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
Nuclear Criticality Safety
NCSD provides communication among nuclear criticality safety professionals through the development of standards, the evolution of training methods and materials, the presentation of technical data and procedures, and the creation of specialty publications. In these ways, the division furthers the exchange of technical information on nuclear criticality safety with the ultimate goal of promoting the safe handling of fissionable materials outside reactors.
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?
Willem L. Zijp, Éva M. Zsolnay, Henk J. Nolthenius, Egon J. Szondi, Gerardus C. H. M. Verhaag
Nuclear Technology | Volume 67 | Number 2 | November 1984 | Pages 282-301
Technical Paper | Material | doi.org/10.13182/NT84-A33517
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
The aim of the interlaboratory REAL-80 exercise, organized by the International Atomic Energy Agency, was to determine the state of the art in 1981 of the capabilities of laboratories to adjust neutron spectrum information on the basis of a set of experimental activation rates, and to subsequently predict the number of displacements in steel, together with its uncertainty. The input information distributed to participating laboratories comprised values, variances, and covariances for a set of input fluence rates, for a set of activation and damage cross-section data, and for a set of experimentally measured reaction rates. The exercise dealt with two clearly different spectra: the thermal Oak Ridge Research Reactor (ORR) spectrum and the fast YAYOI spectrum. Out of 30 laboratories asked to participate, 13 laboratories contributed 33 solutions for ORR and 35 solutions for YAYOI. The spectral shapes of the solution spectra showed considerable spread, both for the ORR and YAYOI spectra. When the series of predicted activation rates in nickel and the predicted displacement rates in steel derived for all solutions is considered, one cannot observe significant differences due to the adjustment algorithm used. The largest deviations seem to be due to effects related to group structure and/or changes in the input data. When comparing the predicted activation rate in nickel with its available measured value, we observe that the predicted value (averaged over all solutions) is lower than the measured value.