Sodium Fast Reactors with Closed Fuel Cycle

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Baldev Raj ◽  
P. Chellapandi ◽  
P.R. Vasudeva Rao
Atomic Energy ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. V. Gorin ◽  
N. P. Voloshin ◽  
Yu. I. Churikov ◽  
A. N. Chebeskov ◽  
V. P. Kuchinov ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
S. Richards ◽  
B. Feng

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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 781 ◽  
pp. 012017 ◽  
Author(s):  
E A Bobrov ◽  
P N Alekseev ◽  
P S Teplov

Author(s):  
I. A. Tereshchenko ◽  
S. O. Ustimenko

It is known that the IAEA considers options for a fuel cycle with light water reactors of new generation (LWR); however, the uranium reserves will not last forever, so the input of fast reactors in order to “close” the fuel cycle is currently the best option. Therefore, the preliminary calculations of the approximate cycle took place, and a comparative analysis of cycles using only LWR and the cycle with a gradual replacement of LWR by fast breeder reactors was carried out as well. It is appropriate, because there is a sufficiently large number of spent nuclear fuel now is accumulated in temporary storage, but soon it has to be either converted into fresh fuel or disposed (that is unacceptable in all respects). The main problem of the closed fuel cycle is usage of MOX-fuel, but this type of fuel is elaborated now and will be improved upon.


2014 ◽  
Vol 72 ◽  
pp. 126-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
P.N. Alekseev ◽  
E.A. Bobrov ◽  
A.V. Chibinyaev ◽  
P.S. Teplov ◽  
A.A. Dudnikov

Author(s):  
T. A. Gupalo ◽  
V. V. Lopatin ◽  
N. F. Lobanov

A huge amount of radioactive waste has been accumulated in the Russian Federation (RF) in the course of implementation of the defense and energy programs, industrial and research activity involving the use of nuclear materials. The most justified and technically feasible technology of solidified RW isolation is its disposition in low-permeable geological formations in specially constructed underground facilities. Today in Russia a Closed Fuel Cycle (CFC) has been adopted, at the CFC final stage the spent nuclear materials and radioactive waste have to be isolated from the biosphere for the whole term of their potential hazard. In Russia, in accordance with the regional approach to the decision of Radioactive Waste (RW) disposal problem, several candidate disposal sites have been assigned.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document