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
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.
Meeting Spotlight
2025 ANS Annual Conference
June 15–18, 2025
Chicago, IL|Chicago Marriott Downtown
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
Jun 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
July 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Smarter waste strategies: Helping deliver on the promise of advanced nuclear
At COP28, held in Dubai in 2023, a clear consensus emerged: Nuclear energy must be a cornerstone of the global clean energy transition. With electricity demand projected to soar as we decarbonize not just power but also industry, transport, and heat, the case for new nuclear is compelling. More than 20 countries committed to tripling global nuclear capacity by 2050. In the United States alone, the Department of Energy forecasts that the country’s current nuclear capacity could more than triple, adding 200 GW of new nuclear to the existing 95 GW by mid-century.
Vinod Mubayi, Robert Youngblood
Nuclear Technology | Volume 207 | Number 3 | March 2021 | Pages 406-412
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2020.1775452
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The safety goals adopted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) consist of two qualitative safety goals backed up by two quantitative health objectives (QHOs). The QHOs establish risk limits for severe accidents in terms of their radiological consequences to affected individuals, in particular, the average individual health risks of early fatality and latent cancers from radiation exposure of members of the public living in the vicinity of a nuclear power plant. This paper is devoted to a reexamination of the coverage of the current safety goals as they constrain (or fail to constrain) the total (radiological and nonradiological) risk posed by nuclear power plant operation. Specifically, we suggest the need to address societal consequences. By societal consequences, we mean measures of consequences that reflect the number of people affected and the offsite effects both radiological and nonradiological, not just the individual risks. Recent Level 3 probabilistic risk assessments suggest that given a high likelihood of evacuation of the close-in population before any release occurs the current QHOs are satisfied by large margins, and the experience of an actual severe accident at Fukushima showed that actual human health effects from released radiation were not the dominant consequences, as there were no early fatalities and no measurable increases expected in cancer rates above the baseline rates in the Japanese population. Hence, regardless of accident probability, Fukushima-type accidents with evacuation would satisfy the NRC’s health-related safety goals. However, there were very significant societal costs in that large numbers of people were relocated for long periods and there was substantial property damage and community disruption along with the costs of recovery and decontamination. We argue that, in addition to the risks addressed in the current safety goals, societal risk should also be considered. This paper discusses specific possibilities for a goal and an associated quantitative objective.