ANS is committed to advancing, fostering, and promoting the development and application of nuclear sciences and technologies to benefit society.
Explore the many uses for nuclear science and its impact on energy, the environment, healthcare, food, and more.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
Mar 2026
Jan 2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
April 2026
Nuclear Technology
February 2026
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
RIC panel discusses pathway to fusion commercialization
Fusion leaders at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s annual Regulatory Information Conference discussed the path forward for regulating the burgeoning fusion industry. The speakers discussed government and private industry initiatives in the United States and United Kingdom, with a focus on efforts shaping the near-term deployment of commercial fusion machines.
A recurring theme was the need to explain the difference between fission and fusion. Representatives from the Department of Energy and Type One Energy highlighted this as an important distinction for regulators, as it will allow fusion to undergo its own independent maturation process for developing standards and regulations in the same way that fission has. Lea Perlas, Fusion Program director at the Virginia Department of Health, said that confusion between fission and fusion has been a common cause for misplaced concerns among community members surrounding Commonwealth Fusion Systems’ proposed fusion plant site near Richmond, Va.
A. Turner, A. Burns, B. Colling, J. Leppänen
Fusion Science and Technology | Volume 74 | Number 4 | November 2018 | Pages 315-320
Technical Paper | doi.org/10.1080/15361055.2018.1489660
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Nuclear analysis supporting the design and licensing of ITER is traditionally performed using MCNP and the reference model C-Model; however, the complexity of C-Model has resulted in the geometry creation and integration process becoming increasingly time-consuming. Serpent 2 is still a beta code; however, recent enhancements mean that it could, in principle, be applied to ITER neutronics analysis. Investigations have been undertaken into the effectiveness of Serpent for ITER neutronics analysis and whether this might offer an efficient modeling environment.
An automated MCNP-to-Serpent model conversion tool was developed and successfully used to create a Serpent 2 variant of C-Model. A version of the deuterium-tritium plasma neutron source was also created. Standard reference tallies in C-Model for the blanket and vacuum vessel heating were implemented, and comparisons were made between the two transport codes assessing nuclear responses and computer requirements in the ITER model. Excellent agreement was found between the two codes when comparing neutron and photon flux and heating in the ITER blanket modules and vacuum vessel.
Comparing tally figures of merit, computer requirements for Serpent were typically three to five times that of MCNP, and memory requirements were broadly similar. While Serpent was slower than MCNP when applied to fusion neutronics, future developments may improve this, and Serpent offers clear benefits that will reduce analyst time, including support for meshed geometry, robust universe implementation that avoids geometry errors at the boundaries, and mixed geometry types. Additional work is proceeding to compare Serpent against experiment benchmarks relevant for fusion shielding problems. While further developments are needed to improve variance reduction techniques and reduce simulation times, this paper demonstrates the suitability of Serpent to some aspects of ITER analysis.