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.
Division Spotlight
Radiation Protection & Shielding
The Radiation Protection and Shielding Division is developing and promoting radiation protection and shielding aspects of nuclear science and technology — including interaction of nuclear radiation with materials and biological systems, instruments and techniques for the measurement of nuclear radiation fields, and radiation shield design and evaluation.
Meeting Spotlight
2024 ANS Annual Conference
June 16–19, 2024
Las Vegas, NV|Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino
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
May 2024
Jan 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
July 2024
Nuclear Technology
June 2024
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Bowman & Smith on NRC security programs
Greg Bowman and George Smith work for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in implementing programs that deal with risk, whether to nuclear power plants or from nuclear materials, such as radiological sabotage and theft or diversion of materials. Bowman is the director of the NRC’s Division of Physical and Cybersecurity Policy in the Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response. Smith is the senior project manager for security in the Source Management & Protection Branch of the Division of Materials Safety, Security, State, and Tribal Programs in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.
The three initiatives Bowman and Smith discussed with Nuclear News editor-in-chief Rick Michal are the Insider Threat Program, the Cybersecurity Program, and the Domestic Safeguards Program.
Kevan D. Weaver, J. Stephen Herring
Nuclear Technology | Volume 143 | Number 1 | July 2003 | Pages 22-36
Technical Paper | Fuel Cycle and Management | doi.org/10.13182/NT03-A3395
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
A renewed interest in thorium-based fuels has arisen lately based on the need for proliferation resistance, longer fuel cycles, higher burnup, and improved waste form characteristics. Recent studies have been directed toward homogeneously mixed, heterogeneously mixed, and seed-and-blanket thorium-uranium oxide fuel cycles that rely on "in situ" use of the bred-in 233U. However, due to the higher initial enrichment required to achieve acceptable burnups, these fuels are encountering economic constraints. Thorium can nevertheless play a large role in the nuclear fuel cycle, particularly in the reduction of plutonium inventories. While uranium-based mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel will decrease the amount of plutonium in discharged fuel, the reduction is limited due to the breeding of more plutonium (and higher actinides) from the 238U. Here, we present calculational results and a comparison of the potential burnup of a thorium-based and uranium-based mixed-oxide fuel in a light water reactor. Although the uranium-based fuels outperformed the thorium-based fuels in achievable burnup, a depletion comparison of the initially charged plutonium (both reactor and weapons grade) showed that the thorium-based fuels outperformed the uranium-based fuels by more that a factor of 2, where >70% of the total plutonium in the thorium-based fuel is consumed during the cycle. This is significant considering that the achievable burnups of the thorium-based fuels were 1.4 to 4.6 times less than the uranium-based fuels for similar plutonium enrichments. For equal specific burnups of ~60 MWd/kg (i.e., using variable plutonium weight percentages to give the desired burnup), the thorium-based fuels still outperform the uranium-based fuels by more than a factor of 2, where the total plutonium consumption in a three-batch, 18-month cycle was 60 to 70%. This is fairly significant considering that 10 to 15% (by weight) more plutonium is needed in the thorium-based fuels as compared to the uranium-based fuels to achieve these burnups.Furthermore, thorium-based fuels could also be used as a strategy for reducing the amount of long-lived nuclides (including the minor actinides) and thus the radiotoxicity in spent nuclear fuel. Although the breeding of 233U is a concern, the presence of 232U and its daughter products (namely 208Tl) can aid in making this fuel self-protecting, and/or enough 238U can be added to denature the fissile uranium. From these calculations, it appears that thorium-based fuel for plutonium incineration is superior when compared to uranium-based fuel and should be considered as an alternative to traditional MOX in both current and future/advanced reactor designs.