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 Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Apr 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
May 2026
Nuclear Technology
March 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
In quickest review, NRC approves 20-year renewal for Robinson
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has renewed the Robinson nuclear power plant’s operating license in record time, the agency announced last week.
The subsequent license renewal process for the Hartsville, S.C., facility was completed within 12 months, according to the NRC. The process has typically taken 18 months. This was the first license renewal review conducted under the directive of Executive Order 14300 to streamline processes like renewing operating licenses.
Won Il Ko, Hangbok Choi, Myung Seung Yang
Nuclear Technology | Volume 134 | Number 2 | May 2001 | Pages 167-186
Technical Paper | Fuel Cycle and Management | doi.org/10.13182/NT01-A3193
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
This study examines the economics of the DUPIC fuel cycle using unit costs of fuel cycle components estimated based on conceptual designs. The fuel cycle cost (FCC) was calculated by a deterministic method in which reference values of fuel cycle components are used. The FCC was then analyzed by a Monte Carlo simulation to get the uncertainty of the FCC associated with the unit costs of the fuel cycle components. From the deterministic analysis on the equilibrium fuel cycle model, the DUPIC FCC was estimated to be 6.21 to 6.34 mills/kWh for DUPIC fuel options, which is a little smaller than that of the once-through FCC by 0.07 to 0.27 mills/kWh. Considering the uncertainty (0.40 to 0.44 mills/kWh) of the FCC estimated by the Monte Carlo simulation method, the cost difference between the DUPIC and once-through fuel cycle is negligible. On the other hand, the material balance calculation has shown that the DUPIC fuel cycle can save natural uranium resources by ~20% and reduce the spent fuel arising by ~65% compared with the once-through fuel cycle. In conclusion, the DUPIC fuel cycle is comparable with the once-through fuel cycle from the viewpoint of FCC. In the future, it should be important to consider factors such as the environmental benefit owing to natural uranium savings, the capability of reusing spent pressurized water reactor fuel, and the safeguardability of the fuel cycle when deciding on an advanced nuclear fuel cycle option.