Features

Despite its significant benefits, the public perception of radiation is generally negative due to its inherent nature: it is ubiquitous yet cannot be seen, heard, smelled, or touched—as if it were a ghost roaming around uncensored. The public is frightened of this seemingly creepy phantom they cannot detect with their senses. This unfounded fear has hampered the progress of the nuclear industry and radiation professions.

Lis Marshall
president@ans.org

Six months into my ANS presidency, the pace has been hectic yet good. I’ve taken nearly two dozen trips to student and local chapters; companies; and various regional, national, and international meetings, where I’ve spoken about the current and future path of nuclear: people-centered interactions that focus on the benefits and capacities of our technologies.

Perception, timing, and financing remain challenges. Perception can be addressed in our deeds, so I am heartened by continuing industry collaborations and subsequent communication to strengthen efforts in the arenas of energy security, environmental stewardship, and (inter)national leadership as we assist new-to-nuclear nations; leverage our outreach, educational, and policy instruments; and volunteer our expertise.

In November, I joined ANS’s delegation to COP29 Baku, Azerbaijan, where we strove be the voice of the nuclear community. Our presence at this and future Conferences of the Parties is necessary if we are to continue the momentum around nuclear science and technology.

Southern Nuclear was first when no one wanted to be.

The nuclear subsidiary of the century-old utility Southern Company, based in Atlanta, Ga., joined a pack of nuclear companies in the early 2000s—during what was then dubbed a “nuclear renaissance”—bullish on plans for new large nuclear facilities and adding thousands of new carbon-free megawatts to the grid.

In 2008, Southern Nuclear applied for a combined construction and operating license (COL), positioning the company to receive the first such license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2012. Also in 2008, Southern became the first U.S. company to sign an engineering, procurement, and construction contract for a Generation III+ reactor. Southern chose Westinghouse’s AP1000 pressurized water reactor, which was certified by the NRC in December 2011.

Fast forward a dozen years—which saw dozens of setbacks and hundreds of successes—and Southern Nuclear and its stakeholders celebrated the completion of Vogtle Units 3 and 4: the first new commercial nuclear power construction project completed in the U.S. in more than 30 years.

In your career as a professional in the nuclear community, chances are you will, at some point, be asked (or volunteer) to talk to at least one layperson about the technology you know and love. You might even be asked to present to a whole group of nonnuclear folks, perhaps as a pitch to some company tangential to your company’s business. So, without further ado, let me give you some pointers on the best way to approach this important and surprisingly complicated task.

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.