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
Decommissioning & Environmental Sciences
The mission of the Decommissioning and Environmental Sciences (DES) Division is to promote the development and use of those skills and technologies associated with the use of nuclear energy and the optimal management and stewardship of the environment, sustainable development, decommissioning, remediation, reutilization, and long-term surveillance and maintenance of nuclear-related installations, and sites. The target audience for this effort is the membership of the Division, the Society, and the public at large.
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?
H. Bairiot, P. Deramaix, C. Vandenberg, L. Leenders, P. Mostert
Nuclear Technology | Volume 33 | Number 2 | April 1977 | Pages 184-202
Technical Paper | Reactor | doi.org/10.13182/NT77-A31776
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Since 1963, Belgonucleaire has been developing the design of plutonium assemblies of the island type (i.e., plutonium rods inserted in the control zone of the assembly and enriched uranium rods at the periphery) for light water reactors. The application to boiling water reactors (BWRs) led to the introduction, in April 1971, of two prototype plutonium island assemblies in the Dodewaard BWR (The Netherlands): Those assemblies incorporating plutonium in 42% of the rods are interchangeable with standard uranium assemblies of the same reload. Their design, which had to meet these criteria, was performed using the routine order in use at Belgonucleaire; experimental checks included a mock-up configuration simulated in the VENUS critical facility at Mol and open-vessel cold critical experiments performed in the Dodewaard core. The pelleted plutonium rods were fabricated and controlled by Belgonucleaire following the manufacturing procedures developed at the production plant. In one of the assemblies, three vibrated plutonium fuel rods with a lower fuel density were introduced in the three most highly rated positions to reduce the power rating. Those plutonium assemblies experienced peak pellet ratings up to 535 W/cm and were discharged in April 1974 after having reached a mean burnup of ∼21 000 MWd/MT. In-core instrumentation during operation, visual examinations, and reactivity substitution experiments during reactor shutdown did not indicate any special feature for those assemblies compared to the standard uranium assemblies, thereby demonstrating their interchangeability.