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.
Operations & Power
Members focus on the dissemination of knowledge and information in the area of power reactors with particular application to the production of electric power and process heat. The division sponsors meetings on the coverage of applied nuclear science and engineering as related to power plants, non-power reactors, and other nuclear facilities. It encourages and assists with the dissemination of knowledge pertinent to the safe and efficient operation of nuclear facilities through professional staff development, information exchange, and supporting the generation of viable solutions to current issues.
2021 Student Conference
April 8–10, 2021
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
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
Fusion Science and Technology
Climate change needs an Operation Warp Speed
The government of the United States should throw its muscle behind ramping up a mammoth, rapid rollout of all forms of renewable energy through Operation Warp Speed, similar to what is being done with COVID-19, Clive Thompson writes in an Ideas column for Wired.
The rollout should include energy sources that we already know how to build—like solar and wind — but also experimental emerging sources such as geothermal and small nuclear, and cutting-edge forms of energy storage or transmission.
Robert W. Carlsen, Paul P. H. Wilson
Nuclear Technology | Volume 195 | Number 3 | September 2016 | Pages 288-300
Technical Paper | dx.doi.org/10.13182/NT15-138
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Because of the diversity of fuel cycle simulator modeling assumptions, direct comparison and benchmarking can be difficult. In 2012 the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development completed a benchmark study that is perhaps the most complete published comparison performed. Despite this, various results from the simulators were often significantly different because of inconsistencies in modeling decisions involving reprocessing strategies, refueling behavior, reactor end-of-life handling, etc. This work identifies and quantifies the effects of selected modeling choices that may sometimes be taken for granted in the fuel cycle simulation domain. Four scenarios are compared using combinations of either fleet-based or individually modeled reactors with either monthly or quarterly (3-month) time steps. The scenarios approximate a transition from the current U.S. once-through light water reactor fleet to a full sodium fast reactor fuel cycle. The Cyclus fuel cycle simulator’s plug-in facility capability along with its market-like dynamic material routing allow it to be used as a level playing field for comparing the scenarios. When they are under supply-constraint pressure, the four cases exhibit noticeably different behavior. Fleet-based modeling is more efficient in supply-constrained environments at the expense of losing insight on issues such as realistically suboptimal fuel distribution and challenges in reactor refueling cycle staggering. Finer-grained time steps also enable more efficient material use in supply-constrained environments resulting in much lower standing inventories of separated Pu. Large simulations with fleet-based reactors run much more quickly than their individual reactor counterparts. Gaining a better understanding of how these and other modeling choices affect fuel cycle dynamics will enable making more deliberate decisions with respect to trade-offs such as computational investment versus realism.