Novel approaches for the in situ study of the sintering of nuclear oxide fuel materials and their surrogates

2017 ◽  
Vol 105 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Clavier ◽  
Galy Ingrid Nkou Bouala ◽  
Jacques Léchelle ◽  
Julien Martinez ◽  
Nicolas Dacheux ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Ceramic Materials ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Oxide Fuel ◽  
Primary Interest ◽  
In Situ Study ◽  
Key Points ◽  
Novel Approaches

AbstractSintering is one of the key-points of the processing of ceramic materials. It is then of primary interest for the nuclear fuel cycle, in which it constitutes an important step in the fabrication of either UO

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.

scholarly journals A VISION of Advanced Nuclear System Cost Uncertainty

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
J’Tia P. Taylor ◽  
David E. Shropshire ◽  
Jacob J. Jacobson
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
Oxide Fuel ◽  
Construction Time ◽  
Cost Uncertainty ◽  
Cycle Simulation ◽  
Advanced Fuel ◽  
Mass Flows

VISION (VerifIable fuel cycle SImulatiON) is the Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative’s nuclear fuel cycle systems code designed to simulate the U.S. commercial reactor fleet. The code is a dynamic stock and flow model that tracks key material mass flows at the elemental and isotopic levels through the entire nuclear fuel cycle. VISION.ECON is a submodel of VISION that was developed to estimate the costs of electricity. The sub-model uses the mass flows generated by VISION for each of the fuel cycle functions and calculates costs based on the Department of Energy Advanced Fuel Cycle Cost Basis report. This paper provides an evaluation of the cost uncertainty effects attributable to fuel cycle system parameters and scheduling variations. A scenario utilizing a single light-water reactor (LWR) using uranium oxide fuel is examined to ascertain the effects of simple parameter changes. The four variable parameters are burnup, thermal efficiency, capacity factor, and reactor construction time. The effect variables are the total cost of electricity (TCOE) and the fuel cycle costs (FCC). Strategies for future analysis are also discussed. Future work consists of extending the analysis to more complex scenarios, including LWRs using mixed oxide fuel and fast recycling reactors using transuranic fuel.

Aluminosilicate-Phosphate Model of Polyphase Matrices for Immobilization of Sr-Cs-fractions of Nuclear Fuel Cycle HLW

2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 209-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Bogdanov ◽  
R. Kuznetsov ◽  
V. Epimahov ◽  
A. Titov ◽  
E. Prudnikov
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle

A family of uranyl oxide hydrate phases with bivalent cations [MII(H2O)4][(UO2)3O3(OH)2]·H2O (MII – Mn, Co, Ni, Zn): synthesis, characterization and chemical stability in aqueous solutions

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolay G. Chernorukov ◽  
Oxana V. Nipruk ◽  
Kseniya A. Klinshova ◽  
Olga N. Tumaeva ◽  
Dmitry V. Sokolov
Keyword(s):  
Aqueous Solutions ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Chemical Stability ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Oxide Hydrate ◽  
Uranium Compounds ◽  
Bivalent Cations

A series of new uranium compounds [MII(H2O)3][(UO2)3O3(OH)2]·2H2O (MII – Mn, Co, Ni, Zn) were synthesized for binding radionuclides in the environment and nuclear fuel cycle.

Comparison of nuclear data uncertainties with other nuclear fuel cycle uncertainty sources

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aris V. Skarbeli ◽  
Rubén Eusebio‐Yebra ◽  
Pablo Romojaro ◽  
Francisco Álvarez‐Velarde ◽  
Daniel Cano‐Ott
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Data ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Uncertainty Sources

Massimo Salvatores’ seminal ideas and comprehensive views on nuclear fuel cycle studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 157 ◽  
pp. 108223
Author(s):  
Concetta Fazio ◽  
Fabrizio Gabrielli ◽  
Andrei Rineiski ◽  
Barbara Vezzoni
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document