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 Winter Conference & Expo
November 15–18, 2026
Phoenix, AZ|Arizona Grand Resort & Spa
Latest Magazine Issues
Sep 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
October 2026
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Westinghouse, Nordion, and PSEG team up to produce Co‑60 in the United States
This past January, Westinghouse Electric Company, Nordion, and PSEG Nuclear formalized agreements to implement newly developed cobalt-60 production technology at Units 1 and 2 of PSEG’s Salem nuclear power plant in New Jersey, with the Co-60 to be supplied to Nordion. Through an ongoing joint initiative, the companies aim to harness U.S. pressurized water reactors to produce a key medical isotope and build the first commercial-scale Co-60 production platform in the United States.
Y. Ikeda, C. Konno, H. Maekawa
Nuclear Science and Engineering | Volume 116 | Number 1 | January 1994 | Pages 19-27
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.13182/NSE94-A21477
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
In view of the importance of so-called “sequential reactions”in fusion reactor structural materials, the production of radioactivity due to sequential reactions associated with protons emitted via (n,xp) reactions with 14.9-MeV neutrons has been measured. The effective production yields with respect to 14.9-MeV incident neutrons produced by sequential reactions were obtained for the radio active products of 48 V, 56Co, and 64Zn in titanium, iron, and copper, respectively. The values were 14.7 ± 1.9, 4.6 ±0.3, and 11.4 ± 1.9 μb, respectively. The effective production cross section was estimated on the basis of all relevant data on (n,xp) and (p,n) cross sections, proton emission spectra, and the proton stopping power in these materials. This analysis gave values 22% larger, 29% smaller, and a factor of 5.6 smaller than the measured values for these reactions, respectively. The range of these discrepancies is not unreasonable considering the large uncertainties in the data base used in the estimation.