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
LLNL, Ampera partner to develop thorium-based TRISO fuel
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory has formed a strategic partnership with Ampera to develop the company’s nuclear fuel concept through a project named THUNDER, for Thorium Unimodal Droplet Ejection for Reactors.
The focus of THUNDER is fabricating TRISO made with kernels of thorium rather than the usual uranium. LLNL and Ampera will evaluate and optimize liquid metal–jetting technology to produce highly uniform, spherical kernels of thorium-232 for later processing into TRISO fuel.
Steven L. Krahn, Allen G. Croff, Bethany L. Smith, James H. Clarke, Andrew G. Sowder, Albert J. Machiels
Nuclear Technology | Volume 185 | Number 2 | February 2014 | Pages 192-207
Technical Paper | Fuel Cycle and Management | doi.org/10.13182/NT13-64
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) is sponsoring the development of tools to support long-term strategic planning for research, development, and demonstration and for evaluation of advanced nuclear fuel cycles (NFCs). The EPRI-sponsored work under way at Vanderbilt University (VU) is developing a new, comparative risk assessment tool for NFCs. In the course of conducting a demonstration application of the assessment tool, it was observed that the relative contribution of NFC operations to radiological worker impacts estimated by the assessment tool was substantially different from widely used historical data and conventional wisdom. This paper analyzes these differences by first describing the NFC and the nature of radiological worker impacts. Then, the assessment tool developed by VU is described, along with assessment results; historical data relevant to radiological worker impacts are then summarized, and key differences between assessment results and previously reported impacts are identified. This comparison is followed by an analysis of the major factors causing the differences and an assessment of their validity. Finally, several implications of the differences are discussed.