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.
Explore membership for yourself or for your organization.
Conference Spotlight
2025 ANS Winter Conference & Expo
November 9–12, 2025
Washington, DC|Washington Hilton
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
Sep 2025
Jan 2025
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
September 2025
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
October 2025
Latest News
Shifting the paradigm of supply chain
Chad Wolf
When I began my nuclear career, I was coached up in the nuclear energy culture of the day to “run silent, run deep,” a mindset rooted in the U.S. Navy’s submarine philosophy. That was the norm—until Fukushima.
The nuclear renaissance that many had envisioned hit a wall. The focus shifted from expansion to survival. Many utility communications efforts pivoted from silence to broadcast, showcasing nuclear energy’s elegance and reliability. Nevertheless, despite being clean baseload 24/7 power that delivered a 90 percent capacity factor or higher, nuclear energy was painted as risky and expensive (alongside energy policies and incentives that favored renewables).
Economics became a driving force threatening to shutter nuclear power. The Delivering the Nuclear Promise initiative launched in 2015 challenged the industry to sustain high performance yet cut costs by up to 30 percent.
Stan Kaplan
Nuclear Technology | Volume 102 | Number 1 | April 1993 | Pages 137-142
Technical Note | Mixed-Oxide Fuel / Nuclear Reactor Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT93-A34809
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
This paper is inspired by the recent work of Theofanous et al on the risk of liner failure in Mark-I containments. In that work, the authors presented a probabilistic framework and methodology for dealing with uncertainties surrounding “Level 2,” i.e., post-core-melt phenomena in nuclear plants. In so doing, they have advanced the state of the art of risk assessment and decision making in regard to such phenomena. The key ideas in this framework and methodology have application, of course, beyond Level 2 phenomena. The purposes of the present paper are to abstract and lift out these key ideas so that they can be seen more clearly and to place them in context along with similar ideas used elsewhere, particularly in seismic risk assessment and in the treatment of through-wall cracking and pressurized thermal shock transients. The author hopes, in this way, to clear up confusion and to advance the cause of consistency in the use of the words “probability,” “uncertainty,” “frequency,” “variability,” “randomness,” etc.