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 Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
August 24–27, 2026
Dallas, TX|Hilton Anatole
Latest Magazine Issues
Aug 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
October 2026
Nuclear Technology
September 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
August 2026
Latest News
Second round of Launch Pad selections includes eight newcomers
The National Reactor Innovation Center at Idaho National Laboratory has announced 13 project selections across 12 companies for the Nuclear Energy Launch Pad, a Department of Energy–led program that integrates reactor and fuel facility authorization, testing, and deployment support for private nuclear developers.
The Launch Pad emerged from the Reactor Pilot Program and Fuel Line Pilot Program.
According to INL, projects selected include reactor development and nuclear fuel cycle advancements, including fabrication, enrichment, and conversion technologies.
J. A. Blink, G. P. Lasche
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 4 | Number 2 | September 1983 | Pages 1146-1151
Environment and Safety | doi.org/10.13182/FST83-A23013
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Five steels (PCA, HT-9, thermally stabilized 2.25 Cr-1 Mo, Nb stabilized 2.25 Cr-1 Mo, and 2.25 Cr-1 V) are compared as a function of time from the viewpoints of activation, afterheat, inhalation biological hazard potential (BHP), ingestion BHP, and feasibility of disposal by shallow land burial. An additional case uses the 2.25 Cr-1 V steel with a liquid metal wall (LMW) protective shield between the neutron source and the wall. (This geometry is feasible for inertial confinement fusion reactors.) The PCA steel is the worst choice and the LMW protected 2.25 Cr-1 V is the best choice by substantial margins from all five viewpoints. The HT-9 and two versions of 2.25 Cr-1 Mo are roughly the same at intermediate values. The 2.25 Cr-1 V has about the same afterheat as those three steels, but its waste disposal feasibility is considerably better. Under NRC's proposed low level waste disposal rule (10CFR61), only the 2.25 Cr-1 V could be considered low level waste suitable for shallow land burial.