Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “US DOE”

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 37 records · Page 2

NETL LCA Update US DOE Special Session, ACLCA 2024

This work was presented at the American Center for Life Cycle Assessment 2024 Conference in Snowbird, UT on September 24, 2024. The evaluation of the environmental advantages and disadvantages of energy technology and policy options requires the comparison of those options on a common basis, and as such, it needs to include not only obvious impacts like converting fuel to useful energy via combustion, but of infrastructure construction, extraction, processing and transportation of fuels, and transport of the final energy product to an end user. Further, it requires comparison across multiple categories of impacts, as single metric perspectives can miss important cross-media tradeoffs. At the Department of Energy’s National Energy Technology Laboratory, life cycle analysis is used as a tool and framework for undertaking a broad range of these types of evaluations. This overview will describe the NETL LCA work over the past year.

Jamieson, Matthew↗

Investigation and Analysis of Dolomite Dissolution in Variable Strength Systems Relevant to the WIPP

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) was opened in 1999 as a solution to the long-term disposal of the nation's nuclear defense-generated transuranic (TRU) waste. The salt beds were recommended as the ideal location because they are free from flowing fresh water, easily mined, impermeable, and geologically stable. However, for performance assessment modeling, release scenarios must be considered. The most likely release scenario was determined to be human intrusion leading to direct and/or long-term brine release (US DOE 1995, US DOE 1996, Perkins et al., 1999). The focus of this research is the Rustler formation because it is located above the WIPP and is the most transmissive layer (Perkins et al., 1999). Objective: To determine the effect of chelating ligands ( e.g. EDTA) on dissolution of dolomite in high ionic strength systems. Do brines impact dolomite dissolution and how is it affected by EDTA binding with cations? By varying the ionic strengths, different brine conditions can be simulated similar to those in and around the Culebra member and evaluate trends of dissolved Ca and Mg in the aqueous phase from the quantified data. Conclusions: <2% of dolomite dissolved over one week at pH 8.5. Greater dissolution occurred at higher ionic strength and in the presence of NaCl with approximately 0.4 vs. 0.9% of Mg removed from dolomite in 0.1 and 1.0 M Na. Further, 0.3 vs. 0.9% of Mg was removed from dolomite in 1.0 M IS CaCl{sub 2} versus NaCl. EDTA increased dissolution of dolomite at low ionic strength due to its strong complexation affinity for Ca/Mg with slightly greater removal of Ca than Mg. Significant differences were not observed at high ionic strength due to the presence of large concentrations of competing cations (Na, Ca, Mg). Slightly higher concentrations of Ca were removed from dolomite than Mg after one week, suggesting either incongruent dissolution or release through ion exchange of Ca from trace mineral impurities. Further, when EDTA was present, it may have increased Ca removal due to its greater complexation for Ca than Mg. Environmental Implications: High ionic strength brines and low ionic strength solutions with organic ligands increase dissolution of dolomite. Due to the long half-lives of radionuclides in the TRU waste, it may be important to consider the long term impact of dolomite dissolution for potential release scenarios.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Update to the Performance Assessment for the Savannah River Site Saltstone Disposal Facility - 20124

In 2019, Savannah River Remediation developed a revision to the performance assessment (PA) on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Savannah River Operations Office (SR) for the near-surface disposal of low-level waste at the Savannah River Site (SRS) Saltstone Disposal Facility (SDF). Soluble waste from SRS Tank Farms undergoes salt processing to remove cesium and other high activity constituents. The low-activity decontaminated salt solution (DSS) is then immobilized by mixing it into a cementitious waste form known as saltstone. After mixing, the saltstone is poured into leak-tight concrete vaults, known as saltstone disposal units (SDUs), where the waste form cures. By the time of facility closure, the SDF is expected to consist of 15 SDUs with a combined capacity of 1.06 E+09 L (280 Mgal) of cured saltstone. The facility operates under a Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS) from DOE and a permit from the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SCDHEC). Since the start of operations in 1990, the SDF has received almost 6.7 E+07 L (18 Mgal) of DSS, resulting in the safe disposal of 2.7 E+16 Bq (7.3 E+05 Ci) of activity. Due to the radioactive decay of short-lived contaminants, the total remaining activity in the disposed waste is estimated to be approximately 1.4 E+16 Bq (3.9 E+05 Ci), as of September 2018. The Disposal Authorization Statement requires a demonstration that the system of engineered and natural features of the disposal facility will limit releases from the facility and be protective of human health and the environment for at least the next 1,000 years. The long-term performance of the facility was evaluated under the requirements of the DoE's Radioactive Waste Management Manual (US DOE Manual 435.1-1). Simulations were performed to demonstrate that the disposal facility would meet performance objectives specified in the manual. The evaluation was based on numerical models that simulate the releases of contaminants from the saltstone waste form. Contaminants were transported through groundwater and air pathways to points of assessment to evaluate compliance. In addition, the potential consequences of an inadvertent human intrusion (IHI) were also evaluated. In accordance with the guidance and recommendations in US DoE's technical standard for DAS, deterministic and probabilistic analyses were performed to demonstrate the SDF system, which includes the engineered cover system, the SDUs, the waste form, and the natural features of the site, provides a reasonable expectation that saltstone disposal will meet performance objectives. Post-closure doses to future members of the public (MOP) were evaluated; dose estimates from the air pathway were well below the 1.0 E-04 Sv/yr (10 mrem/yr) performance objective within 1,000 years, and the calculated doses to the MOP from all exposure pathways, including the groundwater and air pathways, were well below the 2.5 E-04 Sv/yr (25 mrem/yr) performance objective within 1,000 years. Doses following an assumed intrusion event within the facility boundaries were well below the IHI performance objectives, where the acute IHI dose was below the acute IHI dose performance objective of 5.0 E-03 Sv (500 mrem) and the chronic IHI dose was below the chronic IHI dose performance objective of 1.0 E-03 Sv/yr (100 mrem/yr) within 1,000 years. (author)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Management of Fissionable Equivalent Mass Materials at ORNL - 20146

The US DOE manages an inventory of materials that contains a range of long-lived radioactive isotopes that were produced from the 1960's through the 1980's by irradiating targets in production reactors to produce special heavy isotopes for US DOE programmatic use, scientific research, and industrial and medical applications. Since the production reactors and enrichment facilities that produced many of these materials have been shut down, they are considered unique materials that are not likely to be produced again. ORNL uses these materials in US DoE's center for production, storage, and distribution of TRU isotopes (plutonium through californium) and other related nuclear research programs. ORNL also operates the High Flux Isotope Reactor, which provides a high neutron source for production of isotopes for medical, industrial, and nuclear research programs. As a result, ORNL has an inventory of radioisotopes that are being managed for ongoing research programs and being held for reuse because they have potential intrinsic value to US DOE. An initiative is underway at ORNL to better manage these materials, particularly focusing on those with high fissionable equivalent mass that could impact the ability to perform ongoing or new research projects. This paper describes the actions ORNL is taking to manage these inventories, many of which consist of TRU materials, through reuse and disposal. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Panel Session 120: Roundtable: Waste Management - Energy Facilities Contractor Operating Group (EFCOG WM)

This Roundtable focused on the WM EFCOG working group as they met to discuss a variety of issues of importance to US DOE waste management operations. The purpose of the WM EFCOG is to seek out and promote the best management and operating practices, cost effective technologies and disposal options for all waste streams generated at US DOE facilities whether destined for US DOE or commercial facilities. Each site representative provided a radioactive waste management lessons learned briefing. Panelists with presentations: Savannah River Site (SRS) Solid Waste Program Update (Kerri Crawford); Idaho Clean-up Project Status (Frederick Hughes); West Valley Demonstration Project Update - EFCOG Waste Management Working Group (John Rendall); Key Project Challenges and Successes (Kalli Shupe); EFCOG WMWG Challenging Waste Subgroup Update (Tammy Monday); CH TRU Difficult Waste Stream Processing Challenges (Daniel Pancake); Argonne Building 350 Clean-up Success Using Effective Work Control (Daniel Dilday); Problematic Waste Streams on the Oak Ridge Reservation (John Wrapp)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗