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
Young Members Group
The Young Members Group works to encourage and enable all young professional members to be actively involved in the efforts and endeavors of the Society at all levels (Professional Divisions, ANS Governance, Local Sections, etc.) as they transition from the role of a student to the role of a professional. It sponsors non-technical workshops and meetings that provide professional development and networking opportunities for young professionals, collaborates with other Divisions and Groups in developing technical and non-technical content for topical and national meetings, encourages its members to participate in the activities of the Groups and Divisions that are closely related to their professional interests as well as in their local sections, introduces young members to the rules and governance structure of the Society, and nominates young professionals for awards and leadership opportunities available to members.
Meeting Spotlight
2024 ANS Annual Conference
June 16–19, 2024
Las Vegas, NV|Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino
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
May 2024
Jan 2024
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
June 2024
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
The busyness of the nuclear fuel supply chain
Ken Petersenpresident@ans.org
With all that is happening in the industry these days, the nuclear fuel supply chain is still a hot topic. The Russian assault in Ukraine continues to upend the “where” and “how” of attaining nuclear fuel—and it has also motivated U.S. legislators to act.
Two years into the Russian war with Ukraine, things are different. The Inflation Reduction Act was passed in 2022, authorizing $700 million in funding to support production of high-assay low-enriched uranium in the United States. Meanwhile, the Department of Energy this January issued a $500 million request for proposals to stimulate new HALEU production. The Emergency National Security Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2024 includes $2.7 billion in funding for new uranium enrichment production. This funding was diverted from the Civil Nuclear Credits program and will only be released if there is a ban on importing Russian uranium into the United States—which could happen by the time this column is published, as legislation that bans Russian uranium has passed the House as of this writing and is headed for the Senate. Also being considered is legislation that would sanction Russian uranium. Alternatively, the Biden-Harris administration may choose to ban Russian uranium without legislation in order to obtain access to the $2.7 billion in funding.
Jun Wang, Michael L. Corradini, Troy Haskin, Yapei Zhang, Qing Lu, Wenxi Tian, Guanghui Su, Suizheng Qiu
Nuclear Technology | Volume 192 | Number 1 | October 2015 | Pages 25-34
Technical Paper | Reactor Safety | doi.org/10.13182/NT14-96
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
To better understand the MELCOR oxidation and degradation models, past work compared the MELCOR model to a CORA experiment (CORA Test 13). These MELCOR analyses specifically focused on fuel bundle heatup and clad oxidation when compared to CORA test data. The comparison allowed the authors to investigate differences between hydrogen generation data and simulation results. Several potential reasons were considered for hydrogen generation rate differences, including MELCOR input power, heat transfer modeling, the clad solid-phase oxidation model, and the gaseous steam diffusion model. This work focuses on the possible uncertainty in the clad oxidation models used in MELCOR. First, the MELCOR nodalization approach for the CORA test was reviewed. Then, the temperature history and spatial variation were examined. One main focus was to consider other clad solid-phase oxidation models to compare the MELCOR models. This was accomplished by developing a separate model, MYCOAC, using MELCOR temperature predictions as input. Finally, the mass transfer resistance of steam diffusion to the clad surface was examined and found to be a small effect. While the Baker-Just solid-phase oxidation model showed better agreement with CORA data at low temperatures, the conclusion in this paper is that the oxidation models are not the major source of uncertainty in hydrogen generation rate differences. Future work will focus on heat transfer modeling of the CORA test.