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
2026 ANS Annual Conference
May 31–June 3, 2026
Denver, CO|Sheraton Denver
Latest Magazine Issues
May 2026
Jan 2026
2026
Latest Journal Issues
Nuclear Science and Engineering
June 2026
Nuclear Technology
Fusion Science and Technology
Latest News
Getting back to yes: A local perspective on decommissioning, restart, and responsibility
For 45 years, Duane Arnold Energy Center operated in Linn County, Ia., near the town of Palo and just northwest of Cedar Rapids. The facility, owned by NextEra Energy, was the only nuclear power plant in the state.
In August 2020, a historic derecho swept across eastern Iowa with winds approaching 140 miles per hour. Damage to the plant’s cooling towers accelerated a shutdown that had already been planned, and the facility entered decommissioning soon after, with its fuel removed in October of that year. Iowa’s only nuclear plant had gone off line.
Today the national energy landscape looks very different than it did just six short years ago. Electricity demand is rising rapidly as data centers, artificial intelligence infrastructure, advanced manufacturing, and electrification expand across the country. Reliable, carbon-free baseload power has become increasingly valuable. In that context, Linn County has approved the rezoning necessary to support the recommissioning and restart of Duane Arnold and is actively supporting NextEra’s efforts to secure the remaining state and federal approvals.
Milos I. Atz, Massimiliano Fratoni
Nuclear Technology | Volume 210 | Number 5 | May 2024 | Pages 795-813
Research Article | doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2023.2246736
Articles are hosted by Taylor and Francis Online.
Nuclear fuel cycle advancements will result in new types of fissile material, including nuclear wastes, that require security and safeguards. Nuclear wastes may be more vulnerable for diversion by non-state actors, and chemical processing to recover fissile material is not an insurmountable challenge. Previous work has applied a figure of merit (FOM) to assess material attractiveness and security risks. This analysis applies the material attractiveness FOM to wastes produced by fuel cycles from the Fuel Cycle Evaluation and Screening (FCES) study. Two aspects of security risk are studied: (1) the time before the fissile material in the waste becomes attractive and (2) the number of waste packages required to obtain a critical mass of fissile material. Two fuel cycles are presented to highlight detailed results: (1) once-through use of low-enriched U in light water reactors (LWRs) and (2) continuous recycle of Pu in sodium fast reactors (SFRs). Increasing LWR used nuclear fuel (UNF) package loading increases the time to attractiveness, but the larger packages contain enough Pu for multiple critical masses. The high-level waste (HLW) from processing the SFR fuels has similar FOM behavior but longer time to attractiveness due to the concentration of fission products. More HLW packages are required to obtain a critical mass; that number can be further increased by increasing the separation efficiency. Extended to all FCES fuel cycles, the minimum time before attractiveness is generally lower for UNF than for HLW because radioactivity is concentrated in HLW. For nearly all fuel cycles that produce UNF, only one package is required to recover enough fissile material for a critical mass. Notably, some advanced fuel cycles produce HLW, of which only two packages need to be recovered to obtain a critical mass, even when the target fissile material is recycled. Going forward, an assessment of the security risks posed by fissile material in nuclear wastes will need to quantify the challenge posed by separations. Ultimately, the assessment could inform security and response measures; whether any of the observations might affect these measures could be an area for future work. Finally, future analysis could study whether different fuel cycle wastes are more attractive for use in radiological dispersal devices or radiological exposure devices.
