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
Isotopes & Radiation
Members are devoted to applying nuclear science and engineering technologies involving isotopes, radiation applications, and associated equipment in scientific research, development, and industrial processes. Their interests lie primarily in education, industrial uses, biology, medicine, and health physics. Division committees include Analytical Applications of Isotopes and Radiation, Biology and Medicine, Radiation Applications, Radiation Sources and Detection, and Thermal Power Sources.
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?
Edgar Kiefhaber
Nuclear Technology | Volume 59 | Number 3 | December 1982 | Pages 483-493
Technical Paper | The Backfill as an Engineered Barrier for Radioactive Waste Management / Fission Reactor | doi.org/10.13182/NT82-A33006
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Steam ingress into a gas-cooled fast reactor (GCFR) core may lead to reactivity effects that are undesirable from the point of view of reactor safety. Unfortunately, the amount of reactivity increase caused by a certain steam concentration is usually subject to considerable uncertainty, as has become evident by occasional comparisons between various laboratories for specific examples. Therefore, some time ago, a series of intentionally simple benchmarks were proposed in order to study in a systematic way the calculational uncertainty of the steam ingress reactivity arising essentially from differences in the nuclear data basis used at various laboratories. The analysis of corresponding results provided by laboratories in France, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States reveals that there still exist appreciable deviations in the predicted steam ingress reactivity effect. Due to the extensive cancellation of positive and negative contributions to this reactivity effect, the resulting net value is extremely sensitive to deviations in the nuclear data and calculational methods. Typical discrepancies for the calculated steam ingress reactivity observed within the framework of an international intercomparison are described, leading to the conclusion that further improvements in the nuclear data basis are desirable and the development and application of fairly refined calculational methods is mandatory to be able to predict the corresponding effect with sufficient reliability for related power reactor designs. In addition, measurements of equivalent reactivity effects should be continued in different critical assemblies to provide a broader experimental basis for the verification of the calculational tools. If further analytical work could be pursued, the Argonne National Laboratory experiment on the GCFR Phase II Steam Entry Effect might be the appropriate object to be studied and analyzed in detail, e.g., by a similar intercomparison effort, especially if the discrepancies existing at present in nuclear data bases could be removed or diminished to a tolerable level. Reasonable progress in these areas would increase the confidence attributed to calculations of the reactivity effect of the assumed entry of hydrogeneous material into the core of a fast power reactor.