Features

It’s possible to describe fusion in simple terms: heat and squeeze small atoms to get abundant clean energy. But there’s nothing simple about getting fusion ready for the grid.

Private developers, national lab and university researchers, suppliers, and end users working toward that goal are developing a range of complex technologies to reach fusion temperatures and pressures, confounded by science and technology gaps linked to plasma behavior; materials, diagnostics, and electronics for extreme environments; fuel cycle sustainability; and economics.

It was a laser shot for the ages. By achieving fusion ignition on December 5, 2022, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory proved that recreating the “fire” that fuels the sun and the stars inside a laboratory on Earth was indeed scientifically possible.

Fast burst reactors were the first fast-spectrum research reactors to reach criticality by using only prompt neutrons with high-enriched uranium as fuel, creating a pulse for microseconds. Among many achievements, fast burst reactors were the first research reactors to demonstrate the ability of thermal expansion to terminate a pulse and to show how this could aid in reactor safety. In addition, fast burst reactors were pivotal in early fission studies including critical mass determination, criticality safety, the study of prompt and delayed neutrons, and much more.

Lauren Garrison

We have seen many advancements in the fusion field in the past handful of years. In 2021, the National Academies released a report titled Bringing Fusion to the U.S. Grid.^a In March 2022, the White House held a first-ever fusion forum, “Developing a Bold Decadal Vision for Commercial Fusion Energy.”^b The National Ignition Facility had a record-setting fusion pulse that achieved more power output than the laser input, called ignition, in December 2022.^c The Department of Energy’s Office of Fusion Energy Sciences (FES) started a new public-private partnership program, the fusion milestone program, in May 2023 that made awards to eight fusion companies in a cost-share model.^d That same summer, FES got a new associate director, Dr. Jean Paul Allain,^e who has announced intentions for changing the structure of the FES office to better embrace an energy mission for fusion while keeping the strong foundation in basic science and non-fusion plasmas. ITER construction has continued, with various parts being delivered and systems finished. For example, the civil engineering of the tokamak building was completed in September 2023 after 10 years of work.^f Even more fusion companies have been founded, and the Fusion Industry Association has 37 members now.^g

Craig Piercy
cpiercy@ans.org

A good bit of this month’s edition of Nuclear News is devoted to the latest developments in fusion energy.

While 2024 may not have the punchy investment headlines of ’22, I think it’s fair to say that fusion energy technology is making tangible progress beneath the surface, with unannounced stealth funding plans and the continuation of public-private partnerships.

When will it become a productive element of our global energy architecture? No one knows for sure. There are still myriad challenges to be solved in high-temperature ­materials, high–critical temperature superconductors, advanced algorithms, and tritium fuel cycle control, just to name a few. But every day, fusion feels a tiny bit more mature, like somehow it has left its childhood bedroom in physics to move into the dorm room of engineering.

Lisa Marshall
president@ans.org

Thank you for the opportunity to serve as your American Nuclear Society president. The support from within the Society, academia, professional organizations, and international partners has been heartwarming. Students have expressed joy about what the future holds, and they are ready, as am I, to be part of keeping the industry moving forward.

The year 2001 was pivotal for me; it represented my start in nuclear engineering. My career has centered around precollege and university students. To be cliché, they are our future, and we must continue to support their maturation in the field and in ANS. My cup is full when students thrive, and the Society has made many gains in this arena. We have a robust K-12 STEM program that continues to be refined, and partners among educators and organizations that strengthen the routes into the discipline.

Robert Roche-Rivera and Marcos Rolón-Acevedo are licensed professional engineers who work at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. They are also alumni of the University of Puerto Rico–Mayagüez (UPRM) and have been sharing their knowledge and experience with students at their alma mater since last year, serving as adjunct professors in the university’s Department of Mechanical Engineering. During the 2023–2024 school year, they each taught two courses: Fundamentals of Nuclear Science and Engineering, and Nuclear Power Plant Engineering.

Regardless of how you power our grid or how you attempt to decarbonize our economy, we will need many various metals to achieve any future, or even to just continue with business as usual. Critical metals like cobalt, lithium, nickel, and neodymium are essential to a low-carbon-energy future if renewables and electric vehicles are to play a large role.¹ Even if nuclear provides 100 percent of our power, just operating the grid and electrifying most sectors will take huge amounts of critical metals like copper, notwithstanding the fact that nuclear power requires the least amount of metals and other materials of any energy source.

In May’s Nuclear News (p. 86), we reviewed Argonne National Laboratory’s comprehensive work on fast reactors in Idaho. In this article, we summarize the light water reactor work there.¹

In the early days, there were few data on the behavior of reactor materials under severe neutron bombardment. In collaboration, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Argonne National Laboratory developed the Materials Testing Reactor (MTR) for the National Reactor Testing Station (NRTS) in Idaho. The materials tested in it over the course of 15,000 experiments were reactor fuel materials, structures, cooling systems, and shields. It operated from 1952 to 1970.

Christensen

The conversation was casual with John Christensen, president and chief executive officer of Utilities Service Alliance, as he reflected on his 17 years with the organization. Christensen will be stepping down from USA to retire at the end of the year. He will be succeeded as president and CEO/managing director by Karen Fili, most recently with Urenco USA.

USA is a nonprofit organization incorporated in 1996 to provide its utility and nonutility members a business platform to collaborate on plant performance and economic benefit initiatives. Currently, USA members include 39 nuclear reactors (and one uranium enrichment plant) that provide more than 39,650 MWe of generation. As Christensen explained, USA members get the best of both worlds: the fleet benefits by working with USA while keeping the flexibility of independent operator status. (See the sidebar below for a members list.)

A 60-year-old Wyoming industrial machinery company has joined forces with nuclear innovator BWX Technologies to build and deploy 50-megawatt microreactors in America’s heartland over the coming years to provide carbon-free heat and power for industrial users.

Power generation from nuclear fission as a clean and stable source of electricity has secured the interest of policymakers and industry leaders around the globe. Last fall, the United States spearheaded a pledge at COP28 to get countries to agree to triple nuclear capacity worldwide, and recently the members of the Group of 7 (G7) nations that currently use nuclear power have reaffirmed their pledges to invest in that power source to cut carbon emissions.

As of this writing, U.S. policymakers are trying to make good on that promise by passing legislation to support nuclear power, funding the domestic fuel supply chain, and working to pass the ADVANCE Act. On top of the support from Washington, D.C., power-hungry industries like data centers and chemical engineering are looking to secure stable, carbon-free power directly from power plants.

Craig Piercy
cpiercy@ans.org

On August 23, 2011, at 1:51 p.m., I was standing next to Matt Milazzo, a former ANS Congressional Fellow, on the sidewalk of a high-traffic D.C. street. We were saying goodbye after a pleasant lunch. At that exact moment, a seismic wave from a 5.9 magnitude earthquake in Mineral, Va.—one that would be felt as far away as Canada and cause hundreds of millions of dollars in damage—rippled under my feet. Perhaps it felt too familiar, like a heavy truck passing by, or maybe the oscillation peaked just as I was turning to walk back to my office. Either way, I didn’t feel a thing. The largest East Coast earthquake in 100 years, and I missed it. Completely. It wasn’t until I saw the stunned faces of my colleagues and a few picture frames scattered on the floor of my office that I understood the gravity of the moment.

Today, as I wrap my head around the stunningly large amount of energy that will be required to support advanced data center and AI functions in the coming years, I get the same feeling—that something big and consequential has happened in my larger world and I have been slow to perceive the magnitude of it.

Ken Petersen
president@ans.org

Big news as I write this, my last column as ANS president: Legislation has been passed that will ban the importation of uranium from Russia (though waivers can be used in certain circumstances to continue imports through 2027). This ban has been discussed since the Russian invasion of Ukraine. I am sure all U.S. utilities have followed their risk-management policies.

With two years to plan, appropriate-use waivers, and access to American Assured Fuel Supply, there should not be any disruption to domestic reactor operations. The ban will force the United States and our Western allies to be independent and stronger. Congress has helped by providing $2.72 billion to support new domestic enrichment capacity. The challenge now is for the Department of Energy to turn this into actual new capacity as quickly as possible.

John Wagner

As advocates for the environment, national security, and U.S. prosperity, and as believers that the substantial global expansion of nuclear energy is essential to these interests, let’s take a moment to recognize how far we have come.

In recent years, much has changed. Public opinion polls show increasingly broad support for nuclear energy, which has bipartisan and bicameral support in Congress. The U.S. is on the cusp of achievements that could usher in a new era of nuclear energy and reestablish U.S. global leadership. The prevailing question is no longer whether we need nuclear energy, but rather, how much more nuclear power do we need, how can we enable first movers, and how quickly can we deploy new reactors.

Greg Bowman and George Smith work for the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in implementing programs that deal with risk, whether to nuclear power plants or from nuclear materials, such as radiological sabotage and theft or diversion of materials. Bowman is the director of the NRC’s Division of Physical and Cybersecurity Policy in the Office of Nuclear Security and Incident Response. Smith is the senior project manager for security in the Source Management & Protection Branch of the Division of Materials Safety, Security, State, and Tribal Programs in the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards.

The three initiatives Bowman and Smith discussed with Nuclear News editor-in-chief Rick Michal are the Insider Threat Program, the Cybersecurity Program, and the Domestic Safeguards Program.

Ensuring that nuclear technology is used exclusively for peaceful purposes remains a critical challenge for our society today. The global community faces several grave nuclear security threats: nations that attempt to create (such as Iran) or augment (such as Russia, China, and North Korea) their nuclear arsenals, acts of aggression that target civilian nuclear reactors (as seen with Russia in Ukraine), and the looming menace of nuclear weapons deployment (emanating from Russia). Furthermore, addressing climate change necessitates an expansion of nuclear energy for electricity generation, which brings with it the need for safeguarding and regulating the deployment of advanced reactors.

Idaho’s nuclear energy history is deep and rich. The National Reactor Testing Station (NRTS) began its history as an artillery testing range in the 1940s.¹ Following World War II, Walter Zinn, Argonne National Laboratory’s founding director and Manhattan Project Chicago Pile-1 project manager, proposed to the Atomic Energy Commission that a remote location be found for building test reactors. In 1949, he and Roger S. Warner, AEC’s director of engineering,² developed a list of potential sites from which the NRTS was selected. Over the decades, quite a few companies and AEC national laboratories built 52 experimental and test reactors at the NRTS, including 14 by Argonne.³ (For a brief AEC video on the NRTS, see youtube.com/watch?v=C458NsH08TI.)

There is a mix of good news and bad in the latest Nuclear Engineering Enrollment and Degrees Survey, 2021–2022 Data. According to this report from the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), compiled with data initially released in November 2023 and updated in February 2024, the number of doctoral degrees awarded in nuclear engineering at the end of the 2022 academic year in the United States—211 Ph.D.s—was the highest since the beginning of this survey’s data collection in 1966. However, the overall numbers of nuclear engineering degrees awarded in 2021 and 2022 were at their lowest levels in more than a decade. In addition, both undergraduate and graduate enrollment numbers were down compared with 2018 and 2019.

Physical protection accounts for a significant portion of a nuclear power plant’s operational costs. As the U.S. moves toward smaller and safer advanced reactors, similar protection strategies could prove cost prohibitive. For tomorrow’s small modular reactors and microreactors, security costs must remain appropriate to the size of the reactor for economical operation.