ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Mar 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
April 2026
Nuclear Technology
February 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
60 Years of U: Perspectives on resources, demand, and the evolving role of nuclear energy
Recent years have seen growing global interest in nuclear energy and rising confidence in the sector. For the first time since the early 2000s, there is renewed optimism about the industry’s future. This change is driven by several major factors: geopolitical developments that highlight the need for secure energy supplies, a stronger focus on resilient energy systems, national commitments to decarbonization, and rising demand for clean and reliable electricity.
C. A. Flanagan
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 8 | Number 1 | July 1985 | Pages 1297-1300
Next-Generation Device | Proceedings of the Sixth Topical Meeting on the Technology of Fusion Energy (San Francisco, California, March 3-7, 1985) | doi.org/10.13182/FST85-A39947
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
One critical issue examined in the present phase of the International Tokamak Reactor (INTOR) has been an evaluation of the technical benefit of dividing up the design and component production tasks of all major advanced technologies among all participants. Two approaches were evaluated: (a) a “splitting” approach in which each country provides 1/4 of the components of each major system (e.g., 3 of 12 TF coils), (b) a “branching” approach in which each country provides all components of selected major systems (e.g., first country provides all TF coils, second country provides all torus sectors, etc.). Quantitative cost and schedule estimates were developed for each of the two approaches and compared to the cost and schedule of the entire device if it were produced only by one country. The results of the U.S. evaluation indicated that the ratio of total estimated cost to the “national” cost was 1.66 for “splitting” and 1.20 for “branching.” The cost per participant was 0.41 and 0.30, respectively. The increase in the construction schedule was estimated to be 2.6 years.