Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “nuclear policy”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Paths Forward for Nuclear Energy: Using a Nationwide Post-Stratified Hierarchical Model to Facilitate Matching of New Nuclear Technologies to Receptive Host Communities

This project was a collaboration between the University of Oklahoma (OU) and the University of Michigan (UMich). The overall objective of the project was to address a critical problem facing the siting of nuclear facilities, where there is no mechanism for incorporating public attitudes at a state and local level into decision-making. Utilizing recent advances in data modeling over local spatial scales, the research team created a state and county level map of public attitudes towards nuclear energy. Current estimates for public acceptance of nuclear technologies primarily exists on a national level, and sub-national estimates of public opinion about reactor siting, research facilities, transport routes, or storage and disposal facilities are very scarce. Model results from this project provide a systematic basis for technology developers to evaluate public acceptance across alternative siting options as a critical component for weighing potential benefit-cost tradeoffs for alternative paths to deploy new nuclear facilities. The project utilized data from the largest database of nuclear attitudes in the US, coupled with Census and elections-related data as well as data on social vulnerability and proximity to current nuclear facilities. In addition to modeling public support, the team also developed an interactive map to showcase results, using an online tool called Public and Local Attitudes about Nuclear Energy Technologies (PLANET). The tool allows technology developers and stakeholders to interact with the model results and better understand variation in support for nuclear facility siting on a state and county level. The interactive nature of the tool also allows users to analyze results in a targeted way, by comparing levels of support across different states and/or counties as desired.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Emerging Energy Market Analysis Initiative, Methodological Framework

Planning and operations of the electric power sector are undergoing radical changes. Climate change mitigation efforts have forced rapid changes to the technology mix. Technologies like wind and solar have experienced rapid growth, while investment in fossil sources has peaked or is declining. These foundational changes are forcing changes to energy systems. Demand-side adoption of electrified technologies, including electric vehicles, is changing load profiles and opening up new avenues for consumer participation in the power systems. The implications of an evolving power system pertain to more than environmental and technical dimensions. Changes to the generation mix and its consequent upstream and downstream impacts such as fuel production have significant and highly concentrated consequences on economies and employment. Shifts towards distributed (or decentralized) generating assets offer the potential to reshape economic and employment opportunities associated with the energy sector across space and socioeconomic groups. The Emerging Energy Market Analysis (EMA) initiative aims to identify sustainable, regionally acceptable, and high-value energy solutions that are secure and equitable. Unlike short-term, least-cost choices that can narrowly account for traditional options, EMA’s focus on emerging energy markets recognizes that new or adapted practices and technologies can alter the frontier of solutions and advance a community’s social, economic, and natural pathways. Such change requires a more comprehensive analysis of societal input, resources, capabilities, and infrastructure. These considerations lay the foundation for community decision-making models that are responsive to community values as well as the history and drivers. The result is a community-based decision and engagement model that will be valuable to decisionmakers and developers of advanced and emerging energy solutions, seeking a social license to operate prior to project development.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Assessment of Nuclear Energy to Support Negative Emission Technologies

The feasibility and performance of nuclear energy coupled with Negative Emission Technology (NET) processes were investigated in this report. Three overarching questions from nuclear NET systems guided this research: which NET would be able to use heat and/or electricity from nuclear power plants (NPPs); what is the performance and cost of a nuclear NET system; and what would be the market outlook for this system? Among the various NETs that are actively being developed, several were found to potentially benefit from coupling with an NPP via (1) large amounts of decarbonized and constant-output electricity; (2) free waste heat or cheap low-temperature heat; or (3) high-temperature heat. NPPs were found to be compatible with Direct Air Capture (DAC) systems, and a detailed techno-economic analysis of coupled NPP&DAC systems was performed. Preliminary analysis also indicated that biomass and water-based NETs are potentially compatible with NPPs, but further work is needed to quantify the performance of these nuclear NET systems. Design and performance analyses were completed for both liquid solvent DAC (L-DAC) and solid sorbent DAC (S-DAC) technologies. A 1.0-GWth NPP coupled with L-DAC and S-DAC was found to be able to capture 12–15 Mt CO 2 /yr and 1.0–1.5 Mt CO 2 /yr, respectively. While the L-DAC process enables much greater CO 2 capture than the S-DAC process when both are sized with a 1 GWth NPP, the NPP&L-DAC system considered also requires >2 GWth natural gas oxy-combustion to reach adequate temperature in the calciner. CO 2 generated from natural gas combustion is also captured as part of the calcination process, in addition to the CO 2 captured from air, resulting in overall CO 2 sequestration of close to 30% more than what is captured from air. The cost of carbon capture calculated with the levelized cost of DAC (LCOD) had a range of $\$170–260$/tCO 2 for NPP&L-DAC systems and a range of $\$650–680$/tCO 2 for NPP&S-DAC systems. For both DAC systems, the NPP provides economic benefit when compared to previous National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) studies of non-nuclear DAC systems, leading to reduction of LCOD by 5–7% for L-DAC, and 8–13% for S-DAC. For the NPP&DAC systems, a preliminary market analysis reviewed potential CO 2 market prices and eligibility for incentives. The estimated potential revenues for CO 2 capture (coming from federal incentive, CO 2 commodity markets, or offset market) is in the range of $\$170–979$ tCO 2 , and the results show that because of lower LCOD, the NPP&L-DAC process would be more attractive to a market than the NPP&S-DAC process. The large investment needed for NPP&DAC processes would require long-term certainty of sufficient market size, CO 2 prices, and incentives. Enabling NPPs to ramp DAC operation up or down based on electricity market price is not expected to significantly increase revenues of the NPP&DAC system. This is because the revenues from CO 2 sequestration are required to be very high to justify the deployment and continuous operation of the very expensive DAC technologies. In this analysis, several new research questions were uncovered, and follow-up analyses are recommended for further investigation, including a detailed feasibility study of NPP coupled with other NET systems such as biomass pyrolysis and gasification with carbon capture and storage, and seawater carbon capture.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

NRIC DOME Crane Trade Study and Recommendation

The National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) is a national program that was established as part of the Nuclear Energy Innovation Capabilities Act (NEICA). NRIC’s mission is to accelerate the demonstration and deployment of advanced nuclear energy through its mission to inspire stakeholders and the public, empower innovators, and deliver successful outcomes through efficient coordination of partners and resources. NRIC is designed to bridge the gap between research, development, and the marketplace to help convert some of the nation’s most promising advanced nuclear reactors into commercial applications. The NRIC Demonstration of Microreactor Experiments (DOME) facility, formerly known as Experimental Breeder Reactor II (EBR II), located at the Materials and Fuels Complex (MFC) at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is intended to allow industrial and other partners the opportunity to test Advanced Microreactors up to 20MW thermal power. The 75-ton capacity polar crane located in the EBR II facility was rendered inoperable to support planned facility demolition in 2015; small holes were flame cut in the girders; hoists and cables were removed; oil was drained from gear boxes; trolley drive, and then filled with absorbent; and the electrical and control umbilical’s were disconnected, removed and disposed. Subsequently, the decision was made to convert the EBR II facility into the DOME test bed.

21 - SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLAN↗
DOE OSTI2026

Supplement Analysis for the Proposed Shipment of High Burnup Research Cask to Idaho National Laboratory for Research and Development Purposes

DOE needs to continue with the HBUSFDP and transfer the HBURC to a facility capable of examination and testing of HBU SNF. These types of facilities do not exist at NAPS but are available at DOE national laboratories. The removal and eventual opening of the TN-32B research cask will provide DOE with the opportunity to gather data that will support continued safe storage of SNF at existing nuclear power plants, or a future federal consolidated storage facility. This effort will also help build public trust and confidence by demonstrating DOE’s ability to safely and securely transport commercial SNF using the certified Atlas rail consist.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI1988

Nuclear Safety [Vol. 29, No. 1, January-March 1988]

Nuclear Safety is a review journal that covers significant developments in the field of nuclear safety. Its scope includes the analysis and control of hazards associated with nuclear energy, operations involving fissionable materials, and the products of nuclear fission and their effects on the environment. Primary emphasis is on safety in reactor design, construction, and operation; however, the safety aspects of the entire fuel cycle, including fuel fabrication, spent-fuel processing, nuclear waste disposal, handling of radioisotopes, and environmental effects of these operations, are also treated. Table of Contents for this issue follows. THE CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT: 1 Core History and Nuclide Inventory of the Chernobyl Core at the Time of Accident by Gerald Kirchner and Cornelius C. Noack; GENERAL SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS: 6 Nonprescriptive Nuclear Safety Regulation: The Example of Loss of Offsite Power by M. W. Golay, V. P. Manno, and C. Vlahoplus, Jr., 20 Nuclear Power Safety Goals in Light of the Chernobyl Accident by C. Whipple and C. Starr; ACCIDENT ANALYSIS: 29 Containment Loads from Severe Accidents—U.S. Program by W. Kerr and M. K. Dey; PLANT SAFETY FEATURES: 36 Safety Characteristics of Modern High-Temperature Reactors: Focus on German Designs by W. Kröger, H. Nickel, and R. Schulten; ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS: 49 Radiation Hormesis and Nuclear Safety by C. C. Congdon; OPERATING EXPERIENCES: 58 Evaluation of Nonradiological Water Chemistry at Power Reactors by Harvey Zibulsky, James J. Kottan, Walter J. Pasciak, Mary Ann Castrogivanni, and Sujit Banerjee, 64 Reactor Shutdown Experience Compiled by J. W. Cletcher, 67 Operating U.S. Power Reactors Compiled by E. G. Silver; RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: 85 General Administrative Activities Compiled by E. G. Silver, 94 Reports, Standards, and Safety Guides by D. S. Queener, 100 Status of Power-Reactor Projects Undergoing Licensing Review Compiled by E. G. Silver, 103 Proposed Rule Changes as of Sept. 30, 1987; ANNOUNCEMENTS: 5 Northwestern University Short Course on Radiation Safety, 28 International Approach to Nuclear Safety (After Three-Mile Island and Chernobyl), 57 RPI Short Course on Modern Developments in Boiling Heat Transfer and Two-Phase Flow, 107 20th DOE/NRC Nuclear Air Cleaning Conference, 110 Third International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Power Plant Thermal Hydraulics and Operations, 108 The Authors, 111 Indexes to Nuclear Safety, Volume 28.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Techno-Economic Assessment of Data Center Load Demand Powered by Small Modular Reactors and Distributed Energy Resources

The rapid increase in data center energy demand, driven by AI and large-scale data processing, poses significant challenges to global energy infrastructure. Data centers require substantial and reliable energy for continuous operations and high-performance computing. Current electrical grids face issues such as transmission bottlenecks and aging infrastructure, making it difficult to meet these demands. Integrating inverter-based-resources (IBRs) like solar and wind presents both opportunities and challenges due to their intermittent nature. Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) offer a promising solution with their enhanced safety, modularity, reliability, and scalability, providing consistent base load power ideal for data center operations. This study presents a comprehensive techno-economic assessment of powering data center load demand using a combination of SMRs and IBRs with grid-connected and islanded mode. This study utilized Idaho National Laboratory’s (INL) HPC data center hourly load profiles and Xendee microgrid optimization platform to conduct the analysis. In this configuration, SMRs serves as the primary base load power source, consistently providing a steady supply of electricity necessary to meet the minimum load demand of the data center with support from the IBRs. Key performance indicators such as Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE), Net Present Value (NPV) has been calculated to assess the economic feasibility. The findings from this research will underscore the strategic benefits of integrating SMR plant with DERs – particularly for critical infrastructure load such as data centers.

14 - SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Flexible Grid Interconnections

Key Considerations: - Long-term coordination and collaboration with utilities and ISOs may provide mutual benefits and support flexible interconnectivity. - Onsite storage and energy production can reduce load fluctuations and support grid resilience in the future. - Geography and resource availability can impact energy demand and grid flexibility.

29 - ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2020

A Systematic Evidence Based Performance Approach to Regulation of Nuclear Sites in England and Wales - 20058

The Environment Agency for England has developed a systematic evidence-based approach to pursue our strategic environmental objectives for the regulation of nuclear sites. We use an annual evidence review process to ensure effective and efficient targeting of limited resources to achieve those objectives. Over the last 8 years, we have been developing and refining this approach to ensure risk-based and value driven regulation. The approach comprises nuclear site and nuclear sector review processes known as Site Environment Review (SER) and Nuclear Environment Review (NER). This approach complements our regulation of nuclear site permit holders under the Environmental Permitting Regulations (EPR). We deliver our regulation of nuclear sites in England and Wales alongside the Office for Nuclear Regulation. The SER process involves the lead regulator for each nuclear site assessing the permit holder's environmental performance across 14 themes, set within the context of the site's main activities and associated waste disposals. Our themes include environmental leadership, resources and climate change, radioactive waste management, facility management and decommissioning, groundwater, and environmental radiological protection. We use evidence from site inspections and working within our subject matter groups to grade current and predicted future environmental performance. We are particularly interested in sustainability and the application of Best Available Techniques (BAT) to prevent the creation, and minimise the disposal, of radioactive wastes. We use risk analysis (strengths, weaknesses, threats and opportunities) to examine performance against our strategic environmental objectives, which are set out, in our 5-year Nuclear Delivery Plan (NDP). The output supports the targeting of our resources at each nuclear site. We consult the relevant permit holders on the SER priorities and use their feedback to refine our plans. We expect all permit holders to take account of our priorities when considering their own programmes of work, objectives and plans. The NER process brings together what we learn and achieve through regulation across the sector. It provides input to planning priorities, supported by qualitative and semi-quantitative evidence. It covers the 28 nuclear sites in England and Wales and spans the same 14 environmental themes. During the process we collate, compile and summarise evidence from the SERs and other sources such as inspection reports and evidence from our other nuclear work programmes. The output is the NER annual report. This provides a snapshot of the status of the nuclear sector and gives insights to enable us to regulate more efficiently and effectively. It also takes account of cross-cutting issues and risks such as changes in international standards, domestic policy, regulatory framework, domestic standards and guidance, learning from experience such as incidents, events and good practice, and innovation, research and development. It provides graphics that illustrate the grading of environmental performance for the nuclear sector across the fourteen environmental themes. This analysis allows benchmarking of nuclear site's environmental performance and the visualisation provides a convenient comparison of performance across themes, sites, and over time. We use this intelligence to inform our investment in training and development of our staff, and our cross-cutting engagement on strategic issues with government, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) and other corporate organisations. Adopting this approach can provide benefits with organisational reputation, stakeholder participation and ensuring value from the public investment. This paper describes the history of the SER/NER process, a selection of outputs from the process and ideas for improvement. The paper will be of interest to other regulators and organisations across the world that are interested in supporting continuous improvement. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Reassessing Double-Ended Guillotine Break Requirements: Evidence-Based Analysis of Regulatory Assumptions After Five Decades of Nuclear Operation

After five decades of nuclear power operation encompassing more than 20,000 reactor-years across 35 countries and 647 reactors, zero double-ended guillotine breaks (DEGBs) have been documented in commercial reactor coolant systems—despite DEGB being the fundamental design-basis assumption driving Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) sizing, structural protection requirements, and containment design specifications. This report examines the basis for DEGB requirements in nuclear power plant design. The DEGB postulate assumes the instantaneous, complete circumferential severance of the largest diameter pipes in reactor coolant systems, driving major design requirements under 10 Code of Federal Regulations 50.46, General Design Criterion 4 and containment design specifications. The United States (4,880 reactor-years) and France (2,505 reactor-years) contribute the largest operational datasets. Probabilistic assessments estimate direct DEGB occurrence probabilities with extremely low event frequencies, far below the 10-5/reactor-year thresholds typically used to define non-credible events in nuclear-safety analyses; i.e., events with probability this low fall into beyond-design-basis events. Current material-science knowledge demonstrates that the ductile steel materials used in nuclear piping systems exhibit stable crack-growth behavior fundamentally incompatible with instantaneous severance. International regulatory experience, particularly Germany’s comprehensive break-preclusion implementation, and successful leak-before-break (LBB) applications in almost all of U.S. pressurized water reactor units validate that alternatives can maintain safety performance while reducing economic burden. Current DEGB protection systems impose estimated lifetime costs of hundreds of millions of dollars per unit, over the life of a plant across the nuclear industry (including ongoing costs), representing substantial resource allocation toward scenarios with extremely low probability. Although this report acknowledges uncertainties regarding long-term aging effects, potential synergistic degradation mechanisms, and site-specific seismic considerations that warrant continued evaluation as regulatory policy evolves, there remains no documented evidence that a DEGB has occurred as a consequence of the conditions or mechanisms described in this report. This report acknowledges the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC’s) recent efforts—outlined in the draft Interim Staff Guidance (ISG) NRC-DSS-ISG-2025-XX (“Treatment of Certain Loss-of-Coolant Accident Locations as Beyond-Design-Basis Accidents Draft Interim Staff Guidance”)—to reduce overly conservative requirements for large-break loss of coolant accidents through technical justifications and exemptions. However, extensive operating experience and validated methodologies—such as LBB and in-service inspection programs—demonstrate that the probability of a DEGB in reactor coolant-loop piping is extremely low, even under seismic conditions. The authors and reviewers of this report recommend that DEGB be removed as a design-basis event through formal rulemaking, rather than case-by-case exemptions, to better reflect credible failure modes, align with current data, and align with modern, risk-informed safety analysis.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Agn-201 Digital Twin

This is the repository for all code related to the AGN-201 Nuclear Reactor Digital Twin at Idaho State University. The goal of this code repository is to consolidate all pieces required to run the AGN-201 Digital Twin in the [DeepLynx](https://github.com/idaholab/Deep-Lynx) ecosystem. This is the first successfully launched digital twin of a fissile nuclear reactor that we are aware of. While the code is not complex, the problems of networking, policy, and initial groundwork were significant to overcome.

Darrington, JohnW.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Model MC&A for Pebble Bed Reactors (Technical Direction No. 5 Task 2.6 Letter Report)

In preparation for non-light water reactor (non-LWR) activities, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff are advancing risk-informed and performance-based licensing approaches and addressing key policy issues. One non-LWR reactor concept is a pebble bed reactor (PBR). This reactor design uses spherical fuel elements (pebbles) that are continually added to and removed from the reactor core. The free movement of the fuel in this design presents new challenges for material control and accounting (MC&A) programs. Therefore, an assessment of MC&A program features and measures for a PBR was performed to help NRC staff develop associated MC&A regulations or regulatory guides. The current regulatory framework for non-LWR fuel cycles excludes support for licensing reviews for MC&A programs for PBRs. Licensing reviews of an MC&A program for PBRs can be facilitated by (1) a model MC&A program for a PBR based on identification and assessment of MC&A program features and recommended measures for a reference PBR and (2) a methodology for assessing MC&A performance that can help assess different MC&A program features and measures. This report supports the NRC’s non-LWR Vision and Strategy Near-Term Implementation Action Plans.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Evolution of Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning at MESA

Early on in 2018 Sandia recognized the Microsystems Engineering, Science and Applications (MESA) Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning capability to be unpredictable, inconsistent, reactive, and unable to provide strong linkage to the sponsor's needs. The impetus for this report is to share learnings from MESA's journey towards maturing this capability. This report describes re-building the foundational elements of MESA's Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning capability using a risk-based, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) approach. To begin, MESA's decades-old Piano Chart + Ad Hoc Hybrid Methodology is described with a narrative of its strengths and weaknesses. Then its replacement, the MCDA /Analytical Hierarchy Process, is introduced with a discussion of its strengths and weaknesses. To generate a realistic Programmatic Asset Lifecycle Planning budget outlook, MESA used its rolling 20-year Extended Life Program Plan (MELPP) as a baseline. The new MCDA risk-based prioritization methodology implements DOE/NNSA guidelines for prioritization of DOE activities and provides a reliable, structured framework for combining expert judgement and stakeholder preferences according to an established scientific technique. An in-house Hybrid Decision Support System (HDSS) software application was developed to facilitate production of several key deliverables. The application enables analysis of the prioritization decisions with charts to display and provide linkage of MESA's funding requests to the stakeholders' priorities, strategic objectives, nuclear deterrence programs, MESA priorities, and much more.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Acceptance Criteria Part B: LMQXFA cold mass and cryo-assembly

This document specifies the acceptance criteria for the LMQXFA cold mass and cryoassembly. If all the requirements specified in this document are met, then the U.S. HL-LHC AUP LMQXFA and LQXFA deliverables will be accepted by Please note that the definition of threshold as it is being used by the American contribution is not the same as objective, according to the HL-LHC quality policy.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Uncovering hidden market opportunities for advanced nuclear reactors

Decarbonizing to meet aggressive climate change mitigation targets requires energy transition within all sectors. In the industrial sector, global emissions will need to decrease by 65–90% by 2050 to avert warming greater than 1.5°C (Pörtner et al., 2022). Recent U.S. laws, including the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), Defense Production Act, Creating Helpful Incentives to Produce Semiconductors (or CHIPS), state programs, and other recent laws, have clean energy requirements and provide financial incentives to accelerate the use of clean energy technologies in the industrial sector. These new laws include supporting mechanisms with direct financial support for nuclear power (e.g., advanced reactor development and hydrogen production). However, advanced nuclear could also gain these financial benefits by coupling with low-carbon industrial projects. For example, microreactors could supply low-carbon energy to producers of critical metals that (1) are eligible to receive investment and production tax credits and favorable loans, and (2) the low-carbon product could gain preference in emerging markets for green products.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Economic Impact of Closing the Nuclear Fuel Cycle

This report estimates the economic impact of closing the United States nuclear fuel cycle. Several different fuel cycle scenarios are analyzed. These scenarios include a baseline analysis of the existing fuel cycle conditions, a hypothetical scenario where all fuel cycle operations are preformed domestically, a scenario where all reactors are replaced with sodium fast reactors, and finally a scenario that uses a mix of fast reactors and light water reactors operating on mixed oxide fuel. Each scenario modeled is assumed to be operating at equilibrium and producing electricity at a 100 GWe-yr capacity. Impacts are calculated for normal operations and do not include construction or infrastructure expansion impacts.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗