Features

Tim Tinsley

I’ve been reflecting on the recent American Nuclear Society Winter Conference and Expo, where I enjoyed the discussion on recycling used nuclear fuel to recover valuable minerals or products for future applications. I have spent more than 30 years focusing on dissolving and separating nuclear material, so it was refreshing to hear the case for new applications being made. However, I feel that these discussions could go further still.

Radiation is energy, something that our society seems to have an endless need for. A nuclear power station produces a lot of radiation that is mostly discarded. But once fuel has been used, it still produces significant levels of radiation and heat energy. The associated storage, processing, and eventual disposal of this used fuel requires careful management and investment to protect systems and people from the radiation. Should we really disregard—and discard—this energy source, along with all the valuable minerals in the used fuel, when we could instead use it to deliver significant value to society?

Energy is a business, as well as a science and engineering discipline. Located in oil- and gas-rich Oklahoma, the University of Tulsa is well known for its McDougall School of Petroleum Engineering, but it does not currently offer degrees in nuclear engineering. However, it has been increasing its coverage of nuclear energy and sustainable energy through its energy-related curricula, including in its unique Master of Energy Business (MEB) program within the Collins College of Business—one of nine such programs offered in the United States.

Nuclear energy produces about 9 percent of the world’s electricity and 19 percent of the electricity in the United States, which has 94 operating commercial nuclear reactors with a capacity of just under 97 gigawatts-electric. Each reactor replaces a portion of its nuclear fuel every 18 to 24 months. Once removed from the reactor, this spent (or used) nuclear fuel (SNF or UNF) is stored in a spent fuel pool (SFP) for a few years then transferred to dry storage.

Another calendar year has passed. Before heading too far into 2025, let’s look back at what happened in 2024 in the nuclear community. In today's post, compiled from Nuclear News and Nuclear Newswire are what we feel are the top nuclear news stories from October through December 2024.

The media have gleefully resurrected the language of a past nuclear renaissance. Beyond the hype and PR, many people in the nuclear community are taking a more measured view of conditions that could lead to new construction: data center demand, the proliferation of new reactor designs and start-­ups, and the sudden ascendance of nuclear energy as the power source everyone wants—or wants to talk about.

Once built, large nuclear reactors can provide clean power for at least 80 years—outlasting 10 to 20 presidential administrations. Smaller reactors can provide heat and power outputs tailored to an end user’s needs. With all the new attention, are we any closer to getting past persistent supply chain and workforce issues and building these new plants? And what will the election of Donald Trump to a second term as president mean for nuclear?

As usual, there are more questions than answers, and most come down to money. Several developers are engaging with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or have already applied for a license, certification, or permit. But designs without paying customers won’t get built. So where are the customers, and what will it take for them to commit?

Another calendar year has passed. Before heading too far into 2025, let’s look back at what happened in 2024 in the nuclear community. In today's post, compiled from Nuclear News and Nuclear Newswire are what we feel are the top nuclear news stories from July through September 2024.

Stay tuned for the top stories from the rest of the past year.

Another calendar year has passed. Before heading too far into 2025, let’s look back at what happened in 2024 in the nuclear community. In today's post, compiled from Nuclear News and Nuclear Newswire are what we feel are the top nuclear news stories from April through May 2024.

Stay tuned for the top stories from the rest of the past year.

Another calendar year has passed. Before heading too far into 2025, let’s look back at what happened in 2024 in the nuclear community. In today's post, compiled from Nuclear News and Nuclear Newswire are what we feel are the top nuclear news stories from January through March 2024. Some images below are of the covers of Nuclear News for the months as noted.

Stay tuned for the top stories from the rest of the past year.

Twas the night before Christmas when all through the house
No electrons were flowing through even my mouse.

All devices were plugged in by the chimney with care
With the hope that St. Nikola Tesla would share.

In 1989, the Savannah River Plant was renamed the Savannah River Site. It was originally established in 1950 near Aiken, S.C., to produce nuclear materials for the nation, primarily for defense purposes. The site consisted of a heavy water production plant, three fuel fabrication facilities, five production reactors, two nuclear separation facilities, waste management facilities, tritium processing facilities, and the Savannah River National Laboratory. The main isotopes produced were, by priority, tritium, plutonium-238, and plutonium-239.

Welcome to the inaugural Nuclear News 40 Under 40! A year in the making, this list was a difficult undertaking for the NN staff, there being so many qualified and enthusiastic candidates to review. The task was further complicated by the great diversity of roles that exist within the nuclear community—from academia to labs and from utilities to government positions. Whatever their specific niche, those selected represent the exceptional talent, vision, and drive that is transforming the nuclear sector across the community. These 40 young professionals have shown remarkable commitment, innovation, and leadership in advancing nuclear science and technology, paving the way for a future in which nuclear power and applications will continue to play a vital role in addressing global challenges.

Craig Piercy
cpiercy@ans.org

This month’s Nuclear News features our inaugural 40 Under 40 list of the brightest rising stars in the nuclear field.

The time has clearly come for this feature. The current resurgence of nuclear isn’t just a technological transformation; it’s also a changing of the guard. Consider this: For the first time in modern history, the American Nuclear Society has more members under the age of 40 than over the age of 60.

Of course, for as long as I can remember, the nuclear workforce has always been a bit of a double-humped demographic camel. Picture a nuclear workforce age chart and you will see two distinct peaks, or what a statistician might call a “bimodal distribution.” “Peak 1” is on the right and is centered over the Baby Boomer generation, many of whom entered the industry in its heyday of the 1960s and ’70s. These are the men and women who built the nuclear enterprise as we know it today.

Lisa Marshall
president@ans.org

Several questions loom after federal and state elections: What does the future hold for nuclear science and technology? Will there be a shift in direction? How do we continue and expand our impact on energy and nonenergy initiatives? The American Nuclear Society is an organization of people, policies, and products. We innovate, educate, and facilitate collaboration. We advance the field, serving our members and engaging with communities. With every travel assignment, I have witnessed the collective passion and action of our members toward fuller participation and societal enhancement based on nuclear technology. The work is not done, but there is forward momentum.

We have never been a field that does not answer the call, and at this year’s Winter Conference and Expo, we explored the very apt theme “Now comes the hard part.”

Among the plenaries and technical sessions were panels about engaging and educating the next generation of nuclear professionals, the growth of nuclear engineering departments in higher education, a student design competition, and—as one might expect in November during an election year—keeping nuclear out of the political fray.

The Department of Energy’s Office of Environmental Management will soon, for the first time, begin using drones to internally inspect radioactive liquid waste tanks at the department’s Savannah River Site in South Carolina. Inspections were previously done using magnetic wall-crawling robots.

The July 2024 issue of Nuclear News focused on fusion. Editor-in-chief Rick Michal highlighted in his column (p. 4) Los Alamos National Laboratory’s open access special issue of the American Nuclear Society journal Fusion Science and Technology, titled The Early History of Fusion. This article provides a brief summary of the issue—and we encourage readers to explore all of the full papers.^a

I like to say that I ended up at Massachusetts Institute of Technology because of my father. He saw that I seemed intimidated by the prospect of going there, so he dared me, figuring I would take the bait. And I did.

I graduated with a bachelor’s and master’s in physics in 1968, and two days later I married my classmate, Mike Marcus. After a summer at Ft. Monmouth, where I studied radiation damage to semiconductors, we spent the next few years back at MIT in grad school—Mike in electrical engineering and I in nuclear engineering. It was Mike who steered me toward nuclear engineering, noting that my interest was radiation damage to materials, and the nuclear engineering department was doing more of that than the physics department.

There is extra significance to the American Nuclear Society holding its annual meeting in Orlando, Florida, this past week. That’s because in 1967, the state of Florida passed a law allowing Disney World to build a nuclear power plant.

The Department of Energy has started over on the quest for a place to store used fuel. Its new goal, it says, is to foster a national conversation (although this might better be described as many local conversations) about a national problem that can only be solved at the local level with a “consent-based” approach. And while the department is touting the various milestones it has already reached on the way to an interim repository, the program is structured in a way that means its success will not be measurable for years.

It’s safe to say that readers of Nuclear News are familiar with decommissioning. It’s even safe to assume that experienced decommissioning practitioners are familiar with the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and how it applies to typical projects. What’s different about the N.S. Savannah is that the entire project site is a historic property—and in fact, is a federally owned National Historic Landmark (NHL), a status that confers the highest level of protection under law. Federal owners of NHLs are obligated to minimize harm in both planning and actions. Distilled to its salient point, no federal owner of an NHL should destroy it if there’s a reasonable alternative. That level of preservation is not what we normally associate with nuclear decommissioning. This perfectly summarizes the challenges, and opportunities, that decommissioning Savannah offered. The story of how the Maritime Administration (MARAD) managed these two otherwise contradictory processes showcases how historic preservation and decommissioning can positively intersect, provides a pathway for other historic facilities, and further adds to the already illustrious history of one of our nation’s significant 20th century landmarks.

Some 30 nuclear engineering departments at universities across the United States graduate more than 900 students every year. These young men and women are the present and future of the domestic nuclear industry as it seeks to develop and deploy advanced nuclear energy technologies, grow its footprint on the power grid, and penetrate new markets while continuing to run the existing fleet of reactors reliably and economically.