05.08.2013 Views

ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

ORNL-5388 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

4-8<br />

Since with <strong>the</strong> exception of <strong>the</strong> Fort St. Vrain HTGR, <strong>the</strong> existing power reactors in<br />

<strong>the</strong> United States are LWRs, initial studies of alternate fuel cycles have assumed that <strong>the</strong>y<br />

would first be implemented in LWRs.* Thus <strong>the</strong> calculations for LWRs, sunnnarized in Sec-<br />

tion 4.1 have considered a number of fuels. For <strong>the</strong> purposes of <strong>the</strong> present study <strong>the</strong> fuels<br />

have been categorized according to <strong>the</strong>ir potential usefulness in <strong>the</strong> envisioned power system<br />

scenarios. Those fuel types that meet <strong>the</strong> nonproliferation requirements stated earlier in<br />

this report are classified as "dispersible" fuels that could be used in LWRs operating outside<br />

a secure energy center. The dispersible fuels are fur<strong>the</strong>r divided into denatured 233U<br />

fuels and 235U-based fuels. The remaining fuels in <strong>the</strong> power systems are <strong>the</strong>n categorized as<br />

"energy-center-constrained" fuels. Finally, a fourth category is used to identify "reference"<br />

fuels. Reference fuels, which are not to be confused with an individual reactor's reference<br />

fuel , are fuels that would have no apparent usefulness in <strong>the</strong> energy-center, dispersed-reactor<br />

scenarios but are included as limiting cases against which <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r fuels can be compared.<br />

(Note: The reactor's reference fuel may or may not be appropriate for use in <strong>the</strong> reduced<br />

proliferation risk scenarios.)<br />

To <strong>the</strong> extent that <strong>the</strong>y apply, <strong>the</strong>se four categories have been used to classify all<br />

<strong>the</strong> fuels presented here for <strong>the</strong> various reactors. Although <strong>the</strong> contributing authors have<br />

used different notations, <strong>the</strong> fuels included are in general as follows:<br />

Dispersible Resource-Based Fuels<br />

A. Natural uranium fuel (containing approximately 0.7% 235U), as currently used in<br />

CANDU heavy-water reactors. Notation: U5(NAT)/U.<br />

B.<br />

C.<br />

Low-enriched 235U fuel (containing approximately 3% 235U), as currently used in<br />

LWRs. Notation: LEU; U5(LE)/U.<br />

Medium-enriched 235U fuel (containing approximately 20% 235U) mixed with thorium<br />

fertile material; could serve as a transition fuel prior to full-scale implementation<br />

of <strong>the</strong> denatured 233U cycle. Notation: MEU(235)/Th; DUTH(235).<br />

Dispersible Denatured Fuel<br />

D. Denatured 233U fuel (nominally approximately 12% 233U in U). Notation: Denatured<br />

233U; ' denatured uranium/thorium; denatured 233U02/Th02; MEU(233)/Th;<br />

DUTH(233); U3(DE)/U/Th.<br />

233U/23*U;<br />

*NOTE: The results presented in this chapter do not consider <strong>the</strong> potential improvements<br />

in <strong>the</strong> once-through LWR that are currently under study. In general, this is also true<br />

for <strong>the</strong> resource-constrained nuclear power systems evaluated in Chapter 6; however,<br />

Chapter 6 does include results from a few calculations for an extended exposure<br />

(43,000-MWD/MTU) once-through LEU-LWR. The particular extended exposure design con-<br />

sidered requires 6% less U3O8 over <strong>the</strong> reactor's lifetime.<br />

b;<br />

tl;<br />

c<br />

i:<br />

c

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!