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
Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy
The mission of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Policy Division (NNPD) is to promote the peaceful use of nuclear technology while simultaneously preventing the diversion and misuse of nuclear material and technology through appropriate safeguards and security, and promotion of nuclear nonproliferation policies. To achieve this mission, the objectives of the NNPD are to: Promote policy that discourages the proliferation of nuclear technology and material to inappropriate entities. Provide information to ANS members, the technical community at large, opinion leaders, and decision makers to improve their understanding of nuclear nonproliferation issues. Become a recognized technical resource on nuclear nonproliferation, safeguards, and security issues. Serve as the integration and coordination body for nuclear nonproliferation activities for the ANS. Work cooperatively with other ANS divisions to achieve these objective nonproliferation policies.
Meeting Spotlight
2024 ANS Winter Conference and Expo
November 17–21, 2024
Orlando, FL|Renaissance Orlando at SeaWorld
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
Oct 2024
Jul 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
November 2024
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Keeping up with Kewaunee
In October 2012, Dominion Energy announced it was closing the Kewaunee nuclear power plant, a two-loop 574-MWe pressurized water reactor located about 27 miles southeast of Green Bay, Wis., on the western shore of Lake Michigan. At the time, Dominion said the plant was running well, but that low wholesale electricity prices in the region made it uneconomical to continue operation of the single-unit merchant power plant.
Blair P. Bromley, Bronwyn Hyland
Nuclear Technology | Volume 186 | Number 3 | June 2014 | Pages 317-339
Technical Paper | Fission Reactors | doi.org/10.13182/NT13-85
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
New reactor concepts to implement thorium-based fuel cycles have been explored to achieve maximum resource utilization. Pressure tube heavy water reactors (PT-HWRs) are highly advantageous for implementing thorium-based fuels because of their high neutron economy and online refueling capability. The use of heterogeneous seed/blanket core concepts in a PT-HWR where higher-fissile-content seed fuel bundles are physically separate from lower-fissile-content blanket bundles allows more flexibility and control in fuel management to maximize fissile utilization (FU) and conversion of fertile fuel. The lattice concept chosen was a 35-element bundle made with a homogeneous mixture of reactor-grade PuO2 (∼67 wt% fissile) and ThO2, with a central zirconia rod to reduce coolant void reactivity. Several annular and checkerboard-type heterogeneous seed/blanket core concepts with plutonium-thorium–based fuels in a 700-MW(electric)–class PT-HWR were analyzed, using a once-through thorium cycle. Different combinations of seed and blanket fuel were tested to determine the impact on core-average burnup, FU, power distributions, and other performance parameters. WIMS-AECL Version 3.1 was used to perform lattice physics calculations using two-dimensional, 89-group integral neutron transport theory, while RFSP Version 3.5.1 was used to perform the core physics and fuel management calculations using three-dimensional two-group diffusion theory. Among the different core concepts investigated, there were cores where the FU was up to 30% higher than that achieved in a PT-HWR using natural uranium fuel bundles. There were cores where up to 67% of the Pu was consumed, cores where up to 43% of the energy was produced from thorium, and cores where up to 363 kg/year of 233U was produced in the discharged fuel.