through its coupling with the design and analysis toolkit Dakota. To test and demonstrate these new capabilities, a transition scenario and multi-parameter study were devised. The transition scenario represents a partial transition from the US nuclear fleet to a closed fuel cycle with small modular LWRs and fast reactors fueled by reprocessed used nuclear fuel. Four uncertain parameters in this transition were studied – start date of reprocessing, total reprocessing capacity, the nuclear energy demand growth, and the rate at which the fast reactors are deployed – with respect to their impact on four response metrics. The responses – total natural uranium consumed, maximum annual enrichment capacity required, total disposed mass, and total cost of the nuclear fuel cycle – were chosen based on measures known to be of interest in transition scenarios [2] and to be significantly impacted by the varying parameters. Analysis of this study was performed both from the direct sampling and through surrogate models developed in Dakota to calculate the global sensitivity measures Sobol’ indices. This example application of this new capability showed that the most consequential parameter to most metrics was the share of new build capacity that is fast reactors. However, for the cost metric, the scaling factor of the energy demand growth was significant and had synergistic behavior with the fast reactor new build share.

A Perspective on the U.S. Nuclear Fuel Cycle

2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ed Rodwell ◽  
Albert Machiels
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Waste ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Yucca Mountain ◽  
Design Parameters ◽  
Geologic Repository ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Waste Products

There has been a resurgence of interest in the possibility of processing the US spent nuclear fuel, instead of burying it in a geologic repository. Accordingly, key topical findings from three relevant EPRI evaluations made in the 1990–1995 timeframe are recapped and updated to accommodate a few developments over the subsequent ten years. Views recently expressed by other US entities are discussed. Processing aspects thereby addressed include effects on waste disposal and on geologic repository capacity, impacts on the economics of the nuclear fuel cycle and of the overall nuclear power scenario, alternative dispositions of the plutonium separated by the processing, impacts on the structure of the perceived weapons proliferation risk, and challenges for the immediate future and for the current half-century. Currently, there is a statutory limit of 70,000 metric tons on the amount of nuclear waste materials that can be accepted at Yucca Mountain. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project analyzed emplacement of up to 120,000 metric tons of nuclear waste products in the repository. Additional scientific analyses suggest significantly higher capacity could be achieved with changes in the repository configuration that use only geology that has already been characterized and do not deviate from existing design parameters. Conservatively assuming the repository capacity postulated in the EIS, the need date for a second repository is essentially deferrable until that determined by a potential new nuclear plant deployment program. A further increase in technical capacity of the first repository (and further and extensive delay to the need date for a second repository) is potentially achievable by processing the spent fuel to remove the plutonium (and at least the americium too), provided the plutonium and the americium are then comprehensively burnt. The burning of some of the isotopes involved would need fast reactors (discounting for now a small possibility that one of several recently postulated alternatives will prove superior overall). However, adoption of processing would carry a substantial cost burden and reliability of the few demonstration fast reactors built to-date has been poor. Trends and developments could remove these obstacles to the processing scenario, possibly before major decisions on a second repository become necessary, which need not be until mid-century at the earliest. Pending the outcomes of these long-term trends and developments, economics and reliability encourage us to stay with non-processing for the near term at least. Besides completing the Yucca Mountain program, the two biggest and inter-related fuel-cycle needs today are for a nationwide consensus on which processing technology offers the optimum mix of economic competitiveness and proliferation resistance and for a sustained effort to negotiate greater international cooperation and safeguards. Equally likely to control the readiness schedule is development/demonstration of an acceptable, reliable and affordable fast reactor.

scholarly journals Optimization models of a two-component nuclear energy system with thermal and fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrey A. Andrianov ◽  
Ilya S. Kuptsov ◽  
Tatyana A. Osipova ◽  
Olga N. Andrianova ◽  
Tatyana V. Utyanskaya
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Optimization Models ◽  
Oxide Fuel ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Two Component

The article presents a description and some illustrative results of the application of two optimization models for a two-component nuclear energy system consisting of thermal and fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle. These models correspond to two possible options of developing Russian nuclear energy system, which are discussed in the expert community: (1) thermal and fast reactors utilizing uranium and mixed oxide fuel, (2) thermal reactors utilizing uranium oxide fuel and fast reactors utilizing mixed nitride uranium-plutonium fuel. The optimization models elaborated using the IAEA MESSAGE energy planning tool make it possible not only to optimize the nuclear energy system structure according to the economic criterion, taking into account resource and infrastructural constraints, but also to be used as a basis for developing multi-objective, stochastic and robust optimization models of a two-component nuclear energy system. These models were elaborated in full compliance with the recommendations of the IAEA’s PESS and INPRO sections, regarding the specification of nuclear energy systems in MESSAGE. The study is based on publications of experts from NRC “Kurchatov Institute”, JSC “SSC RF-IPPE”, ITCP “Proryv”, JSC “NIKIET”. The presented results demonstrate the characteristic structural features of a two-component nuclear energy system for conservative assumptions in order to illustrate the capabilities of the developed optimization models. Consideration is also given to the economic feasibility of a technologically diversified nuclear energy structure providing the possibility of forming on its base a robust system in the future. It has been demonstrated that given the current uncertainties in the costs of nuclear fuel cycle services and reactor technologies, it is impossible at the moment to make a reasonable conclusion regarding the greatest attractiveness of a particular option in terms of the economic performance.

Fuel fabrication and reprocessing for nuclear fuel cycle with inherent safety demands

2015 ◽  
Vol 103 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrey Yurevich Shadrin ◽  
Konstantin Nikolaevich Dvoeglazov ◽  
Valentine Borisovich Ivanov ◽  
Vladimir Ivanovich Volk ◽  
Mikhail Vladimirovich Skupov ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Spent Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Inherent Safety ◽  
Closed Fuel Cycle ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Fuel Fabrication ◽  
Uranium Plutonium ◽  
Selection Of

AbstractThe strategies adopted in Russia for a closed nuclear fuel cycle with fast reactors (FR), selection of fuel type and recycling technologies of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) are discussed. It is shown that one of the possible technological solutions for the closing of a fuel cycle could be the combination of pyroelectrochemical and hydrometallurgical methods of recycling of SNF. This combined scheme allows: recycling of SNF from FR with high burn-up and short cooling time; decreasing the volume of stored SNF and the amount of plutonium in a closed fuel cycle in FR; recycling of any type of SNF from FR; obtaining the high pure end uranium-plutonium-neptunium end-product for fuel refabrication using pellet technology.

scholarly journals A scenario study on the transition to a closed nuclear fuel cycle using the nuclear energy system modelling application package (NESAPP)

2022 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. 2
Author(s):  
Andrei A. Andrianov ◽  
Olga N. Andrianova ◽  
Ilya S. Kuptsov ◽  
Leonid I. Svetlichny ◽  
Tatyana V. Utianskaya
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
System Modelling ◽  
Spent Fuel ◽  
Fast Reactors ◽  
Sustainability Metrics ◽  
Closed Nuclear Fuel Cycle

The paper presents the results of a case study on evaluating performance and sustainability metrics for Russian nuclear energy deployment scenarios with thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors in a closed nuclear fuel cycle. Ten possible scenarios are considered which differ in the shares of thermal and sodium-cooled fast reactors, including options involving the use of mixed uranium-plutonium oxide fuel in thermal reactors. The evolution of the following performance and sustainability metrics is estimated for the period from 2020 to 2100 based on the considered assumptions: annual and cumulative uranium consumption, needs for uranium enrichment capacities, fuel fabrication and reprocessing capacities, spent fuel stocks, radioactive wastes, amounts of plutonium in the nuclear fuel cycle, amounts of accumulated depleted uranium, and the levelised electricity generation cost. The results show that the sustainability of the Russian nuclear energy system can be significantly enhanced through the intensive deployment of sodium-cooled fast reactors and the transition to a closed nuclear fuel cycle. The authors have highlighted some issues for further considerations, which will lead to more rigorous conclusions regarding the preferred options for the development of the national nuclear energy system.

The Study of Typical PWR Nuclear Fuel Cycle

2014 ◽  
Vol 644-650 ◽  
pp. 5174-5178
Author(s):  
Yue Hong ◽  
Lan Lan Jiang ◽  
Dong Xiao Niu ◽  
Fu Yan Liu ◽  
Xiao Yu Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Empirical Analysis ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Uranium Plutonium ◽  
The One ◽  
Plutonium Fuel

This paper analyzed two different types of nuclear fuel cycle which refferred to one-through fuel cycle and close fuel cycle (uranium-plutonium fuel cycle). Based on specific economic elements related to each cycle process, this paper built a model to evaluate PWR nuclear fuel cycle’s economy. Then, for given data of PWR, empirical analysis and sensitivity analysis were carried out. The result showed the superiority of the close fuel cycle compared to the one-through cycle.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document