Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Fuel cycle”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Assessment of Technical Information Needs and Considerations for Front-End Activities for Molten Salt Fuel Types

This report details an assessment of the hazards and safety impacts related to front-end operations of molten salt reactors (MSR) as well as an assessment of existing safety guidance. Publicly available information was evaluated to make recommendations to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for guidance development and information gathering needs. Five different MSR technologies were evaluated along with information from 1960’s about the Atomic Energy Commission programs for the Aircraft Reactor Experiment and Molten Salt Reactor Experiment. Primary areas of evaluation include fuel cycle facilities, transportation and at reactor fuel mixing operations up to reactor startup. In general, there was difficulty synthesizing publicly available information due to the early stage of the MSR development and proprietary information associated with the reactor technology companies analyzed. There are a few specific recommendations from this report. One overarching paradigm shift that the NRC needs to evaluate is the possibility of collocating fuel cycle facilities with operating MSRs. Although there is no specific prohibition to this in the NRC regulations, the collocation of the fuel cycle facilities with the operating MSR presents a novel approach compared to the light water reactor baseline. More guidance and research into thorium operations and regulation is needed. The hazards associated with the stability of stored fuel constituents need to be evaluated. Some reactor fuel cycles use beryllium, and its use and the associated hazards need further analysis. NRC-approved designs for transportation packages for shipping molten salt fuels and factory-built and fueled reactors are not available.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Scale effects on core design, fuel costs, and spent fuel volume of pressurized water reactors

The desire to improve the economic competitiveness and deployment pace of nuclear energy through modularization, manufacturing, and series production had led to the development of smaller size reactors. As the standard 17x17 fuel technology is mainly maintained in the pressurized water reactors (PWRs) category, this translates into a lower number of fuel assemblies in the core and sometimes a reduced fuel height. To assess the impact of such scale change in core design on fuel cycle cost and spent fuel volume, a scoping analysis tool is developed based on infinite lattice calculations, leakage, fuel management reduced models, and levelized unit cost of electricity (LCOE) estimate. As such, cost dynamics driven by fuel specific power, burnup, core leakage, feed, cycle length, fuel assembly height as well as uranium market data are captured with consistent set of assumptions and analysis methods. A selection of 5 reactor designs representative of leading PWR developers is assessed and compared. Pursuing higher specific powers and optimal burnups are highlighted as the main fuel cost reduction drivers, nevertheless, practical limitations and opportunities must be evaluated to establish the feasibility of such enhanced fuel operation. In consequence, a detailed core design is performed using SIMULATE3 code for 5 PWR variations including natural and forced coolant circulation modes, two reactor scales, power densities of 73, 112, and 123 kW/l and higher discharge burnups. Design and optimization are performed at the lattice level, for the reflector, and at the core loading level. Satisfactory steady-state operation including power distribution, coolant operating limits, and reactivity requirements are analyzed and reported in this paper. The fuel economics of the detailed core designs confirm the scoping analysis findings. Despite the unlocked power uprates in small PWRs, the achievable burnup for a given fuel specific power requires more enrichment and shorter fuel height results in higher fabrication costs per mass of fuel, which makes scaling down core size a more expensive endeavor on the fuel cycle front. Spent fuel volumes are reported for the PWRs designed in this paper. Furthermore, these volumes are driven by the core average discharge burnup regardless of the scale in consideration. Additional cost and core performance aspects related to heavy reflector gains, fuel-reflector substitution, and disposal cost policy in the U.S. are examined.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sensitivity and Uncertainty Quantification of Transition Scenario Simulations

This report documents the first collective attempt at developing and applying capabilities to quantify uncertainties, assess parametric sensitivities, and optimize multiple parameters and metrics in fuel cycle simulations generated by the SA&I Campaign. To do this, external codes that were designed to perform sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification (SA&UQ) needed to be coupled to the SA&I Campaign’s nuclear fuel cycle simulators (NFCS). In FY20, two approaches were pursued: 1) coupling Cyclus to an ORNL-internal code called MOT (Metaheuristic Optimization Tool) and 2) coupling DYMOND to the opensource SA&UQ tool kit Dakota. The primary objective of having these NFCS/SA&UQ coupled capabilities is to better inform DOE-NE and other stakeholders on the results generated from the NFCS. For a given set of fuel cycle strategies, policies, and technology assumptions that make up a fuel cycle scenario, these NFCS have traditionally been used by the SA&I Campaign to provide quantitative answers in terms of year-by-year mass flows, infrastructure requirements, costs, etc. With these newly developed coupled capabilities, the SA&I Campaign can now efficiently simulate hundreds or thousands of these scenarios, sample large ranges of parameters and assumptions, and use the unique features of the SA&UQ tools to process the data. This enables providing answers with known and propagated uncertainties, determining the sensitivity of important metrics to different parameters and assumptions, quantifying how much fuel cycle and technology parameters impact each other, and producing optimized fuel cycle strategies for single and multiple variables. To demonstrate these new capabilities, the Cyclus/MOT was used to model several scenarios ranging from simple fleet retirements to transitions to advanced reactors. Specifically, for a transition scenario from LWRs to SFRs and advanced LWRs, uncertainty quantification, sensitivity analysis, and optimization studies were applied to cases involving single and multiple parameter (input) and single and multiple metric (output) variations. In addition, a similar transition scenario was modeled to demonstrate how to optimize the reprocessing capacity parameter to minimize two performance metrics while taking into account uncertainties from two other parameters. Lastly, a depletion module based on SCALE/ORIGEN was added in Cyclus to simulate the third scenario that was designed to quantify the impact of the modeling assumption that all LWR used nuclear fuel have the same burnup. The newly developed DYMOND/Dakota capability was also applied to a transition scenario from the existing fleet to small modular reactors and fast reactors. This particular scenario involves not only explicit isotopic depletion via ORIGEN-2, but also includes multirecycling and utilizing the criticality search feature to determine the fresh fuel composition of recycled fuel, a feature unique to the DYMOND NFCS. A large database of simulations were run with 4 main parameters that were sampled: start date of reprocessing, reprocessing capacity, energy demand growth rate, and advanced reactor share of the fleet. The 4 main metrics were uranium consumption, enrichment requirements, waste generation, and levelized cost of electricity using data from the Cost Basis Report. The demonstrated SA&UQ results include those that inform on how to choose parameters to avoid “failed” scenarios, Sobol’ indices that inform on the importance of various parameters individually and synergistically, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) studies that decompose parameter ranges into groups and informs on whether variations are statistically significant.

Feng, B.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Waste Attributes of SMRs Scheduled for Near Term Deployment

This is a short presentation as part of a "roundtable" panel on Back-end Fuel Cycle Implications of Advanced Reactor Fuel Cycles. It covers an evaluation of waste generation rates projected for small modular reactors expected to be constructed this decade which are compared to a reference gigawatt-scale light water reactor like those in the current commercial fleet. For ease of comparison, results are normalized per unit of electricity generated.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Next Generation System Analysis Model: Recently Added Features and Future Plans

To better enable informed decision-making regarding the back-end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management System (IWMS) program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring the development and application of system analysis tools capable of analyzing various system options for the management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW).With these tools, IWMS architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). The Next Generation System Analysis Model (NGSAM) is an agent-based simulation software tool expressly designed to be capable of modeling features within various IWMS architectures. NGSAM imports data from Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)’s unified database (e.g., historic assembly information, thermal profiles for assembly heat, and at-reactor dry storage loadings) to ensure that each simulation initializes with a realistic representation of the state of commercial SNF in the U.S. Recent major enhancements implemented into NGSAM in the period since NGSAM was last presented at the WM2019 conference include: • Tracking of railroad escort car acquisition and buffer car acquisition • The addition of heavy haul truck (HHT) and barge routes for some sites, as well as support for user-defined inter-modal routes • Updates to the logic that checks the transportation cask thermal limit maps prior to package transport • An allocation method that predicts when reactor sites would pack assemblies from their spent fuel pools for dry storage, and prioritizes shipments directly from the pools of those reactor sites in the preceding periods (before the predicted loadings to dry storage), thus reducing the number of casks loaded into dry storage at reactor sites • The addition of “reactor site family” operational limits to restrict the number of loads of SNF taken from the pool and from dry storage at a given reactor site each year • Added support for multiple canister loading map options and packages with multiple compatible transportation overpacks • Updates to the handling of non-commercial SNF, including a new database that contains data to support the updates • Updates to allow analysis of hypothetical scenarios which include repackaging at reactor sites, e.g., for possible comparative analysis with other scenarios • Implementation of additional output reports, or modification of existing ones • The ability to generate and implement user edits via the NGSAM website • The ability to model loading SNF from pool storage at an interim storage facility (ISF) into dry storage at the ISF • The ability to model consolidating SNF from different existing storage containers at a DOE site into the same DOE standard canister • The ability to model transferring SNF casks from one transportation mode to another, e.g., from HHT to rail, referred to as transloading. These new features have improved NGSAM capabilities and users’ experience with the model. Preliminary NGSAM requirements for modeling advanced reactor fuels, reprocessing, treatment, and conditioning were considered, and this paper describes them at a high level. Other nuclear fuel cycle system analysis tools developed under sponsorship of DOE-NE, like the VISION code developed at Idaho National Laboratory, might be better suited for initial high-level analysis of those technologies and advanced fuel cycles. As technologies are developed and system concepts evolve, NGSAM could provide value by providing more detailed modeling of transport, storage, and disposal of spent fuel and wastes from advanced reactors and advanced fuel cycles at the fuel element and waste container level.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

2016 US Petroleum fuels Life Cycle Baseline Data Package

This data package accompanies the report "2016 U.S. Petroleum Fuels Life Cycle Baseline." It contains the openLCA life cycle model that generated the results and an Excel spreadsheet that contains well-to-tank life cycle inventory for all products.

Life Cycle Analysis Options - Fuels↗
DOE OSTI2026

Impact of Time-Dependent Reactor and Sensor Physics on Core Power Synthesis (Rev.1)

Online synthesis of power distribution is critical in the operation and control of nuclear power reactors to ensure that the core is operating within safety margins and to provide essential knowledge associated with the burnup of the fuel. In light-water reactors, power synthesis is achieved by using some a priori knowledge of the state of the reactor core and updating based on the signals coming from in-core sensors—namely, self-powered neutron detectors (SPNDs). This report examines the effects of fuel burnup and sensor degradation on the ability to accurately synthesize the power distribution in a pressurized water reactor (PWR), considering the typical low-enriched uranium (LEU, 3%-5% enrichment) fuel cycle as well as the higher enrichment LEU+ (5%-8% enrichment) fuel cycle. Several modeling tools were used to simulate power synthesis based on the responses of SPNDs, with emitters made out of Rh or V. A representative PWR LEU core was modeled using the Polaris/Purdue Advanced Reactor Core Simulator (PARCS) approach. The Monte Carlo N-Particle Transport 6 (MCNP6) code was used as well to calculate response functions between different segments of fuel to individual SPNDs; this is a crucial parameter for power synthesis. The Oak Ridge Isotope GENeration (ORIGEN) package in the Standardized Computer Analyses for Licensing Evaluation (SCALE) code was used to model the time-dependent isotopic transmutation in the SPND emitters. All these data were fed into a custom code that enacted the point-based iterative method to simulate power synthesis. Developmental work was also performed on high-fidelity SPND models in the GEometry ANd Tracking 4 (Geant4) code, which enables higher-accuracy modeling of the current responses from SPNDs. In this work, five sets of time-dependent power synthesis test cases were conducted. In these test cases, systematic changes in the input conditions enabled an analysis of the effect of (1) slightly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup, (2) highly inaccurate a priori power distribution assumptions with respect to fuel burnup (such that burnup is not included in the a priori assumed distribution), and (3) differences between Rh and V SPNDs in terms of downstream consequences of the transmutation in the emitters and the extended nature of the LEU+ fuel cycle in comparison with LEU. The authors discovered that one may permissibly have slightly inaccurate a priori assumptions of the fuel burnup (such that the level of burnup may be slightly underapproximated or overapproximated by the accumulated burnup in approximately 9.3 full power days), but to not account for burnup at all in the a priori assumptions leads to severe levels of error, approaching 25% at maximum (for LEU). The authors also discovered that V SPNDs are extraordinarily robust in both the LEU and LEU+ fuel cycles considered in this modeling work, whereas Rh SPNDs undergo significant transmutation that can result in large errors in the synthesized power distribution.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Preliminary Analysis of Advanced Reactors Storage, Transportation, and Disposal

Based on the higher interest in Advanced Reactor (AR) deployment (e.g., ARDP[1]) for potential new fuel cycles, the Spent Fuel & Waste Science and Technology (SFWST) Program has begun to evaluate the possible implications of long-term management and final disposition of potential Advance Reactor spent nuclear fuels (SNF) that would be generated in potential advanced reactors. Safely managing and dispositioning the potential future AR SNF, and any other associated radioactive wastes, is the primary focus of this initial preliminary assessment of those. This paper summarizes the efforts by the Spent Fuel & Waste Science and Technology (SFWST) in evaluating characteristics and packaging options for advanced reactor spent nuclear fuel forms. The fuel forms were categorized into three types: (1) tristructural isotropic (TRISO), (2) metallic, and (3) fuel salt. This work emphasized TRISO and metallic SNF and waste streams because of the near-term anticipated operation of the Xe-100 and the Natrium reactors as advanced-reactor demonstrations. Preliminary information for the spent-fuel salts discharged from molten-salt reactors (MSRs) is also examined to provide a baseline for future efforts. All calculations and assumptions used publicly available information. The following characteristics are calculated or estimated for use in the preliminary assessments: SNF volume and mass, radiation/activity levels through time, thermal conditions through time, potential radionuclide source terms, chemical interactions and evolutions, disposal inventories, and waste-form lifetime. Using those characteristics, calculations to determine the applicability of existing canister designs were performed. These evaluations included geometric (e.g., dimension, volume) and mass/weight considerations, known operational approaches and loading procedures, physical and chemical considerations/conditions for storage environments, as-loaded radiation, thermal, and criticality analyses to identify constraints for storage, transportation, and disposal. The paper also includes a literature review and analysis on the storage, transportation, and disposal evaluations and experiences from reactors with similar fuel forms. Advanced-reactor vendors cite past experiences with Fort St. Vrain for TRISO and the Experimental Breeder Reactor II (EBR-II) for metallics that have major influences on fuel design. Finally, the paper includes preliminary concepts of operation for advanced-reactor SNF. This encompasses storage, transportation, potential treatment, and disposal activities from both a per-canister and systems-integration perspective.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

High-Assay Low Enriched Uranium Pyroprocessing and Electrometallurgical Treatment at the Fuel Conditioning Facility

Fuel Conditioning Facility (FCF) fulfills part of INL’s mission by reprocessing irradiated sodium-bonded fuel from the EBR-ll reactor and participates in research to further explore the fuel cycle for recovery of fuel from a variety of current reactors in use today. The fuel cycle of a nuclear reactor under the current non-proliferation act, leaves unused fuel in the spent fuel rods. The rods are safely stored until their fuel can be recovered. ? Fuel recovery from the EBR-II fuel pins has several steps to separate the uranium from the salts. The pyroprocessing technology involves high - temperatures, chemical and electrochemical methods for separating the unused uranium from the salts, fission products, and used fuel. The recovered uranium is then remixed and formed into ingots or Regulus with an enrichment of < 20% U-235. This final product is a source to fuel current nuclear reactors as well as research and development for future nuclear reactors

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Advanced Fuels Campaign Execution Plan

The Advanced Fuels Campaign (AFC) Execution Plan outlines the strategy, mission, scope, near-term and long-term goals, structure, and organization associated with nuclear fuels and materials research, development, and demonstration activities within the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Supply Chain (NFCSC) program. NFCSC has been given responsibility to identify and mature advanced fuel technologies for the DOE using a science-based approach, focused on developing a fundamental understanding of nuclear fuels and materials to drive development of integrated nuclear fuel and materials technology. This science-based approach combines theory, experiments, and multiscale modeling and simulation to achieve a predictive understanding of relevant behaviors ranging from fuel fabrication processes (and their resulting fuel microstructures) through fuel/cladding performance under irradiation (in contrast to more empirical, observation-based approaches frequently used in fuel performance modeling and fuel qualification). The traditional scope of AFC includes the evaluation and development of multiple fuel forms to support two fuel cycle options: once-through and full recycle. The word “fuel” is used generically to include conventional fuels, transmutation targets, and any associated cladding or duct materials. The once-through fuel cycle addresses advanced light water reactor fuels with enhanced performance, extended burnup, and reduced waste generation. In fiscal year (FY) 2012, AFC’s scope expanded to include research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) for light water reactor (LWR) fuels with enhanced accident tolerance. Fuel fabrication activities include the development of innovative methods to enhance process efficiencies, reduce waste, and improve control over as-fabricated fuel microstructural properties to achieve desired in-reactor performance. Using modern modeling and simulation approaches, the objective is to predict fresh fuel properties given the feedstock characteristics and fabrication process parameters. The performance-related activities include small-scale, in-reactor, and out-of-reactor phenomenological testing (distinct from, but synergistic with, integral prototypic testing) and extensive, quantitative characterization (focusing on characterization of fuel and cladding materials at the scale of microstructure) both before and after testing. Larger-scale, prototypic experiments are conducted in concert with phenomenological testing to drive a Fuel Development and Qualification program, incorporating a fundamental understanding of fuel behavior performance characteristics. Then, using the tools developed under the productive science-based approach, fuels will be optimized to meet specific performance requirements, thereby minimizing the need to repeatedly perform large-scale, integral experiments over a wide parametric range as a means of experimental exploration. Two significant initiatives are underway within AFC. First, a gap analysis completed in early FY 2019 identified critical irradiation testing needs that are lacking within the national light water reactor (LWR) fuels testbed since the shutdown of the Halden Reactor in 2018. The identified gaps are for instrumented, prototypic testing of LWR fuels, especially under boiling water reactor conditions, ramp conditions, and conditions leading to fuel failure; these needs exist for supporting current LWR fuels and their possible extension to higher burnups, but are especially urgent relative to near-term development and qualification of accident-tolerant fuels. Recommendations that resulted from the Halden Gap Analysis focused on enhancements at Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) and Transient Reactor Test Facility (TREAT) to fill gaps in testing capabilities relative to these needs. Second, a concerted effort to develop and demonstrate a systematic approach to accelerating the development, testing, and qualification of new fuel systems has been initiated. This is highlighted by a test strategy that combines the considerable advances in multiscale, mechanistic fuel modeling of recent years with a MiniFuel separate effects test program in the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) and a Fission Accelerated Steady-state Testing (FAST) semi-integral accelerated test program in ATR. This approach is being tested/demonstrated using the metallic fuel system, but if successful it is expected to be extensible to multiple fuel types and diverse applications. This document includes an overview of the NFCSC program, a definition of science-based development of nuclear fuels, near-term goals for Advanced LWR fuels (ALFs), and longer-term goals for Advanced Reactor Fuels (ARFs) RD&D. This includes the activities that will be conducted to achieve success toward the grand challenge, as well as the goals and milestones to be achieved over the next few decades of research and development. Long-term goals are based on the DOE Office of Nuclear Energ

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Advanced Fuels Campaign Execution Plan

The Advanced Fuels Campaign (AFC) Execution Plan outlines the strategy, mission, scope, near-term and long-term goals, structure, and organization associated with nuclear fuels and materials research, development, and demonstration activities within the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Nuclear Fuel Cycle and Supply Chain (NFCSC) program. NFCSC has been given responsibility to identify and mature advanced fuel technologies for the DOE using a science-based approach, focused on developing a fundamental understanding of nuclear fuels and materials to drive development of integrated nuclear fuel and materials technology. This science-based approach combines theory, experiments, and multiscale modeling and simulation to achieve a predictive understanding of relevant behaviors ranging from fuel fabrication processes (and their resulting fuel microstructures) through fuel/cladding performance under irradiation (in contrast to more empirical, observation-based approaches frequently used in fuel performance modeling and fuel qualification). The traditional scope of AFC includes the evaluation and development of multiple fuel forms to support two fuel cycle options: once-through and full recycle. The word “fuel” is used generically to include conventional fuels, transmutation targets, and any associated cladding or duct materials. The once-through fuel cycle addresses advanced light water reactor fuels with enhanced performance, extended burnup, and reduced waste generation. In fiscal year (FY) 2012, AFC’s scope expanded to include research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) for light water reactor (LWR) fuels with enhanced accident tolerance. Fuel fabrication activities include the development of innovative methods to enhance process efficiencies, reduce waste, and improve control over as-fabricated fuel microstructural properties to achieve desired in-reactor performance. Using modern modeling and simulation approaches, the objective is to predict fresh fuel properties given the feedstock characteristics and fabrication process parameters. The performance-related activities include small-scale, in-reactor, and out-of-reactor phenomenological testing (distinct from, but synergistic with, integral prototypic testing) and extensive, quantitative characterization (focusing on characterization of fuel and cladding materials at the scale of microstructure) both before and after testing. Larger-scale, prototypic experiments are conducted in concert with phenomenological testing to drive a Fuel Development and Qualification program, incorporating a fundamental understanding of fuel behavior performance characteristics. Then, using the tools developed under the productive science-based approach, fuels will be optimized to meet specific performance requirements, thereby minimizing the need to repeatedly perform large-scale, integral experiments over a wide parametric range as a means of experimental exploration. Two significant initiatives are underway within AFC. First, a gap analysis completed in early FY 2019 identified critical irradiation testing needs that are lacking within the national light water reactor (LWR) fuels testbed since the shutdown of the Halden Reactor in 2018. The identified gaps are for instrumented, prototypic testing of LWR fuels, especially under boiling water reactor conditions, ramp conditions, and conditions leading to fuel failure; these needs exist for supporting current LWR fuels and their possible extension to higher burnups, but are especially urgent relative to near-term development and qualification of accident-tolerant fuels. Recommendations that resulted from the Halden Gap Analysis focused on enhancements at Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) and Transient Reactor Test Facility (TREAT) to fill gaps in testing capabilities relative to these needs. Second, a concerted effort to develop and demonstrate a systematic approach to accelerating the development, testing, and qualification of new fuel systems has been initiated. This is highlighted by a test strategy that combines the considerable advances in multiscale, mechanistic fuel modeling of recent years with a MiniFuel separate effects test program in the High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) and a Fission Accelerated Steady-state Testing (FAST) semi-integral accelerated test program in ATR. This approach is being tested/demonstrated using the metallic fuel system, but if successful it is expected to be extensible to multiple fuel types and diverse applications. This document includes an overview of the NFCSC program, a definition of science-based development of nuclear fuels, near-term goals for Advanced LWR fuels (ALFs), and longer-term goals for Advanced Reactor Fuels (ARFs) RD&D. This includes the activities that will be conducted to achieve success toward the grand challenge, as well as the goals and milestones to be achieved over the next few decades of research and development. Long-term goals are based on the DOE Office of Nuclear Energ

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Recommendations for an Applicant to Calculate Activity Data for Greenhouse Gases Estimates

In 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) directed the NRC staff to address climate change issues and consider the impacts of the emissions of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) in its environmental reviews for major licensing actions (NRC 2009b). To implement this direction from the Commission, the staff issued guidance in 2011 and updated guidance in 2014 in Attachment 1 to Interim Staff Guidance COL/ESP-ISG-026 (NRC 2011; NRC 2014). This guidance provides a simpler method than the method described in RG 4.2 Rev. 3, that an applicant can use to meet the plant parameter envelope (PPE) value from the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for Licensing of New Nuclear Reactors (NR GEIS). NRC staff estimated the 97-year lifecycle GHG emissions from a reference 1000 megawatt electrical (MWe) light-water reactor (LWR) for various activities associated with construction, operation (including uranium fuel cycle), and decommissioning of nuclear power plants and presented the results in Appendix H of the NR GEIS. Appendix H of the NR GEIS includes estimates of direct emissions from construction equipment and emergency diesel engines in a nuclear facility and indirect emissions from workforce vehicular traffic, fuel transportation and the uranium fuel cycle. The NR GEIS Section 3.3 extended the estimates in Appendix H for the installation of two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors on the same site. Scaling factors were used to extrapolate the GHG emissions of a reference 1000 MWe reactor to a two-unit nuclear reactor plant (each reactor unit generating 1000 MWe). GHG emission estimates for building, operation, decommissioning and safe storage (SAFSTOR) for a two-unit nuclear reactor plant would be based on the plant’s physical size, and therefore estimates for these source categories were assumed to be twice the value of the reference 1000 MWe reactor. However, GHG emissions from the fuel cycle (including fuel transportation) were scaled upward by a factor of 3, based on plant efficiencies greater than the 80 percent assumption in Appendix H. Table 1 below shows the PPE emissions for two 1000 MWe nuclear reactors as provided in NR GEIS. The total GHG emissions for two 1000 MWe reactors were calculated as 2,534,000 metric tons (MT) of CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 (e)) based on a 97 year GHG life cycle period. The GHG emissions lifetime of 97 years for a reference nuclear reactor includes a 7-year building phase, 40 years of operation, 10 years of active decommissioning, and 40 years of SAFSTOR operations (NRC 2024). Construction equipment and vehicular traffic from workers commute would contribute to the GHG emissions during a 7-year building phase. Uranium fuel cycle, vehicular traffic, fuel and waste transportation, and testing of standby diesel generators would contribute to GHG emissions during the 40-year operations phase. While NRC’s regulations allow up to 60 years of reactor facility decommissioning, Appendix H estimated that most of the GHGs would occur over an estimated 10-year period during which to the licensee would engage in significant demolition and earth-moving activities, as discussed in Supplement 1 to NUREG-0586 (NRC 2002). Vehicular traffic by the workforce during a 40-year SAFSTOR period would additionally contribute GHG emissions. The carbon footprint for a 40-year SAFSTOR period was separately analyzed from the decommissioning activities as provided in Table YYYY-2 of the staff issued guidance in 2011 (NRC 2011).

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Fuel Assembly and Irradiation Parametric Study for Extended-Enrichment and High-Burnup Light-Water Reactor Spent Nuclear Fuel in Dry Storage Casks and Transportation Packages

There is an increased interest in operating commercial light-water reactors (LWRs) in the United States with improved economics that would result from longer fuel cycle lengths, fewer and shorter refueling outages, and fewer fuel assemblies requiring storage at the back end of the fuel cycle. To support this, fuel discharge burnups, as well as initial 235 U enrichments, must be higher than those used in current commercial LWRs. The typical upper limit considered for assembly average burnup in this report is 75 gigawatt-days (GWd) per metric ton of uranium (MTU), as opposed to the current typical upper bound of approximately 62 GWd/MTU. The upper limit considered for initial 235 U enrichment is 8 weight percent (8 wt %), as opposed to the current regulatory limit of 5 wt %. The enrichment range from 5 to 8 wt % is referred to in this report as extended enrichment . To investigate the effect of high burnup and extended enrichment conditions on dose rates and burnup credit for dry storage casks and transportation packages, a fuel assembly and irradiation parametric study was performed. The conclusions from this study will assist U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff in reviewing applications for dry storage casks and transportation packages that contain high-burnup and extended enrichment fuel.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

MPACT Safeguards Modeling: FY25 Update

Sandia National Laboratories develops and maintains several open-source software packages to support material accountancy analyses. This includes the Material Accountancy Performance Indicator Toolkit (MAPIT), the Fissile Facility Flow Modeler (F3M) and the Separation and Safeguards Performance Model Library (SSPM-L). MAPIT is responsible for performing statistical safeguards analyses on bulk and itemized data from nuclear fuel cycle facilities and can operate on real or synthetic data. MAPIT is the only open-source software for such analyses. F3M is a library of modules, built in MATLAB Simulink, that contain pre made blocks to represent different generic fuel cycle processes. These blocks can be used together in a modular fashion to represent and simulate nuclear fuel cycle processes with the goal of improving facility-level accountancy during the design phase. F3M is also an open-source library. Finally, the SSPM-L library is a series of completed models built from F3M. The library includes facility models such as a generic PUREX facility and a fuel fabrication facility. The SSPM-L library is not open source, but is available to collaborators with a relevant use case. These tools include modeling and simulation pipelines to simulate nuclear fuel cycle facilities and the underlying software needed to simulate measurement uncertainty and perform statistical analyses. Together, these tools can perform end-to-end nuclear material accountancy analyses. This report documents the various improvements made to these tools in FY25. Specifically, we added new statistical test, new statistical modeling capabilities, new fuel cycle facility models, and launched a new open-source model component library.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Design and Fabrication Options Trade Study for Metallic Fuel without Internal Sodium Bonding

Nuclear fuels using alloys of uranium, or metallic fuels, have many beneficial properties. The classical metallic fuel design uses a loose fitting cylindrical “slug” of fuel placed inside stainless-steel cladding tubes where the gap is filled with sodium. This sodium bond is liquid at operating temperature and conducts heat from the slug to the cladding, especially in early life before fuel swells into contact with the cladding. Despite the benefits of sodium bonding, there is a desire to develop metallic fuel technologies without it chiefly to reduce chemical reaction hazards in spent fuel storage from sodium fast reactors operating on once-through fuel cycles. Elimination of the sodium bond may also help unlock potential benefits for fuel fabrication, reactor neutronics, and compatibility with other types of reactors. Creating a sodium-free metallic fuel revolves around the problem of manufacturing fuel slug geometries which are in close contact with the cladding at beginning of life to facilitate heat transport while alleviating fuel-cladding chemical interactions (FCCI) at this interface and providing enough free volume to accommodate fuel swelling. Accelerating development and qualification of this fuel system will require careful selection of design and manufacturing options. To this end, a design trade-off study was performed to evaluate candidate options. Several design and manufacturing options were assessed, weighted, scored, and ranked with respect to fabrication, normal reactor operation, off-normal scenarios, and back-end considerations. This effort was performed both for “baseline” needs, which represented a once-through fuel cycle at temperatures and burnups known to be viable for sodium-bonded metallic fuel, and for “enhanced” needs to represent opportunities for closed fuel cycles and/or more aggressive temperatures/burnups. The outcomes of this study prioritized a baseline technology using U-Zr alloy with additives to mitigate FCCI, produced in annular slug geometry by continuous casting, clad in austenitic stainless-steel alloy, and followed by a final step to swage the cladding down to close the gap. This study prioritized an enhanced fuel technology using U-Mo alloy, also produced by continuous casting into an annular geometry, followed by coating/plating with an FCCI barrier on the slug, again with a final step to swage the cladding diameter down using oxide dispersion strengthened steel. It was noted that development of the enhanced fuel technology would entail more risk, thus U-Zr alloy was put forth as a backup to U-Mo if challenges are encountered with FCCI barriers, and advanced ferritic/martensitic steels are put forth as a backup to oxide dispersion strengthened steels if swaging and welding are found unworkable.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Comparative Analysis of Standard and Advanced USL Methodologies for Nuclear Criticality Safety

The American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society national standards 8.1 and 8.24 provide guidance on the requirements and recommendations for establishing confidence in the results of the computerized models used to support operation with fissionable materials. By design, the guidance is not prescriptive, leaving freedom to the analysts to determine how the various sources of uncertainties are to be statistically aggregated. Due to the involved use of statistics entangled with heuristic recipes, the resulting safety margins are often difficult to interpret. Also, these technical margins are augmented by additional administrative margins, which are required to ensure compliance with safety standards or regulations, eliminating the incentive to understand their differences. With the new resurgent wave of advanced nuclear systems, e.g., advanced reactors, fuel cycles, and fuel concepts, focused on economizing operation, there is a strong need to develop a clear understanding of the uncertainties and their consolidation methods to reduce them in manners that can be scientifically defended. In response, the current studies compare the analyses behind four notable methodologies for upper subcriticality limit estimation that have been documented in the nuclear criticality safety literature: the parametric, nonparametric, Whisper, and TSURFER methodologies. Specifically, the work offers a deep dive into the various assumptions of the noted methodologies, their adequacies, and their limitations to provide guidance on developing confidence for the emergent nuclear systems that are expected to be challenged by the scarcity of experimental data. Here, to limit the scope, the current work focuses on the application of these methodologies to criticality safety experiments, where the goal is to calculate a bias, a bias uncertainty, and a tolerance limit for k eff in support of determining an upper subcriticality limit for nuclear criticality safety.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗
DOE OSTI2022

Validation of NEAMS Tools Using MSRE Data

This report documents the benchmarks developed and performed for the tools and codes developed under the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program utilizing the MSRE experiment data. There are three focus areas explored in this work: fuel evolution, CFD, and system transient analyses. Fuel depletion is important for MSR reactor physics and fuel cycle analysis. Fuel depletion capability is currently being developed in the Griffin reactor physics code. To support this, a benchmark problem is developed using the MSRE data and an existing depletion code with flowing fuel analysis functionality (ADDER) to validate this new capability in Griffin. The ADDER calculation is compared with the TRITON-MSR results as well as the MSRE experimental data. This benchmark can be directly used to verify and validate the Griffin fuel depletion capability in future years. For CFD simulation, the MSRE CAD model is obtained from the Copenhagen Atomics and a mesh is generated for the MSRE inlet plenum. The Nek5000 code will be employed to find the flow distribution in the MSRE inlet plenum based on the mesh generated. For system analysis, a simple benchmark problem for three types of MSR system transients is developed. The SAM and SPECTRA codes are used to solve the simple problem, and the results from the two codes agree well. The SAM code is also employed to obtain the frequency response of the MSRE system at the 5 and 8 MWt power levels. The results agree well with the experiment measurements. These verification and validation efforts gives SAM users more confidence in MSR system transient simulations using SAM. Lastly, the SAM-Griffin Multiphysics coupling work is initiated. A simple one-way coupling of evaluating the precursor drift effect on the MSRE k-eff is demonstrated. This preliminary coupling work serves as the basis for future more complex Multiphysics simulation and modelling.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2023

Comparative Analysis of Confidence Metrics for Nuclear Criticality Safety

Nuclear criticality safety standards provide guidance on the requirements and recommendations to establish confidence in computerized model results used to support operation with fissionable materials. By design, the guidance is not prescriptive, leaving the analysts free to determine how various sources of uncertainties are to be statistically aggregated. This report compares the analyses and key assumptions behind four notable methodologies documented in the nuclear criticality safety literature: the parametric, nonparametric, Whisper, and TSURFER methodologies. Because of the involved use of statistics entangled with heuristic recipes, the results of these methodologies are often difficult to interpret. Also, they are augmented by additional large administrative margins, eliminating the incentive to understand their differences. With the new resurgent wave of advanced nuclear systems focused on economizing operation—including advanced reactors, fuel cycles, and fuel concepts—there is a strong need to develop a clear understanding of uncertainties and their fusion methodologies to reduce uncertainties in a scientifically defensible manner. This report offers a deep dive into the various assumptions of the four noted methodologies, their adequacy, and their limitations, to provide guidance on developing confidence for the emergent nuclear systems. These systems are expected to be challenged by the scarcity of experimental data.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗