India's Nuclear Fuel Cycle: Unraveling the Impact of the U.S.-India Nuclear Accord

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-104
Author(s):  
Taraknath V.K. Woddi ◽  
William S. Charlton ◽  
Paul Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Integration of the Back-end of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle: An Overview

MRS Advances ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 253-264
Author(s):  
François Diaz-Maurin ◽  
Rodney C. Ewing
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nuclear Waste Management ◽  
Policy Choices ◽  
Interim Storage ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Fully Coupled ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACTRecent efforts have been made toward the integration of the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle in the United States. The back-end integration seeks to address several management challenges: 1) current storage practices are not optimized for transport and disposal; 2) the impact of interim storage on the disposal strategy needs to be evaluated; and 3) the back-end is affected by—and affects—nuclear fuel cycle and energy policy choices. The back-end integration accounts for the various processes of nuclear waste management—onsite storage, consolidated storage, transport and geological disposal. Ideally, these processes should be fully coupled so that benefits and impacts can be assessed at the level of the full fuel cycle. The paper summarizes the causes and consequences of the absence of integration at the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle in the U.S., critically reviews ongoing integration efforts, and suggests a framework that would support the back-end integration.

Overview of the U.S. Department of Energy Advanced Waste Forms Development

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Gray ◽  
John Vienna ◽  
Patricia Paviet
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Department Of Energy ◽  
High Level Waste ◽  
Fuel Cycles ◽  
Waste Forms ◽  
The U.S

In order to maintain the U.S. domestic nuclear capability, its scientific technical leadership, and to keep our options open for closing the nuclear fuel cycle, the Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) invests in various R&D programs to identify and resolve technical challenges related to the sustainability of the nuclear fuel cycle. Sustainable fuel cycles are those that improve uranium resource utilization, maximize energy generation, minimize waste generation, improve safety and limit proliferation risk. DOE-NE chartered a Study on the evaluation and screening of nuclear fuel cycle options, to provide information about the potential benefits and challenges of nuclear fuel cycle options and to identify a relatively small number of promising fuel cycle options with the potential for achieving substantial improvements compared to the current nuclear fuel cycle in the United States. The identification of these promising fuel cycles helps in focusing and strengthening the U.S. R&D investment needed to support the set of promising fuel cycle system options and nuclear material management approaches. DOE-NE is developing and evaluating advanced technologies for the immobilization of waste issued from aqueous and electrochemical recycling activities including off-gas treatment and advanced fuel fabrication. The long-term scope of waste form development and performance activities includes not only the development, demonstration, and technical maturation of advanced waste management concepts but also the development and parameterization of defensible models to predict the long-term performance of waste forms in geologic disposal. Along with the finding of the Evaluation and Screening Study will be presented the major research efforts that are underway for the development and demonstration of waste forms and processes including glass ceramic for high-level waste raffinate, alloy waste forms and glass ceramics composites for HLW from the electrochemical processing of fast reactor fuels, and high durability waste forms for radioiodine.

Evaluating the Collective Radiation Dose to Workers from the U.S. Once-Through Nuclear Fuel Cycle

2014 ◽  
Vol 185 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven L. Krahn ◽  
Allen G. Croff ◽  
Bethany L. Smith ◽  
James H. Clarke ◽  
Andrew G. Sowder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiation Dose ◽  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The U.S

scholarly journals Sustainability Features of Nuclear Fuel Cycle Options

2012 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 2377-2398 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefano Passerini ◽  
Mujid Kazimi
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Nuclear Energy ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Energy System ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The United States ◽  
Base Line ◽  
Energy Potential ◽  
Fuel Cycle Analysis ◽  
The Impact

The nuclear fuel cycle is the series of stages that nuclear fuel materials go through in a cradle to grave framework. The Once Through Cycle (OTC) is the current fuel cycle implemented in the United States; in which an appropriate form of the fuel is irradiated through a nuclear reactor only once before it is disposed of as waste. The discharged fuel contains materials that can be suitable for use as fuel. Thus, different types of fuel recycling technologies may be introduced in order to more fully utilize the energy potential of the fuel, or reduce the environmental impacts and proliferation concerns about the discarded fuel materials. Nuclear fuel cycle systems analysis is applied in this paper to attain a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of fuel cycle alternatives. Through the use of the nuclear fuel cycle analysis code CAFCA (Code for Advanced Fuel Cycle Analysis), the impact of a number of recycling technologies and the associated fuel cycle options is explored in the context of the U.S. energy scenario over 100 years. Particular focus is given to the quantification of Uranium utilization, the amount of Transuranic Material (TRU) generated and the economics of the different options compared to the base-line case, the OTC option. It is concluded that LWRs and the OTC are likely to dominate the nuclear energy supply system for the period considered due to limitations on availability of TRU to initiate recycling technologies. While the introduction of U-235 initiated fast reactors can accelerate their penetration of the nuclear energy system, their higher capital cost may lead to continued preference for the LWR-OTC cycle.

scholarly journals Assessment of radioecological capacity of the territories under the impact of nuclear fuel cycle objects

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 188-193
Author(s):  
I.P. Drozd ◽  
◽  
Yu.S. Oliynyk ◽  
O.A. Sova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals Accelerator–Reactor Coupling for Energy Production in Advanced Nuclear Fuel Cycles

2015 ◽  
Vol 08 ◽  
pp. 99-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florent Heidet ◽  
Nicholas R. Brown ◽  
Malek Haj Tahar
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Fuel ◽  
Energy Production ◽  
Fuel Cycle ◽  
Reactor Core ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycle ◽  
Driven Systems ◽  
Fuel Cycles ◽  
Accelerator Driven Systems ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Nuclear Fuel Cycles

This article is a review of several accelerator–reactor interface issues and nuclear fuel cycle applications of accelerator-driven subcritical systems. The systems considered here have the primary goal of energy production, but that goal is accomplished via a specific application in various proposed nuclear fuel cycles, such as breed-and-burn of fertile material or burning of transuranic material. Several basic principles are reviewed, starting from the proton beam window including the target, blanket, reactor core, and up to the fuel cycle. We focus on issues of interest, such as the impact of the energy required to run the accelerator and associated systems on the potential electricity delivered to the grid. Accelerator-driven systems feature many of the constraints and issues associated with critical reactors, with the added challenges of subcritical operation and coupling to an accelerator. Reliable accelerator operation and avoidance of beam trips are critically important. One interesting challenge is measurement of blanket subcriticality level during operation. We also review the potential benefits of accelerator-driven systems in various nuclear fuel cycle applications. Ultimately, accelerator-driven subcritical systems with the goal of transmutation of transuranic material have lower 100,000-year radioactivity than a critical fast reactor with recycling of uranium and plutonium.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document