Thorium Fuel Cycles with Externally Driven Systems

Brown, Nicholas R.; Powers, Jeffrey J.; Todosow, M.; Fratoni, Massimiliano; Ludewig, H.; Sunny, Eva E; Raitses, Gilad; Aronson, A.

doi:10.13182/nt15-40

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stauff et al (2015) overviews the nuclear waste management metrics performance of each of the fuel cycles in the E&S, as well as the nuclear waste management metric definitions, which are relevant to the present paper. Other literature related to the E&S has explored performance trade-offs in various sustainable fuel cycles by examining the impact of technology choices (Brown et al 2015) and the performance of externally driven systems versus critical reactors in uranium fuel cycles (Heidet et al 2015) and thorium fuel cycles (Brown et al 2016a). Similar to the present paper, Brown et al (2015), Heidet et al (2015), and Brown et al (2016a) explore the relative performance of fuel cycle options or technology choices and the underlying physics reasons the performance is different.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Other literature related to the E&S has explored performance trade-offs in various sustainable fuel cycles by examining the impact of technology choices (Brown et al 2015) and the performance of externally driven systems versus critical reactors in uranium fuel cycles (Heidet et al 2015) and thorium fuel cycles (Brown et al 2016a). Similar to the present paper, Brown et al (2015), Heidet et al (2015), and Brown et al (2016a) explore the relative performance of fuel cycle options or technology choices and the underlying physics reasons the performance is different. Additional studies have examined the potential transition from the present once-through fuel cycle to a promising future fuel cycle (Feng et al 2016, Brown et al 2016b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Impact of thermal spectrum small modular reactors on performance of once-through nuclear fuel cycles with low-enriched uranium

Brown

Worrall

Todosow

2017

Annals of Nuclear Energy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Small modular reactors (SMRs) may offer potential benefits relative to large light water reactors, such as enhanced flexibility in deployment and operation. However, it is vital to understand the holistic impact of SMRs on nuclear fuel cycle performance. The focus of this paper is the fuel cycle impacts of light water SMRs in a once-through fuel cycle with low-enriched uranium fuel. A key objective of this paper is to describe preliminary neutronics and fuel cycle analyses conducted in support of the US Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy, Fuel Cycle Options Campaign. The hypothetical light water SMR example case considered in these preliminary scoping studies is a "cartridge type" one-batch core with slightly less than 5.0% enrichment. The high-level issues identified and preliminary scoping calculations in this paper are intended to inform decision makers regarding potential fuel cycle impacts of one-batch thermal-spectrum SMRs. In particular, this paper highlights the impact of increased neutron leakage and a reduced number of batches on the achievable burnup of the reactor. Fuel cycle performance metrics for the simplified example SMR analyzed herein are compared with those for a conventional three-batch light water reactor (LWR) in the following areas: nuclear waste management, environmental impact,

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Impact of thermal spectrum small modular reactors on performance of once-through nuclear fuel cycles with low-enriched uranium

Brown

Worrall

Todosow

2017

Annals of Nuclear Energy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ceramic materials can be used in the reactors' core to enhance the system safety and economic performance for a long-period operation [34]. The nuclear raw materials in this system can use depleted uranium, natural uranium, or thorium [35]. Figure 1.…”

Section: Concept Of Accelerator-driven Advanced Nuclear Energy Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concept of an Accelerator-Driven Advanced Nuclear Energy System

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The utilization of clean energy is a matter of primary importance for sustainable development as well as a vital approach for solving worldwide energy-related issues. If the low utilization rate of nuclear fuel, nuclear proliferation, and insufficient nuclear safety can be solved, nuclear fission energy could be used as a sustainable and low-carbon clean energy form for thousands of years, providing steady and base-load electrical resources. To address these challenges, we propose an accelerator-driven advanced nuclear energy system (ADANES), consisting of a burner system and a fuel recycle system. In ADANES, the ideal utilization rate of nuclear fuel will be >95%, and the final disposal of nuclear waste will be minimized. The design of a high-temperature ceramic reactor makes the burner system safer. Part of fission products (FPs) are removed during the simple reprocessing in the fuel recycle system, significantly reducing the risks of nuclear proliferation of nuclear technology and materials. The ADANES concept integrates nuclear waste transmutation, nuclear fuel breeding, and safety power production, with an ideal closed loop operation of nuclear fission energy, constituting a major innovation of great potential interest for future energy applications.

show abstract

“…While waiting for the development of a cladding material that can be certified to withstand $500 DPA, it was proposed to start benefiting from the B&B mode of operation by using a Seed-and-Blanket (S&B) core configuration (Greenspan, 2012). Instead of using accelerator-driven spallation neutron sources (Brown et al, 2016;Heidet et al, 2015;Lin et al, 2017), the S&B core is designed to have a subcritical breed-and-burn thorium fueled blanket that is driven by the excess neutrons from a TRU transmuting seed without exceeding the 200 DPA constraint.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fuel cycle analysis of Advanced Burner Reactor with breed-and-burn thorium blanket

Zhang

Fratoni

Greenspan

2018

Annals of Nuclear Energy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Seed-and-Blanket (S&B) Sodium-cooled Fast Reactor (SFR) core concept was proposed for generating a significant fraction of the core power from thorium fueled breed-and-burn (B&B) blankets without exceeding the presently verified radiation damage constraint of 200 Displacement per Atom (DPA). To make beneficial use of the excess neutrons from fast reactors, the S&B core is designed to have an elongated TRU transmuting (or ''TRU burner") seed from which over 20% of the fission neutrons leak into a subcritical thorium blanket that radially surrounds the seed. The seed fuel is recycled while the blanket operates in a once-through breed-and-burn (B&B) mode. The objective of this paper is to compare the fuel cycle performance of the S&B reactor against an Advanced Burner Reactor (ABR) and a conventional Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR). For the fast reactors (SFR: ABR and S&B) the fuel cycle performance is evaluated based on a 2-stage PWR-SFR energy system while the reference nuclear system is made of once-through PWRs. It was found that relative to the ABR, the S&B core has a lower fuel cycle cost, higher capacity factor, and comparable short-term radioactivity. The discharged seed fuel from the S&B core features lower fissile Pu-to-Pu ratio, higher 238 Pu-to-Pu ratio, higher specific plutonium decay heat, higher spontaneous fission rate, and lower overall material attractiveness for weapon use. Due to the significant amount of 233 U discharged from the breed-and-burn thorium fueled blankets, the S&B core has much higher long-term radioactivity and radiotoxicity. Since the thorium fueled blanket operates in the breed-andburn mode and requires no fuel reprocessing, the discharged blanket fuel is unattractive for weapons application. Compared with a PWR, the S&B core has a lower fuel cycle cost, much lower short-term radioactivity and radiotoxicity but higher long-term values, and higher proliferation resistance for the discharged plutonium. The natural uranium utilization of the 2-stage PWR-S&B system is approximately 60% higher than that of present PWRs; it is few percent higher than that of the 2-stage PWR-ABR system. Approximately 7% of the thorium fed to the blanket is converted into energy, which makes the thorium fuel utilization approximately 12 times the utilization of natural uranium in PWRs. A comprehensive fuel cycle evaluation performed with the methodology developed by the recent U.S Department of Energy's Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation and Screening campaign concludes that the PWR-S&B system has similar fuel cycle performance characteristics as the PWR-ABR system. The S&B concept may potentially feature improved economics and resource utilization relative to the ABR.

show abstract

Thorium Fuel Cycles with Externally Driven Systems

Abstract: -

Cited by 12 publications

References 15 publications

Impact of thermal spectrum small modular reactors on performance of once-through nuclear fuel cycles with low-enriched uranium

Impact of thermal spectrum small modular reactors on performance of once-through nuclear fuel cycles with low-enriched uranium

Concept of an Accelerator-Driven Advanced Nuclear Energy System

Fuel cycle analysis of Advanced Burner Reactor with breed-and-burn thorium blanket

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About