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.
Division Spotlight
Fuel Cycle & Waste Management
Devoted to all aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle including waste management, worldwide. Division specific areas of interest and involvement include uranium conversion and enrichment; fuel fabrication, management (in-core and ex-core) and recycle; transportation; safeguards; high-level, low-level and mixed waste management and disposal; public policy and program management; decontamination and decommissioning environmental restoration; and excess weapons materials disposition.
Meeting Spotlight
Conference on Nuclear Training and Education: A Biennial International Forum (CONTE 2025)
February 3–6, 2025
Amelia Island, FL|Omni Amelia Island Resort
Standards Program
The Standards Committee is responsible for the development and maintenance of voluntary consensus standards that address the design, analysis, and operation of components, systems, and facilities related to the application of nuclear science and technology. Find out What’s New, check out the Standards Store, or Get Involved today!
Latest Magazine Issues
Jan 2025
Jul 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
February 2025
Nuclear Technology
January 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Reboot: Nuclear needs a success . . . anywhere
The media have gleefully resurrected the language of a past nuclear renaissance. Beyond the hype and PR, many people in the nuclear community are taking a more measured view of conditions that could lead to new construction: data center demand, the proliferation of new reactor designs and start-ups, and the sudden ascendance of nuclear energy as the power source everyone wants—or wants to talk about.
Once built, large nuclear reactors can provide clean power for at least 80 years—outlasting 10 to 20 presidential administrations. Smaller reactors can provide heat and power outputs tailored to an end user’s needs. With all the new attention, are we any closer to getting past persistent supply chain and workforce issues and building these new plants? And what will the election of Donald Trump to a second term as president mean for nuclear?
As usual, there are more questions than answers, and most come down to money. Several developers are engaging with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission or have already applied for a license, certification, or permit. But designs without paying customers won’t get built. So where are the customers, and what will it take for them to commit?
C. J. Barton, R. E. Moore, S. R. Hanna
Nuclear Technology | Volume 20 | Number 1 | October 1973 | Pages 35-50
Technical Paper | Nuclear Explosive | doi.org/10.13182/NT73-A31332
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Production testing of the Rulison well, the second natural gas well developed by use of nuclear explosives, was completed in April 1971. We examined the hypothetical radiation exposure situation that would have resulted if the gas originally present in the well had been withdrawn at a rate to give 1 million ft3/day after dehydration and CO2 removal and the processed gas distributed by two gas companies to small communities in the area near the well. Tritium and 85Kr are the principal radionuclides present in the gas from the Rulison well. The average whole body dose from inhalation and skin absorption of tritium to members of the exposed public served by one of the gas transmission companies was estimated to be 0.6 mrem for the first year of gas use. The principal source of this hypothetical dose was exposure in the home to tritiated water vapor from cooking with unvented gas ranges. Use of unvented home heaters was not considered credible. Whole body doses from exposure to tritiated water vapor dispersed in the atmosphere of the same communities averaged 0.1 mrem for the first year. Continuing use of gas at the same rate would reduce the average dose to 0.02 mrem in the second year and to <0.01 mrem in the third year as contaminated gas in the chimney is diluted by the influx of uncontaminated gas from the surrounding formation. Whole body doses from 85Kr were estimated to be ∼2% of the tritium whole body doses.