SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Panel presentation and discussion on "Nuclear Energy for Industrial Uses: Bridging the Gap." This presentation will introduce the motivation for extended use of nuclear energy and will provide brief insight into historical experience and current programs on the topic.
To assess the cost competitiveness of microreactors, a new tool integrating reactor design calculations with economic models was developed. Using detailed cost data and design specifications from the MARVEL project (85 kWth), the tool estimates costs for a more representative commercial microreactor (20 MWth). The LCOE for a 20 MWth MARVEL-like reactor is estimated at $236/MWh, with an overnight cost of about $12,000/kW (excluding fuel). Mass production could reduce costs by 70%, making the 10th unit cost around $3,700/kWe, which is economically competitive. The new neutronics-economics coupling tool also enables studying the impact of the design parameters on the economic figures of merit. The impact of changing the enrichment and reactor capacity on the LCOE has been studied.
The economic feasibility of nuclear microreactors will depend on minimizing operating costs through advancements in autonomous control, especially when these microreactors are operating alongside other types of energy systems (e.g., renewable energy). This study explores the application of deep reinforcement learning (RL) for real-time drum control in microreactors, exploring performance in regard to load-following scenarios. By leveraging a point kinetics model with thermal and xenon feedback, we first establish a baseline using a single-output RL agent, then compare it against a traditional proportional–integral–derivative (PID) controller. This study demonstrates that RL controllers, including both single- and multi-agent RL (MARL) frameworks, can achieve similar or even superior load-following performance as traditional PID control across a range of load-following scenarios. In short transients, the RL agent was able to reduce the tracking error rate in comparison to PID by one half to one third. Over extended 300-minute load-following scenarios in which xenon feedback becomes a dominant factor, PID maintained better accuracy, but RL still remained within a 1% error margin despite being trained only on short-duration scenarios. This highlights RL’s strong ability to generalize and extrapolate to longer, more complex transients, affording substantial reductions in training costs and reduced overfitting. Furthermore, when control was extended to multiple drums, MARL enabled independent drum control as well as maintained reactor symmetry constraints without sacrificing performance---an objective that standard single-agent RL could not learn. We also found that, as increasing levels of Gaussian noise were added to the power measurements, the RL controllers were able to maintain lower error rates than PID, and to do so with at least 10% and upwards of 150% less control effort. These findings illustrate RL's potential for autonomous nuclear reactor control, laying the groundwork for future integration into high-fidelity simulations and experimental validation efforts.
Fire protection systems (FPSs) and features are installed in U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hazard Category 1, 2, or 3 nuclear facilities to protect property (maximum possible fire loss thresholds), life, and nuclear safety (i.e., structures, systems, and components). These FPSs and features are designed and maintained in accordance with the prescriptive guidance provided in applicable building codes and National Fire Protection Association codes and standards. Management, operations, and maintenance activities of FPSs involve significant effort. A DOE facility’s documented safety analysis or other safety basis document could also rely on FPSs to provide either a safety significant or safety class function to mitigate fire hazards and minimize radiological consequences. In some cases, the designation of safety significant or safety class may be determined to provide a layer of defense-in-depth to minimize nuclear safety risks independent of the fire risk. DOE standards allow the use of performance-based design alternatives developed by the fire industry but do not consider the defense-in-depth layers of protection provided in DOE facilities to prevent or mitigate the risks associated with unintended release of radioactive materials into the environment. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory developed a decision-making methodology tailored for DOE non-reactor nuclear facilities to manage FPSs and features by integrating nuclear safety risk insights into a performance-based analysis. This risk-informed, performance-based (RIPB) methodology can be used to provide the technical basis for classifying an FPS as safety class and safety significant, tailoring administrative controls (e.g., technical safety requirements), and ranking the importance of FPSs to prioritize maintenance, upgrades, and replacement activities. The RIPB methodology is a graded approach to inform DOE facility owners and Fire Protection Program managers of the most risk-significant FPSs and equipment, and those systems would be cost-beneficial to relax rigor if there is a need to re-design the FPS coverage or deviate from DOE and National Fire Protection Association standards for those systems that would be less significant. This paper describes the framework used to develop the RIPB methodology and the outcome of implementing this methodology in a use-case nuclear facility. This paper also discusses the impact to DOE policies and standards and the safety margins and defense-in-depth measures credited in nuclear safety assessments in a facility’s documented safety analysis and the benefits of implementing an RIPB methodology in lieu of a prescriptive method to comply with fire protection requirements.
This presentation summarizes the challenge of decarbonizing the last 10%" of the power system and discusses six strategies for addressing that challenge. This presentation was given at the IRA, BIL, and the Future of Energy: A Summit to Support State Implementation" workshop in Washington, D.C., in April 2024.
There is an emerging consciousness in India of the importance of nuclear security and safety. Motivated by a combination of rapid growth in its civil nuclear sector, heightened scrutiny of recent nuclear accidents around the world, and the deteriorating regional security environment, India has pushed to adopt measures to strengthen and enhance its nuclear security and safety governance structures. India recognizes that the various recent global nuclear security initiatives are in its own best interest and has been an enthusiastic participant in the Nuclear Security Summit process. Today, India demonstrates a greater willingness to showcase its nuclear security arrangements before the public and has undertaken many institutional, legal, and operational reforms to maintain international regime compliance. This study takes a comprehensive look at India's approach to nuclear security and critically examines the physical security measures the country has put in place. Particular focus is placed on the evolution and strengths, as well as weaknesses, of the country's nuclear security institutions, instruments, practices, and culture. Given that the strengthening of India's nuclear security governance is an ongoing endeavor, the paper also puts forward a number of policy recommendations.
Beginning in FY20, SRNL was funded by the National Nuclear Security Administration’s Office of Defense Nuclear Non-Proliferation Research and Development to develop a prototype natural language processing/natural language understating machine learning-based modeling and analysis pipeline to extract and forecast events of interest from massive open data sources. The working hypothesis within the approach is that contextual shifts in key words and phrases act as indicators of events of interest over time. Therefore, by identifying points in time where contextual shifts occur, events of interest can be extracted along with explicit and implicit connections of entities and activities. The development of the preliminary prototype pipeline proved successful, meriting further testing of the pipeline on more broad topical domains and in a worldwide data environment. Therefore, SRNL, in collaboration with the Sanghani Center for Artificial Intelligence and Data Analytics at Virginia Tech, have continued development with a test case of identifying events of interest related to worldwide state-sponsored civil nuclear power in open data sources. In the first year of this follow-on effort, the team has curated domain-specific data corpuses using an automated scheme and applied the modeling and analysis pipeline. This robust, focused, and efficient approach consists of an ensemble of analyses applied to time dependent word embedding models that are trained on the data corpuses. In this report, the team has demonstrated the capability of the existing pipeline (as development has continued in parallel) by exploring several specific case-studies centered around Rosatom’s international activities regarding the planning, construction, operation, and/or shutdown of nuclear reactors. A basic timeline events has been generated by manually cataloging known “milestone” events that have occurred at reactors in Turkey, Finland, Hungary, and Egypt and compared with the output of the modeling pipeline. In this approach, the team has characterized the lead time using the prototype pipeline, as well as the ability to capture relevant information, which proved 100% successful. A deep dive example of the Akkuyu reactor (Turkey) is presented that shows the breadth of information that can be captured using the approach. In this case study, events were extracted pertaining to the planning/construction of Akkuyu including protests from the population, information campaigns in response to the protests, forged regulatory documents and lawsuits, budgetary/shareholder information, geopolitical tensions, and the various construction milestones. This has demonstrated the pipeline’s utility as a research aid or real-time event extraction tool, where summary-level information and detailed text extractions from millions of articles or Tweets across long time periods can be generated with significantly less effort than current techniques.
Supporting Data can be downloaded at: https://gain.inl.gov/content/uploads/4/2024/06/INL-RPT-24-77048-R1.xlsx Nuclear energy is a critical cornerstone of the current United States clean energy supply and may play a larger role in the future in support of a transition to a net-zero economy. The current fleet of nuclear reactors predominantly consists of large light-water reactors (LWRs), while many of the reactor designs under consideration are smaller and/or different technologies. Because these new designs have not yet been built, there is a high degree of uncertainty associated with their cost. This complicates energy-planning efforts because cost projections are not always standardized, consistent, and centralized in an easily accessible location. To help support energy planning in the US, this report provides advanced nuclear cost ranges using a transparent methodology along with other relevant information that can be used to help support decision making and energy planning. The purpose of this work was to conduct a methodical process for cost evaluation using only public information that was vetted with the end-goal to provide reference cost projections for nuclear energy. To provide a solid basis for these values, the approach and assumptions are explicitly laid out throughout the report allowing any user of the data to challenge or reconsider them. Because future US nuclear-reactor costs are still unknown due to little recent observed data, the report opted to compile a comprehensive list of bottom-up estimates and evaluate averages/trends within the data to identify reference ranges. This was deemed preferable to opining on the robustness or validity of one cost estimation versus another. To that end, the work evaluated thousands of lines of cost subaccounts from several bottom-up cost estimates. A wide variety of different reactor types captured in the data are of various sizes and technologies. Some of these reactors will be representative of advanced reactors under development while others will not. Thus, the results here are dependent on the data that are available and the accuracy of the estimates that are used. Each bottom-up estimate was reviewed to determine whether it was complete. Incomplete data sets were corrected to ensure an adequate basis of cross-comparison. The report is not without limitations and should be interpreted as an initial step to develop cost ranges for nuclear technology. Ultimately, future work can build upon the methodology with refined cost estimates to reduce uncertainty. US-based overnight capital cost (OCC) estimates were compiled from extensive data sets into ranges for both large and small reactor sizes for 2030. To project the cost declines over time, learning rates were sampled from literature sources. No SMRs were previously built; hence, learning rates based on bottom-up approaches (e.g., by quantifying the impact stemming from fabrication of different components, modular work, site construction, commissioning) were prioritized. For larger reactors, actual learning rates from deployments were used to project future costs (adjusted to account for standardization or lack thereof between designs). Other costs included are fixed and variable operations and maintenance costs. The final variables were capacity factors and ramp rates to support energy planning.
The completion of Vogtle Units 3 and 4, despite significant cost and schedule overruns, a major bankruptcy, and a pandemic, demonstrates that the U.S. nuclear industry can still develop new supply chains, train a highly skilled workforce, and build large nuclear power plants. Vogtle, being a first-of-a-kind (FOAK) plant, faced overruns, but FOAK overruns can decrease with more deployments through a combination of design standardization and modularization, transferring and implementing lessons learned between consecutive projects, and innovation. This report quantifies the potential cost and schedule reductions in future AP1000 plants in the US and identifies the barriers in achieving those reductions. It starts with a summary and analysis of the cost and construction timeline data for AP1000 plants that started construction in the United States (Vogtle) and China. Motivated by the steep schedule reductions from the first to second series of AP1000 plants in China, a cost reduction model was developed to quantify potential reductions for future AP1000 builds in the US. Results show that within about 3 more builds, AP1000s can become economically attractive in large markets in the U.S., without leveraging the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) or Production Tax Credit (PTC), and much sooner if these tax credits are available. Importantly the financial risks for future AP1000 builds in the US might be much smaller than observed in the FOAK plants. The study also identifies various barriers for future builds including the availability of a supply chain and a skilled workforce, and emphasizes the importance of making investments to gather and implement lessons learned between consecutive projects.
This research explores the colocation of nuclear power plants (NPPs) with industrial applications. Three existing industrial sites were considered to demonstrate the siting process and illuminate technological gaps for future work. The three applications demonstrated for colocation here are a petroleum refinery, a methanol production plant, and a pulp and paper plant. This study uses a modified version of the EPRI siting criteria to explore the geological and demographic characteristics of the location of the current industrial site, as well as exploring external hazards from the industrial plant and its surrounding land use. Data was collected from public databases to estimate site characteristics. We then discuss how the site characteristics may impact the ability to colocate an NPP with an industrial application. The application site and 5 additional sites were explored for each application to give a general indication of the siting implications for an NPP in each area. The hazards for each industrial application was also explored to determine how colocation may impact reactor safety. The following gaps have been identified and should be explored in future research on colocation of NPPs with petroleum refineries, methanol plants, and pulp and paper plants: - There is a variety of industrial use, hazards, and pipelines in the surrounding area. A more thorough review of these hazards should be considered for colocation. - In general, the whole region around some applications seems to have softer soil, with implications for large site preparation costs. Further site investigations should prioritize looking into the geotechnical conditions. - Applications along coastlines are susceptible to flooding and hurricanes. The benefits of colocation should be weighed against the potential design implications. - The benefits of natural gas pipeline infrastructure in place should be explored further. If heat supply from the NPP is not required or not feasible due to the distance between the NPP and the application, there may be an opportunity to supply hydrogen to the plant through an existing pipeline. - Because there are several collocated industrial plants in the regions for the refinery and methanol plant, the benefits of sharing resources from the NPP should be explored further. This may open up additional sites for colocation. The following knowledge gaps were identified for the colocation of NPPs with these three industries, and industrial applications in general. These gaps are: - While the STAND tool contains many important characteristics for the reactor siting process, it is not calibrated for the colocation of NPPs with industrial facilities. - There are aspects of both the NPP and industrial application that need to be quantified for a siting analysis. Particularly, we need to understand the water intake requirements for NPPs and each application. - Further work may focus on adapting the STAND site comparison methodology to comparison of sites for co-location. This will involve using the data documented in this report as a starting point and performing a comprehensive and quantitative comparison. - Without spending significant resources, it would be impossible to gather data for each site to evaluate all aspects of siting. One approach to finding data and understanding its implications to siting is looking at FSARs for existing plants. For example, most sites considered in this study have small Vs30 values, indicating soft soil. However, there are NPPs located in the vicinity of most of the sites (e.g., Waterford Steam Electric Station near New Orleans) and reviewing available site characteristics and geotechnical data for these NPPs, might provide further information for siting. - The siting analysis in this study indicates that colocation of the NPP with the industrial site could be difficult based on external hazards, cooling requirements, weather, or population. We need to determine the impact of distance between the two facilities on cost and quality of energy transport. - This study did not touch on socioeconomic impacts for NPP colocation with industrial facilities. The input-output analysis methodology could be applied to the communities referenced in this study to determine the socioeconomic impact of these projects. - Similarly, the impacts of colocation on emergency planning was not explored in this study. The impacts on emergency planning infrastructure are somewhat related to the socioeconomic impacts, and could be explored using a similar methodology. - This study also did not address physical and cybersecurity, which will be important aspects of co-location [ref] . Cybersecurity will be important, regardless of the distance, but physical security will be important if the facilities are located very closely. Physical security might also be important for the steam lines between the plants, unless they are determined to be non-safety significant. - In many site l
This presentation covers IES modeling and simulation tools, with a specific focus on how physical modeling is linked to technoeconomic analysis.
This research explores the colocation of nuclear power plants (NPPs) with industrial applications. Three existing industrial sites were considered to demonstrate the siting process and illuminate technological gaps for future work. The three applications demonstrated for colocation here are a petroleum refinery, a methanol production plant, and a pulp and paper plant. This study uses a modified version of the EPRI siting criteria to explore the geological and demographic characteristics of the location of the current industrial site, as well as exploring external hazards from the industrial plant and its surrounding land use. Data was collected from public databases to estimate site characteristics. We then discuss how the site characteristics may impact the ability to colocate an NPP with an industrial application. The application site and 5 additional sites were explored for each application to give a general indication of the siting implications for an NPP in each area. The hazards for each industrial application was also explored to determine how colocation may impact reactor safety. The following gaps have been identified and should be explored in future research on colocation of NPPs with petroleum refineries, methanol plants, and pulp and paper plants: - There is a variety of industrial use, hazards, and pipelines in the surrounding area. A more thorough review of these hazards should be considered for colocation. - In general, the whole region around some applications seems to have softer soil, with implications for large site preparation costs. Further site investigations should prioritize looking into the geotechnical conditions. - Applications along coastlines are susceptible to flooding and hurricanes. The benefits of colocation should be weighed against the potential design implications. - The benefits of natural gas pipeline infrastructure in place should be explored further. If heat supply from the NPP is not required or not feasible due to the distance between the NPP and the application, there may be an opportunity to supply hydrogen to the plant through an existing pipeline. - Because there are several collocated industrial plants in the regions for the refinery and methanol plant, the benefits of sharing resources from the NPP should be explored further. This may open up additional sites for colocation. The following knowledge gaps were identified for the colocation of NPPs with these three industries, and industrial applications in general. These gaps are: - While the STAND tool contains many important characteristics for the reactor siting process, it is not calibrated for the colocation of NPPs with industrial facilities. - There are aspects of both the NPP and industrial application that need to be quantified for a siting analysis. Particularly, we need to understand the water intake requirements for NPPs and each application. - Further work may focus on adapting the STAND site comparison methodology to comparison of sites for co-location. This will involve using the data documented in this report as a starting point and performing a comprehensive and quantitative comparison. - Without spending significant resources, it would be impossible to gather data for each site to evaluate all aspects of siting. One approach to finding data and understanding its implications to siting is looking at FSARs for existing plants. For example, most sites considered in this study have small Vs30 values, indicating soft soil. However, there are NPPs located in the vicinity of most of the sites (e.g., Waterford Steam Electric Station near New Orleans) and reviewing available site characteristics and geotechnical data for these NPPs, might provide further information for siting. - The siting analysis in this study indicates that colocation of the NPP with the industrial site could be difficult based on external hazards, cooling requirements, weather, or population. We need to determine the impact of distance between the two facilities on cost and quality of energy transport. - This study did not touch on socioeconomic impacts for NPP colocation with industrial facilities. The input-output analysis methodology could be applied to the communities referenced in this study to determine the socioeconomic impact of these projects. - Similarly, the impacts of colocation on emergency planning was not explored in this study. The impacts on emergency planning infrastructure are somewhat related to the socioeconomic impacts, and could be explored using a similar methodology. - This study also did not address physical and cybersecurity, which will be important aspects of co-location [ref] . Cybersecurity will be important, regardless of the distance, but physical security will be important if the facilities are located very closely. Physical security might also be important for the steam lines between the plants, unless they are determined to be non-safety significant. - In many site l
Microreactors represent an emerging innovation in the nuclear industry; yet have been overshadowed by their high capital costs. With the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), new opportunities have emerged to improve the economics of microreactor systems. This work examines liquid metal batteries (LMB) as a value-adding technology as part of microreactor-LMB systems within three U.S. electricity markets: ERCOT, PJM, and MISO. Our investigation considers key uncertainties: the cost of microreactors, the performance of LMBs, and the eligible tax credit levels. To this end, we use a dispatch optimization to trace not only the changes in system economics but also to provide a granular picture of energy delivery within the systems. We find that even with favorable costs for microreactors, significant regional variations in the project sizing and returns exist across the markets. Our heuristic method identifies their non-electric application potentials beyond electricity and technical requirements to maximize returns. The results suggest that 12–39 % of reactor heat could be cost-effectively diverted to produce more valuable by-products in U.S. markets. Including the impacts of tax credits, we establish the outcomes of each provision with varying rates. Coupling an LMB to a microreactor consistently improves the net present value of a microreactor compared to its standalone operation. In conclusion, for reasonable assumed conditions, we quantify a heterogeneous impact of round-trip efficiency (RTE) and extended LMB service life across the three markets—a one-year extension in LMB service life is roughly equivalent to a 2.11 % improvement in RTE for ERCOT, 1.16 % for PJM, and 1.04 % for MISO.
Abstract not provided.
Navigating through the world of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in nuclear reactors and their Instrumentation and Control (I&C) systems demands a careful, deliberate journey. AI’s capability to manage massive datasets and streamline control systems has indeed carved out a significant role in various sectors, including nuclear energy. However, while AI, and particularly Large Language Models (LLMs), bring a lot to the table in terms of operational efficiency and anomaly detection, they also expose the sector to a new breed of cybersecurity threats, like Inference Attacks, Adversarial Attacks, and Trojan Attacks. This guide is designed to be a straightforward manual, diving deep into the intertwining worlds of AI and cybersecurity within nuclear reactors, and tailoring insights for three crucial audiences: I&C Vendors/Developers, Nuclear Regulators, and Nuclear Reactor Operators and Cyber Defense Teams. (1) Section 2, directed at I&C Vendors/Developers, will provide a clear and focused look at several cybersecurity attacks, offering practical recommendations and detailed scenarios related to AI cybersecurity. This section isn’t just about identifying problems but also about giving solid, usable solutions. (2) Section 3, meant for Nuclear Regulators, gets straight to the point about regulations, policy suggestions, and guidelines that are needed to lay down a robust, secure, and ethical foundation for the application of AI in nuclear operations. The focus is on making sure that everything adheres to international standards and laws while being practicable and clear-cut. (3) Section 4, aimed at Nuclear Reactor Operators and Cyber Defense Teams, offers an exhaustive exploration and technical reports, with clear recommendations and scenario analyses vital to protect operational environments and guarantee the secure application of AI in nuclear reactor operations. The goal is simple: as we step into an era where AI becomes a fundamental element of our technological and energy infrastructures, this guide is here to act as a clear, direct handbook, ensuring that AI is implemented within the nuclear sector in a manner that is secure, responsible, and practical. It’s about striking a balance – optimizing the undeniable benefits offered by AI while securing and shielding against potential cyber threats as we move through this new and complex landscape.
The Biden administration has committed to full decarbonization of the U.S. electricity grid by 2035 and economy-wide net zero emissions by 2050. These aggressive goals demand immediate action if we are to be successful, and they require us to think more holistically about our clean energy options. Programs within the Department of Energy are addressing these holistic solutions. Traditionally, electricity generation and management and meeting energy demands for industry and transportation are considered independently. As we seek to achieve net zero, we need to reassess our energy demands. When we consider overall energy use, only one-third is in the form of electricity. Additional energy demands are in the form of heat or steam for industrial processes, as well as transportation. These sectors are much harder to abate, and electrification may not be the best option. Reducing environmental emissions at an affordable cost, while maintaining grid reliability and resilience, will require us to use all of the clean energy resources that we have available. That means coordinating the use of nuclear, renewables, and fossil fuels with carbon capture to meet growing demands for electricity, industrial applications, and mobility. Various energy applications and product streams beyond electricity are being evaluated, ranging from generation of potable water to production of hydrogen, fertilizers, synthetic fuels, and various chemicals. This presentation will highlight advanced nuclear technologies under development today and will provide a glimpse into the wide array of R&D being conducted across multiple DOE-funded programs.
Governments and private industry around the world have established aggressive goals to achieve net-zero emissions for the power, industrial, and transportation sectors by 2050. These aggressive goals demand immediate action if we are to be successful, and they require us to think more holistically about our clean energy options. Programs within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) are addressing these holistic solutions. Traditionally, electricity generation and management are considered independently from meeting energy demands for industry and transportation. As we seek to eliminate emissions across all energy use sectors we need to reassess how energy demands are met. When we consider overall energy use, only one-third is in the form of electricity. Additional energy demands are in the form of heat or steam for industrial processes, in addition to direct fuel use for transportation. These sectors are much harder to abate, and electrification may not be the best option. Reducing environmental emissions at an affordable cost, while maintaining grid reliability and resilience, will require us to leverage all of the clean energy resources available. The DOE Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) program on Integrated Energy Systems (IES) is led by researchers at Idaho National Laboratory (INL), and work is conducted in partnership with an array of other DOE laboratories, industry, and academia. The primary focus of IES research is to assess the technical and economic potential of nuclear-driven IES to enhance the flexibility and utilization of nuclear reactors working alongside renewable generators to meet an array of energy demands—thereby maximizing the utilization of clean energy resources across all energy sectors. Various energy applications and product streams beyond electricity are being evaluated, ranging from generation of potable water to production of hydrogen, fertilizers, synthetic fuels, and various chemicals. The DOE-NE program additionally partners with the Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Technologies Office under the DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy to jointly fund the development of analysis tools, technologies, and nuclear-integrated hydrogen demonstration projects. This presentation will highlight the wide array of R&D being conducted across multiple DOE-funded programs to develop and deploy nuclear-based IES that will be key to achieving our net-zero goals. By working with key collaborators in the nuclear industry, analytical studies are now becoming a reality in demonstration projects.
These slides contain highlights for INL/RPT-23-74311 Siting Requirements for Colocating Nuclear Power Plants with Industrial Facilities.