Survey of LWR environmental control technology performance and cost

Heeb, C M; Aaberg, R L; Cole, B M; Engel, R L; Kennedy, Jr, W E; Lewallen, M A

doi:10.2172/5510351

Title: Survey of LWR environmental control technology performance and cost

Full Record
Other Related Research

Abstract

This study attempts to establish a ranking for species that are routinely released to the environment for a projected nuclear power growth scenario. Unlike comparisons made to existing standards, which are subject to frequent revision, the ranking of releases can be used to form a more logical basis for identifying the areas where further development of control technology could be required. This report describes projections of releases for several fuel cycle scenarios, identifies areas where alternative control technologies may be implemented, and discusses the available alternative control technologies. The release factors were used in a computer code system called ENFORM, which calculates the annual release of any species from any part of the LWR nuclear fuel cycle given a projection of installed nuclear generation capacity. This survey of fuel cycle releases was performed for three reprocessing scenarios (stowaway, reprocessing without recycle of Pu and reprocessing with full recycle of U and Pu) for a 100-year period beginning in 1977. The radioactivity releases were ranked on the basis of a relative ranking factor. The relative ranking factor is based on the 100-year summation of the 50-year population dose commitment from an annual release of radioactive effluents. The nonradioactive releases were rankedmore »« less

Authors:: Heeb, C M; Aaberg, R L; Cole, B M; Engel, R L; Kennedy, Jr, W E; Lewallen, M A

Publication Date:: Sat Mar 01 00:00:00 EST 1980

Research Org.:: Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs., Richland, WA (United States)

OSTI Identifier:: 5510351

Report Number(s):: PNL-2287
TRN: 80-007858

DOE Contract Number:: EY-76-C-06-1830

Resource Type:: Technical Report

Country of Publication:: United States

Language:: English

Subject:: 11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS; 54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES; FUEL CYCLE; CHEMICAL EFFLUENTS; RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENTS; ALDEHYDES; AMMONIA; BWR TYPE REACTORS; CARBON 14; CESIUM 137; COBALT 60; COST; CURIUM 244; DUSTS; FEED MATERIALS PLANTS; FUEL FABRICATION PLANTS; FUEL REPROCESSING PLANTS; HEXANE; HYDROFLUORIC ACID; IODINE 131; ISOTOPE SEPARATION PLANTS; KRYPTON; NITRIC ACID; NITROGEN OXIDES; ORE PROCESSING; PERFORMANCE; PLUTONIUM 238; PWR TYPE REACTORS; RADON 222; STRONTIUM 90; SULFUR OXIDES; TRITIUM; URANIUM 232; URANIUM MINES; XENON; ACTINIDE ISOTOPES; ACTINIDE NUCLEI; ALKALI METAL ISOTOPES; ALKALINE EARTH ISOTOPES; ALKANES; ALPHA DECAY RADIOISOTOPES; BETA DECAY RADIOISOTOPES; BETA-MINUS DECAY RADIOISOTOPES; CARBON ISOTOPES; CESIUM ISOTOPES; CHALCOGENIDES; COBALT ISOTOPES; CURIUM ISOTOPES; DAYS LIVING RADIOISOTOPES; ELEMENTS; EVEN-EVEN NUCLEI; HEAVY NUCLEI; HYDRIDES; HYDROCARBONS; HYDROGEN COMPOUNDS; HYDROGEN ISOTOPES; INDUSTRIAL PLANTS; INORGANIC ACIDS; INTERMEDIATE MASS NUCLEI; INTERNAL CONVERSION RADIOISOTOPES; IODINE ISOTOPES; ISOMERIC TRANSITION ISOTOPES; ISOTOPES; LIGHT NUCLEI; MINES; MINUTES LIVING RADIOISOTOPES; NITROGEN COMPOUNDS; NITROGEN HYDRIDES; NONMETALS; NUCLEAR FACILITIES; NUCLEI; ODD-EVEN NUCLEI; ODD-ODD NUCLEI; ORGANIC COMPOUNDS; OXIDES; OXYGEN COMPOUNDS; PLUTONIUM ISOTOPES; PROCESSING; RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS; RADIOACTIVE WASTES; RADIOISOTOPES; RADON ISOTOPES; RARE GASES; REACTORS; STRONTIUM ISOTOPES; SULFUR COMPOUNDS; URANIUM ISOTOPES; WASTES; WATER COOLED REACTORS; WATER MODERATED REACTORS; YEARS LIVING RADIOISOTOPES; 053000* - Nuclear Fuels- Environmental Aspects; 500200 - Environment, Atmospheric- Chemicals Monitoring & Transport- (-1989); 500300 - Environment, Atmospheric- Radioactive Materials Monitoring & Transport- (-1989)

Citation Formats


                    Heeb, C M, Aaberg, R L, Cole, B M, Engel, R L, Kennedy, Jr, W E, and Lewallen, M A. Survey of LWR environmental control technology performance and cost.  United States: N. p., 1980. 
        Web.  doi:10.2172/5510351.

Copy to clipboard


                    Heeb, C M, Aaberg, R L, Cole, B M, Engel, R L, Kennedy, Jr, W E, & Lewallen, M A. Survey of LWR environmental control technology performance and cost.  United States.  https://doi.org/10.2172/5510351

Copy to clipboard


                    Heeb, C M, Aaberg, R L, Cole, B M, Engel, R L, Kennedy, Jr, W E, and Lewallen, M A. 1980.  
        "Survey of LWR environmental control technology performance and cost".  United States.  https://doi.org/10.2172/5510351.  https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/5510351.

Copy to clipboard


                    
@article{osti_5510351,

  title        = {Survey of LWR environmental control technology performance and cost},

  author       = {Heeb, C M and Aaberg, R L and Cole, B M and Engel, R L and Kennedy, Jr, W E and Lewallen, M A},

  abstractNote = {This study attempts to establish a ranking for species that are routinely released to the environment for a projected nuclear power growth scenario. Unlike comparisons made to existing standards, which are subject to frequent revision, the ranking of releases can be used to form a more logical basis for identifying the areas where further development of control technology could be required. This report describes projections of releases for several fuel cycle scenarios, identifies areas where alternative control technologies may be implemented, and discusses the available alternative control technologies. The release factors were used in a computer code system called ENFORM, which calculates the annual release of any species from any part of the LWR nuclear fuel cycle given a projection of installed nuclear generation capacity. This survey of fuel cycle releases was performed for three reprocessing scenarios (stowaway, reprocessing without recycle of Pu and reprocessing with full recycle of U and Pu) for a 100-year period beginning in 1977. The radioactivity releases were ranked on the basis of a relative ranking factor. The relative ranking factor is based on the 100-year summation of the 50-year population dose commitment from an annual release of radioactive effluents. The nonradioactive releases were ranked on the basis of dilution factor. The twenty highest ranking radioactive releases were identified and each of these was analyzed in terms of the basis for calculating the release and a description of the currently employed control method. Alternative control technology is then discussed, along with the available capital and operating cost figures for alternative control methods.},

  doi          = {10.2172/5510351},

  url          = {https://www.osti.gov/biblio/5510351},
  journal      = {},
number       = ,

  volume       = ,

  place        = {United States},

  year         = {Sat Mar 01 00:00:00 EST 1980},

  month        = {Sat Mar 01 00:00:00 EST 1980}

}

Copy to clipboard

Technical Report:

View Technical Report (5.61 MB)

https://doi.org/10.2172/5510351

Save / Share:

Export Metadata

Save to My Library

Similar records in OSTI.GOV collections:

Requirements and Conceptual Design of Off-gas Systems for the Reprocessing of Metallic Fuels

Technical Report Bruffey, Stephanie; Martin, Leigh; Peruski, Kathryn; ...

An assessment has been conducted to determine how key regulations regarding volatile radionuclide emissions to the atmosphere may apply to the off-gas streams associated with electrochemical reprocessing. The scope of this assessment was based upon a generic electrochemical reprocessing scheme with a throughput rate of 200 MTIHM/y applied to metallic fuel discharged from a sodium fast reactor (SFR), but the findings are able to be translated to other advanced nuclear scenarios as merited. Air dispersion modeling was performed using the EPA CAP-88 model and evaluated the uncontrolled decontamination factors (DFs) that would be required to achieve regulatory compliance with themore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/1767867

Full Text Available
Preliminary report on blending strategies for inert-matrix fuel recycling in LWRs.

Technical Report Hoffman, E

Various recycle strategies have been proposed to manage the inventory of transuranics in commercial spent nuclear fuel (CSNF), with a particular goal of increasing the loading capacity of spent fuel and reprocessing wastes in the Yucca Mountain repository. Transuranic recycling in commercial LWRs can be seen as a viable means of slowing the accumulation of transuranics in the nationwide CSNF stockpile. Furthermore, this type of approach is an important first step in demonstrating the benefits of a nuclear fuel cycle which incorporates recycling, such as envisioned for Generation-IV reactor systems under development. Recycling strategies of this sort are not proposedmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/925237

Full Text Available
LIFE vs. LWR: End of the Fuel Cycle

Technical Report Farmer, J; Blink, J; Shaw, H

The worldwide energy consumption in 2003 was 421 quadrillion Btu (Quads), and included 162 quads for oil, 99 quads for natural gas, 100 quads for coal, 27 quads for nuclear energy, and 33 quads for renewable sources. The projected worldwide energy consumption for 2030 is 722 quads, corresponding to an increase of 71% over the consumption in 2003. The projected consumption for 2030 includes 239 quads for oil, 190 quads for natural gas, 196 quads for coal, 35 quads for nuclear energy, and 62 quads for renewable sources [International Energy Outlook, DOE/EIA-0484, Table D1 (2006) p. 133]. The current fleetmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/945511

Full Text Available
Analysis of the Reuse of Uranium Recovered from the Reprocessing of Commercial LWR Spent Fuel

Technical Report DelCul, Guillermo; Trowbridge, Lee; Renier, John-Paul; ...

This report provides an analysis of the factors involved in the reuse of uranium recovered from commercial light-water-reactor (LWR) spent fuels (1) by reenrichment and recycling as fuel to LWRs and/or (2) by recycling directly as fuel to heavy-water-reactors (HWRs), such as the CANDU (registered trade name for the Canadian Deuterium Uranium Reactor). Reuse is an attractive alternative to the current Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (AFCI) Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) baseline plan, which stores the reprocessed uranium (RU) for an uncertain future or attempts to dispose of it as 'greater-than-Class C' waste. Considering that the open fuel cycle currentlymore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/947143

Full Text Available
Generic repository design concepts and thermal analysis (FY11).

Technical Report Howard, Robert; Dupont, Mark; Blink, James; ...

Reference concepts for geologic disposal of used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste in the U.S. are developed, including geologic settings and engineered barriers. Repository thermal analysis is demonstrated for a range of waste types from projected future, advanced nuclear fuel cycles. The results show significant differences among geologic media considered (clay/shale, crystalline rock, salt), and also that waste package size and waste loading must be limited to meet targeted maximum temperature values. In this study, the UFD R&D Campaign has developed a set of reference geologic disposal concepts for a range of waste types that could potentially be generatedmore »« less
https://doi.org/10.2172/1029783

Full Text Available

Similar Records