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
Nuclear Energy Conference & Expo (NECX)
September 8–11, 2025
Atlanta, GA|Atlanta Marriott Marquis
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Sep 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
September 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
October 2025
Latest News
U.S. nuclear supply chain: Ready for liftoff
Craig Piercycpiercy@ans.org
This month, September 8–11, the American Nuclear Society is teaming up with the Nuclear Energy Institute to host our first-ever Nuclear Energy Conference and Expo—NECX for short—in Atlanta. This new meeting combines ANS’s Utility Working Conference and NEI’s Nuclear Energy Assembly to form what NEI CEO Maria Korsnick and I hope will be the premier nuclear industry gathering in America.
We did this because after more than four decades of relative stagnation, the U.S. nuclear supply chain is finally entering a new era of dynamic growth. This resurgence is being driven by several powerful and increasingly durable forces: the explosive demand for electricity from artificial intelligence and data centers, an unprecedented wave of public and private acceptance of—and investment in—advanced nuclear technologies, and a strong market signal for reliable, on-demand power. Add the recent Trump administration executive orders on nuclear into the mix, and you have all the makings of an accelerant-rich business environment primed for rapid expansion.
Uwe Kasemeyer, Jean-Marie Paratte, Peter Grimm, Rakesh Chawla
Nuclear Technology | Volume 122 | Number 1 | April 1998 | Pages 52-63
Technical Paper | Fuel Cycle and Management | doi.org/10.13182/NT98-A2850
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The large quantities of reactor-grade (RG) and weapons-grade (WG) Pu accumulated worldwide could be reduced by employing 100% mixed-oxide (MOX) cores in light water reactors. The buildup of new Pu from the U present in the MOX, however, remains disadvantageous from the viewpoint of inventory reduction and also enhances the need for multiple recycling. A more effective way would be to use U-free fuel so that no new Pu is produced.A comparison is made, from the physics design viewpoint, between the potential and the possible difficulties for two different types of Pu-burning pressurized water reactor cores, namely, 100% MOX and 100% uranium-free Pu fuel. The latter employs ZrO2 as inert matrix and Er2O3 as burnable poison. In each case, RG and WG Pu have been considered separately. The characteristics of the four different cores have been studied on the basis of three-dimensional calculations for an equilibrium cycle, a real-life UO2-fueled core being considered as reference for comparison purposes.For all four Pu-burning cases, it appears possible to design a four-region core with a natural cycle length of more than 300 days. For the 100% MOX cores, the Pu mass is reduced during irradiation by ~35% of the initial Pu inventory. For the U-free cores, the consumption is about twice as much, i.e., ~60% for the RG-Pu fuel and over 70% for the WG-Pu core. The reactivity balance in going from hot full power to hot zero power conditions shows that while the 100% MOX core with RG Pu would need more effective control rods, both types of U-free cores have larger shutdown margins than the reference case. Consideration of the reactivity coefficients indicates that a steam-line-break accident could be more problematic in the MOX core with RG Pu than in the other cases. The rod ejection transient should be safe because the maximum inserted worth of a control rod is ~0.5 $. More detailed investigations of transient behavior - particularly for the U-free cores - are needed, the current study having considered feasibility mainly from the viewpoint of static physics considerations.