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
ANS Student Conference 2025
April 3–5, 2025
Albuquerque, NM|The University of New Mexico
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
Apr 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
May 2025
Nuclear Technology
April 2025
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
General Kenneth Nichols and the Manhattan Project
Nichols
The Oak Ridger has published the latest in a series of articles about General Kenneth D. Nichols, the Manhattan Project, and the 1954 Atomic Energy Act. The series has been produced by Nichols’ grandniece Barbara Rogers Scollin and Oak Ridge (Tenn.) city historian David Ray Smith. Gen. Nichols (1907–2000) was the district engineer for the Manhattan Engineer District during the Manhattan Project.
As Smith and Scollin explain, Nichols “had supervision of the research and development connected with, and the design, construction, and operation of, all plants required to produce plutonium-239 and uranium-235, including the construction of the towns of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, and Richland, Washington. The responsibility of his position was massive as he oversaw a workforce of both military and civilian personnel of approximately 125,000; his Oak Ridge office became the center of the wartime atomic energy’s activities.”
M. Levenson, F. Rahn
Nuclear Technology | Volume 53 | Number 2 | May 1981 | Pages 99-110
Technical Paper | Realistic Estimates of the Consequences of Nuclear Accident / Nuclear Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT81-A32614
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
In estimating the real risk to the public from an accident at a nuclear power plant, several quantities are important: the probability and consequence of the accident itself and the risk resulting from any mitigating action taken. The uncertainties of the risk associated with the accident seem to be dominated by the uncertainties of the consequence estimates. The current procedure of using “conservative” assumptions (usually at each stage) in the calculations produces an estimate of the risk that is likely to be much too high (by as much as an order of magnitude or more). In and of themselves, conservative estimates as typically made in the licensing process may in fact contribute additional risk by overestimating source terms and thus overestimating benefits of activities such as evacuation. This process, in turn, leads inadvertently to putting major segments of society at greater risk than is necessary by encouraging decisions that have higher risk. The principal areas of concern focus on the treatment of a number of physical processes. These processes are always operative and can be counted on to limit the consequences of a reactor accident. Sufficient credit is not taken for their ability to reduce the release of radioactivity and confine it relatively close to its source. Estimates of risk will improve in direct proportion to improvements in quantification of these phenomena. Empirical evidence from many sources shows that these processes are indeed operative and very efficient in reducing the release of radioactivity. As a result, the policy decisions based on the source term in the event of a major reactor accident must be reassessed.