SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
This work includes, but is not limited to, research and development of joint technology development and certification efforts in the wind power sector; providing access to commercial wind farm and federal facilities to enhance R&D; identification of workforce development best practices. This work will be done at Contractor and Participant facilities.
The purpose of this report is to summarize the capabilities of currently existing NDA technologies that can be applied to holdup measurements. Cataloguing the strengths and weaknesses of the existing state of the art is a necessary step towards setting goals for new technology development. The NDA technologies evaluated in this report include gamma imaging, non-imaging gamma detectors, and neutron coincidence counting. These technologies were chosen based on their potential for technological improvement or to be applied in different settings. Each technology will be analyzed on a set of evaluation criteria chosen to represent the most salient features of a detector system for holdup measurements. These criteria include sensitivity, energy resolution, angular resolution (for imaging technologies only), ease of use, and cost.
The production of renewable motor fuels from lignocellulosic biomass is a key part of the U.S. strategy to ease dependence on imported oil and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For this strategy to be environmentally and economically sound, biomass resource development and conversion technology development must be coordinated so that cost-competitive biofuels can be produced using sustainable, low-cost, and diverse feedstocks. However, the impacts of different biomass types on conversion performance (process efficiency, product quality, potential waste streams) are not well known. To this end, Idaho National Laboratory (INL), National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) are partnering to understand the ‘field-to-fleet’ implications of using different feedstocks in various thermal conversion processes, including fast pyrolysis, catalytic fast pyrolysis, hydrothermal liquefaction, hydrodeoxygenation, and gasification. We recently published results from an integrated study to produce petroleum refinery blendstocks via pyrolysis and catalytic hydroprocessing using several commercially-relevant feedstocks, including softwoods, hardwoods, herbaceous materials, and blends. The results presented here show that feedstock choice has a significant impact on multiple conversion metrics, including bio-oil yield and composition, hydrotreating yield, H2 consumption, selectivity to fuel products, and biomass carbon-to-fuel efficiency. Technoeconomic analysis was used to estimate conversion costs in a commercial process, based on a published design case, indicating that in-plant fuel production costs are also projected to vary significantly. The overall processing efficiency as a function of feedstock is examined on the basis of mass, carbon, and chemical energy of the inputs and products. It is hoped that a quantitative understanding of how different biomass types behave in various thermal processes, coupled with projected feedstock and preprocessing costs, will allow biomass resources to be well-matched with biofuels conversion processes.
At the US Department of Energy Hanford site, the K-East and K-West reactor fuel storage basins (KE or KW Basin) were used in the 1970's and 1980's to store more than 100,000 uranium fuel rods and rod fragments that had been irradiated in the Hanford N Reactor. Approximately 2,100 metric tons of spent nuclear fuel that had been stored in the KW Basin were removed in 2004. Over time a mixture of small fuel corrosion particles, fuel rod metal fragments, and other debris accumulated in the KW Basin from the degradation of the spent nuclear fuel during storage. This is the source of the TRU sludge stored in the KW Basin. The corrosion products mixed with windblown sand, concrete dust, and other debris in the basin to form what is known as sludge. In 2006/2007 KE Basin sludge of similar origin as the KW Basin was transferred to KW Basin. Approximately 27 m{sup 3} of highly radioactive sludge was collected and consolidated underwater in six specially designed engineered containers. The mission of the Hanford Sludge Treatment Project (STP) is to develop and deploy technologies to safely retrieve, transport, and interim store the approximately 27 m{sup 3} of remote-handled transuranic (RH-TRU) sludge that is stored in the KW Basin. After extensive technology development, testing (with a bounding range of simulants), design, and procurement a sludge removal and storage system called the Engineered Container Retrieval and Transfer System (ECRTS) completed acceptance testing in 2018. The ECRTS system is designed to remotely retrieve and transport high density, highly erosive, uranium metal pieces as well as small low-density particles. The ECRTS system includes a retrieval tool based on the XAGO{sup tm} design from the United Kingdom, a heavily modified positive displacement pump, a hose-in-hose transfer system, a Sludge Transport and Storage Container (STSC), a settling and decant system, and a shielded transport system. The first sludge transfer was successfully completed on June 12, 2018 proving that the ECRTS process equipment worked as intended on the actual sludge. Three batches (i.e. transfer and decant) were required to obtain a ∼ 100% fill of the first STSC. The STSC was then transported to the on-site storage facility. Over 20 STSCs will be filled with RH-TRU sludge over approximately 16 months. This paper will discuss the issues and successes associated with this project including the operational aspects of this new system. Experience gained from this successful project should assist anyone with the need to retrieve and manage remote handled sludge from fuel storage basins. (authors)
This report provides the qualification status of experimental data for the entire Advanced Gas Reactor 3/4 (AGR 3/4) fuel irradiation. AGR-3/4 is the third in a series of planned irradiation experiments conducted in the Advanced Test Reactor (ATR) at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) for the AGR Fuel Development and Qualification Program, which supports development of the advanced reactor technology under the INL ART Technology Development Office (TDO). The main objective of AGR-3/4 irradiation is to provide a known source of fission products for subsequent transport through compact matrix and structural graphite materials due to the presence of designed-to-fail fuel particles. Full power irradiation of the AGR 3/4 test began on December 14, 2011 (ATR Cycle 151A), and was completed on April 12, 2014 (end of ATR Cycle 155B) after 369.1 effective full power days of irradiation. The AGR-3/4 test was in the reactor core for eight of the ten ATR cycles between 151A and 155B. During the unplanned outage cycle, 153A, the experiment was removed from the ATR northeast flux trap (NEFT) location and stored in the ATR canal. This was to prevent overheating of fuel compacts due to higher than normal ATR power during the subsequent Powered Axial Locator Mechanism cycle, 153B. The AGR 3/4 test was inserted back into the ATR NEFT location during the outage of ATR Cycle 154A on April 26, 2013. Therefore, the AGR-3/4 irradiation data received during these 2 cycles (153A and 153B) are irrelevant and their qualification status isnot included in this report. Additionally, during ATR Cycle 152A the ATR core ran at low power for a short enough duration that the irradiation data are not used for physics and thermal calculations. However, the qualification status of irradiation data for this cycle is still covered in this report. As a result, this report includes data from 8 ATR Cycles: 151A, 151B, 152A, 152B, 154A, 154B, 155A, and 155B, as recorded in the Nuclear Data Management and Analysis System (NDMAS). The AGR 3/4 data streams addressed in this report include thermocouple (TC) temperatures, sweep gas data (flow rates, pressure, and moisture content), and Fission Product Monitoring System (FPMS) data (release rates, release to birth rate ratios [R/Bs], and particle failure counts) for each of the twelve capsules in the AGR 3/4 experiment. During Outage Cycle 155A, fourteen flow meters were installed downstream from fourteen FPMS monitors to measure flows from the monitors; qualification status of these data are also included in the report. The final data qualification status for these data streams is determined by a Data Review Committee (DRC) composed of AGR technical leads, Sitewide Quality Assurance (QA), and NDMAS analysts. For ATR Cycles 151A through 154B, the DRC convened on February 12, 2014, reviewed the data acquisition process, and considered whether the data met the requirements for data collection as specified in QA approved INL ART TDO data collection plans. The DRC also examined the results of NDMAS data testing and statistical analyses, and confirmed the qualification status of the data as given in this report. The qualification status of AGR-3/4 irradiation data during the first six cycles were previously reported in INL/EXT-14-31186 document. This report presents data qualification status for the entire AGR-3/4 irradiation.
Bioproducts are chemicals derived from a biomass feedstock; they can be produced on their own or as co-products of a biorefinery that also produces biofuels. Bioproducts have historically been difficult to scale up and bring to market, despite a broad understanding developed within BETO of the various conversion processes that can be used to produce bioproducts. Expanding the bioproducts industry by bringing more bioproducts to market would have a variety of positive impacts. Growth in the bioproducts industry would support the biofuels industry by enabling biorefinery co-products that yield additional revenue streams, allowing biofuel selling prices to be reduced and expanding the biofuels market. A larger bioproducts industry also has the potential to reduce carbon and other emissions associated with the U.S. chemical sector and contribute to increased price stability in some areas of the chemical market by shifting portions of the chemical sector away from reliance on fossil feedstocks. The key barrier to realizing these positive impacts is a lack of knowledge around the factors that prevent or enable bioproducts to reach the commercial market. To date, there has been essentially no research done on how successful bioproducts (commercially produced bioproducts that have captured market share) become successful, why failed bioproducts fail, and what the similarities and differences are between successful and failed bioproducts. The current project addresses this knowledge gap with a decision support tool that can be used by investors, technology developers and government agencies to bring more bioproducts to market, thereby simultaneously growing the bioproducts and biofuels industries. Development of the decision support tool was based on research on the technology development process and success rates in analogous industries, data gathered during previous BETO-funded projects, and a series of interviews with subject-matter experts within BETO, the bioproducts industry, and the investment community. This information formed a knowledge base around how bioproducts are developed from applied research to commercial scale was assembled, which was used to build the Bioproduct Transition Dynamics (BTD) model, a system dynamics (SD) model that tracks bioproduct development projects from applied research through the 'valley of death' of piloting and demoing to commercial scale production. The end-of-project goal is to release the BTD, along with supporting documentation, as a transparent open-source model that will inform decisions around bioproduct development and investments and enable more bioproducts to reach the market. The BTD takes as inputs techno-economic data on specific bioproducts, behavioral parameters for developers and investors, expectations around government support, and exogenous market factors. Model outputs include bioproduct technological progress over time, a cash flow statement for the development project, and market share estimates. Following initial model development, a sensitivity analysis was performed on a subset of model inputs to determine, first, if the BTD could be used to answer analysis questions of interest to BETO, and second, which of the inputs considered were most influential on bioproduct success. Results indicate that the BTD can be used to identify scenarios that enable bioproduct development, and that 'soft' or semi-quantitative factors play a large role in determining if a bioproduct will reach the market. A workshop was also held for subject-matter experts and prospective BTD users in July 2018. The workshop covered BTD model logic, input data and assumptions as well as the sensitivity analysis results and a discussion of potential use cases. Workshop feedback was used to identify additional model development tasks and was incorporated into a draft technical report completed in September 2018. BTD model development, validation and application will continue through 2019.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Environmental Management (EM) has a mission to complete the safe clean-up of the environmental legacy resulting from six decades of weapons production and energy research. This effort is recognized as one of the largest and most diverse and technically complex environmental clean-up operations in the world. The overall strategy to address this challenge includes several components, one of which involves leveraging the expertise within the International community, when applicable. The opportunities related to international collaborations are an important component of the DOE EM strategy for the clean-up mission, providing excellent forums for EM to stay beneficially engaged with the international community and our global partners. EM has been supporting the clean-up mission of the Department through international collaborations for almost 20 years. The EM International Program is sponsored by the DOE EM Office of the Chief of Staff (EM-2.1), which directly supports the DOE-EM Office of Assistant Secretary (EM-1), in coordination with the entire EM organization. The primary objective of the EM International Program is to provide benefit to the Department in successful completion of the EM clean-up mission, through establishing strategic approaches for specific international collaboration initiatives that are focused on appropriate strategic program goals. The EM International Program strategy to support the EM mission includes many facets, but they can generally be grouped into two primary areas. First, the EM International Program maintains, establishes, and/or participates in international agreements such that appropriate mechanisms are available for conducting international collaborations with foreign government organizations, educational institutions and private industry to leverage resources and link international experience and expertise, in support of the EM mission and compliant with US foreign policy. Second, through coordination with the EM Office of Technology Development (EM-3.2), the EM International Program leverages these agreements to identify mutually beneficial opportunities to evaluate, test, and adapt technologies, capabilities, and expertise for application to EM mission needs. These activities directly support goals within the current DOE Strategic Plan 2014 - 2018, issued in April 2014. Working with the Office of Technology Development, the EM International Program is developing a process for identifying and selecting collaborative international technology projects for Fiscal Year 2017 (FY17) that have high potential impact to the EM mission. The technical scope of these activities is expected to span the entire EM mission, including tank waste and nuclear materials management; groundwater and soil remediation; deactivation and decommissioning; and radioactive waste disposal operations. Depending on budget availability, these collaborative activities are expected to be awarded by mid-FY17. (authors)
Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International, Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration. Sandia has a long history of pioneering AM technology development. In the mid 1990s, Sandia developed laser-engineered net shaping (LENS), one of the first direct metal AM technologies, which was commercialized by Optomec. Robocast, an extrusion-based direct-write process for 3D ceramic parts, is another technology developed at Sandia. It was commercialized by Robocast Enterprises, LLC. As of January, 2019, Sandia was conducting AM R&D projects valued at about $25 million, with an emphasis on: 1) analysis-driven design, 2) materials reliability, and 3) multi-material AM.
Under the Energy & Environmental Research Center’s (EERC’s) ~$\$$22 million Phase II Brine Extraction and Storage Test (BEST) Program, a multimillion-dollar brine treatment technology test bed facility was established in western North Dakota to provide a platform for evaluating developing technologies and approaches for brine treatment and volume reduction. The initial facility, and associated research effort, was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), with in-kind contributions provided by several industry participants and the state of North Dakota. Since its opening, the Brine Technology Test Facility (BTTF) has supported performance evaluations of desalination technologies capable of treating high-salinity produced water (PW) and enabled data collection for multiple approaches of PW management and critical material recovery. As part of the decommissioning process for the original project, facility ownership and liability were transferred to Select Water, which is providing the EERC with a continuing site access option for state or federal research and/or commercial technology development. This report documents the findings from a design study conducted by the EERC and the engineering firm that was originally contracted to design and construct the facility (Advanced Engineering and Environmental Services, LLC [AE2S]) that evaluated the current status of BTTF and its systems and developed a retrofit design to increase the facility’s capabilities through automation and modularization of its PW treatment infrastructure. The proposed retrofit will provide DOE and industry with an expanded range of conditioned PW that can be produced at the facility for evaluating fit-for-purpose water treatment technologies, online instrumentation for brine chemistry determination, and systems that recover critical materials like lithium and magnesium. The current facility consists of an 9600-square-foot facility that includes a 40-foot by 65-foot Class 1, Division 2-rated demonstration area and associated control rooms and lab-ready space capable of sourcing oil and gas PW and wastewater from industrial sources or tailoring brine compositions up to 300,000 mg/L total dissolved solids (TDS) and supplying them at rates up to 25 gpm for extended-duration technology demonstrations. The colocation of the facility with Select Water’s water management facilities allows for access and unloading of more than 10,000 bbl/day of trucked water delivered to site and associated access to on-site Class I and Class II brine disposal wells and nearby hazardous waste landfills operated and/or contracted by Select Water to dispose of concentrate and/or effluents associated with the testing.
The Hanford Site Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF) currently treats aqueous waste streams generated during site cleanup activities. When the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) begins operations, including Direct Feed Low Activity Waste (DFLAW) vitrification, a liquid secondary waste (LSW) stream from the WTP will need to be treated. The volume of effluent for treatment at the ETF will increase significantly. The powdered salt waste form produced by the ETF will be replaced by a stabilized solidified waste form for disposal in Hanford’s Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF). Washington River Protection Solutions is implementing a Secondary Liquid Waste Immobilization Technology Development Plan to address the technology needs for a waste form and solidification process to treat the increased volume of waste planned for disposal at the IDF. Waste form testing to support this plan is composed of work in the near term to provide data as input to a performance assessment (PA) for Hanford’s IDF. In 2015, three Hanford Liquid Secondary Waste simulants were developed based on existing and projected waste streams. Using these waste simulants, fourteen mixes of Hanford Liquid Secondary Waste were prepared and tested varying the waste simulant, the water-to-dry materials ratio, and the dry materials blend composition.1 In FY16, testing was performed using a simulant of the EMF process condensate blended with the caustic scrubber—from the Low Activity Waste (LAW) melter—, processed through the ETF. The initial EMF-16 simulant will be based on modeling efforts performed to determine the mass balance of the ETF for the DFLAW.2 The compressive strength of all of the mixes exceeded the target of 3.4 MPa (500 psi) to meet the requirements identified as potential IDF Waste Acceptance Criteria in Table 1 of the Secondary Liquid Waste Immobilization Technology Development Plan.3 The hydraulic properties of the waste forms tested (hydraulic conductivity and water characteristic curves) were comparable to the properties measured on the Savannah River Site (SRS) Saltstone waste form. Future testing should include efforts to first; 1) determine the rate and amount of ammonia released during each unit operation of the treatment process to determine if additional ammonia management is required, then; 2) reduce the ammonia content of the ETF concentrated brine prior to solidification, making the waste more amenable to grouting, or 3) manage the release of ammonia during production and ongoing release during storage of the waste form, or 4) develop a lower pH process/waste form thereby precluding ammonia release.
This report provides a status of the markets and technology development involved in growing a domestic bioenergy economy as it existed at the end of 2013. It compiles and integrates information to provide a snapshot of the current state and historical trends influencing the development of bioenergy markets. This information is intended for policy-makers as well as technology developers and investors tracking bioenergy developments. It also highlights some of the key energy and regulatory drivers of bioenergy markets.
This document serves as a resource to science and technology offices within DOE seeking to incorporate energy and environmental justice (EEJ) into their programs and portfolios. It provides background information on EEJ principles, how those principles apply from early-stage technology development through deployment and commercialization. Through providing foundational information about justice and equity, and how they apply to technology development and program facilitation, this document provides information to take tangible and interim steps towards these goals.
This effort employs and adapts a rigorous multiscale electricity modeling platform at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to evaluate carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and negative emissions technologies (NET) from the ARPA-E FLECCS program. NREL's modeling platform includes the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) electric sector capacity expansion model, which projects future electricity generation mixes at sub-state-level resolution that are downscaled to the unit-level to enable hourly, zonal or nodal electricity production cost modeling in the PLEXOS model. The ReEDS-PLEXOS modeling suite is well-established for examining electric sector futures with high renewable energy penetrations, energy storage, electrification, and distributed generation. The key advancement proposed herein utilizes collaboration with CCS experts at the University of Wyoming (U.WY) and the FLECCS technology development teams to create innovative methods for representing CCS and NET in the ReEDS and PLEXOS models. Expanded technology options and new operational parameterizations are integrated into these models to allow an unprecedented combination of scope and resolution for exploring the future of CCS and NET. The resulting capabilities permit wide-ranging scenario analysis to assess CCS and NET deployment under alternative scenarios of CO2 prices and competitiveness of flexible CCS and NET technologies. We demonstrate sample deployment and operational outcomes to show how these models are being used to assess the future potential for FLECCS technologies and their impacts on the U.S. electricity system. These products will help an emerging CCS/NET industry in the United States by providing economics-driven guidance to technology developers while informing policy and investment decisions in the public and private sectors.
Half of China’s population now lives in cities whose rapidly increasing populations burden already crowded infrastructure and exacerbate environmental and climate change stresses, threatening public health and quality of life (Chinese Society for Urban Studies 2011; Zhou and Williams 2013). To help address these challenges, China’s central and local governments have moved aggressively toward building low-carbon eco-cities, which have significant potential to mitigate and adapt to climate change (Zhou, He, and Williams 2012). However, there is a lack of information to assist policy makers in defining low-carbon eco-cities, evaluating progress toward low-carbon and ecological goals, and finding information on policies and technologies to improve the performance of developing a low-carbon eco-cites.
This project was a collaboration between the University of Oklahoma (OU) and the University of Michigan (UMich). The overall objective of the project was to address a critical problem facing the siting of nuclear facilities, where there is no mechanism for incorporating public attitudes at a state and local level into decision-making. Utilizing recent advances in data modeling over local spatial scales, the research team created a state and county level map of public attitudes towards nuclear energy. Current estimates for public acceptance of nuclear technologies primarily exists on a national level, and sub-national estimates of public opinion about reactor siting, research facilities, transport routes, or storage and disposal facilities are very scarce. Model results from this project provide a systematic basis for technology developers to evaluate public acceptance across alternative siting options as a critical component for weighing potential benefit-cost tradeoffs for alternative paths to deploy new nuclear facilities. The project utilized data from the largest database of nuclear attitudes in the US, coupled with Census and elections-related data as well as data on social vulnerability and proximity to current nuclear facilities. In addition to modeling public support, the team also developed an interactive map to showcase results, using an online tool called Public and Local Attitudes about Nuclear Energy Technologies (PLANET). The tool allows technology developers and stakeholders to interact with the model results and better understand variation in support for nuclear facility siting on a state and county level. The interactive nature of the tool also allows users to analyze results in a targeted way, by comparing levels of support across different states and/or counties as desired.
This study is aimed at evaluating the existing waste management approaches for nuclear fuel cycle facilities in comparison to the objectives of implementing an advanced fuel cycle in the U.S. under current legal, regulatory, and logistical constructs. The study begins with the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Integrated Waste Management Strategy (IWMS) (Gombert et al. 2008) as a general strategy and associated Waste Treatment Baseline Study (WTBS) (Gombert et al. 2007). The tenets of the IWMS are equally valid to the current waste management study. However, the flowsheet details have changed significantly from those considered under GNEP. In addition, significant additional waste management technology development has occurred since the GNEP waste management studies were performed. This study updates the information found in the WTBS, summarizes the results of more recent technology development efforts, and describes waste management approaches as they apply to a representative full recycle reprocessing flowsheet. Many of the waste management technologies discussed also apply to other potential flowsheets that involve reprocessing. These applications are occasionally discussed where the data are more readily available. The report summarizes the waste arising from aqueous reprocessing of a typical light-water reactor (LWR) fuel to separate actinides for use in fabricating metal sodium fast reactor (SFR) fuel and from electrochemical reprocessing of the metal SFR fuel to separate actinides for recycle back into the SFR in the form of metal fuel. The primary streams considered and the recommended waste forms include; Tritium in low-water cement in high integrity containers (HICs); Iodine-129: As a reference case, a glass composite material (GCM) formed by the encapsulation of the silver Mordenite (AgZ) getter material in a low-temperature glass is assumed. A number of alternatives with distinct advantages are also considered including a fused silica waste form with encapsulated nano-sized AgI crystals; Carbon-14 immobilized as a CaCO3 in a cement waste form; Krypton-85 stored as a compressed gas; An aqueous reprocessing high-level waste (HLW) raffinate waste immobilized by the vitrification process; An undissolved solids (UDS) fraction from aqueous reprocessing of LWR fuel either included in the borosilicate HLW glass or immobilized in the form of a metal alloy or titanate ceramics; Zirconium-based LWR fuel cladding hulls and stainless steel (SS) fuel assembly hardware super-compacted for disposal or purified for reuse (or disposal as low-level waste, LLW) of Zr by reactive gas separations; Electrochemical process salt HLW incorporated into a glass bonded Sodalite waste form; and Electrochemical process UDS and SS cladding hulls melted into an iron based alloy waste form. Mass and volume estimates for each of the recommended waste forms based on the source terms from a representative flowsheet are reported. In addition to the above listed primary waste streams, a range of secondary process wastes are generated by aqueous reprocessing of LWR fuel, metal SFR fuel fabrication, and electrochemical reprocessing of SFR fuel. These secondary wastes have been summarized and volumes estimated by type and classification. The important waste management data gaps and research needs have been summarized for each primary waste stream and selected waste process.
During D and D operations of legacy nuclear facilities, the ability to effectively stabilize contamination in large cavities is a significant challenge. For items that must be removed, such as gloveboxes and entry hoods, a method of simply filling the volume to stabilize any residual contamination after contamination efforts have concluded would be of great benefit, and further the As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) culture of the DOE complex. The development, testing, and characterization of commercial fixatives and foams for applicability towards fixating contamination provides a potential structural reinforcement and fire resiliency in legacy nuclear facility equipment. Much of the equipment, such as gloveboxes, shielded cells, and radiological hoods left over from nuclear processing leave large cavities. Filling these voids after decontamination efforts provides a means of shielding workers from excess radiation exposure while immobilizing residual contamination. As such, we look to continue the development of fixatives/intumescent coatings from the previous year and test commercially available polymer-based foam products for use in filling these cavities, providing a secondary level of protection and shielding during the D and D process This research is funded as part of the In-Situ Decommissioning and Technology Development and sponsored by DOE- Office of Environmental Management Technology Development. (authors)
This study is aimed at evaluating the existing waste management approaches for nuclear fuel cycle facilities in comparison to the objectives of implementing an advanced fuel cycle in the U.S. under current legal, regulatory, and logistical constructs. The study begins with the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) Integrated Waste Management Strategy (IWMS) as a general strategy and associated Waste Treatment Baseline Study (WTBS). The tenets of the IWMS are equally valid to the current waste management study. However, the flowsheet details have changed significantly from those considered under GNEP. In addition, significant additional waste management technology development has occurred since the GNEP waste management studies were performed. This study updates the information found in the WTBS, summarizes the results of more recent technology development efforts, and describes waste management approaches as they apply to both a nominal case study and near-term target reprocessing flowsheets. Many of the waste management technologies discussed also apply to other potential flowsheets that involve reprocessing. The report summarizes the waste arising from aqueous reprocessing of a typical light-water reactor (LWR) fuel to separate actinides for use in fabricating metal sodium fast reactor (SFR) fuel and from electrochemical reprocessing of the metal SFR fuel to separate actinides for recycle back into the SFR in the form of metal fuel. The primary streams considered and the recommended waste forms include: • Tritium separated from either a low volume gas stream or a high volume water stream. The recommended waste form is low-water cement in high integrity containers (HICs). • Iodine-129 separated from off-gas streams in aqueous processing. There are a range of potentially suitable waste forms. As a reference case, a glass composite material (GCM) formed by the encapsulation of the silver Mordenite (AgZ) getter material in a low-temperature glass is assumed. A number of alternatives with distinct advantages are also considered including a fused silica waste form with encapsulated nano-sized AgI crystals. • Carbon-14 separated from LWR fuel treatment off-gases and immobilized as a CaCO3 in a cement waste form. • Krypton-85 separated from LWR and SFR fuel treatment off-gases and stored as a compressed gas. • An aqueous reprocessing high-level waste (HLW) raffinate waste which is immobilized by the vitrification process in one of three forms: a single phase borosilicate glass, a borosilicate based glass ceramic, or a multi-phased crystalline synthetic rock (Synroc). • An undissolved solids (UDS) fraction from aqueous reprocessing of LWR fuel that is either included in the borosilicate HLW glass or is immobilized in the form of a metal alloy in the case of glass ceramics or Synroc. • Zirconium-based LWR fuel cladding hulls and stainless steel (SS) fuel assembly hardware that are washed and super-compacted for disposal or as an alternative with high promise the purification and reuse (or disposal as low-level waste, LLW) of Zr by reactive gas separations. • Electrochemical process salt HLW which is incorporated into a glass bonded Sodalite waste form known as the ceramic waste form (CWF). • Electrochemical process UDS and SS cladding hulls which are melted into an iron based alloy waste form. Mass and volume estimates for each of the recommended waste forms based on the source terms from the reference mass balances are reported. In addition to the above listed primary waste streams, a range of secondary process wastes are generated by aqueous reprocessing of LWR fuel, metal SFR fuel fabrication, and electrochemical reprocessing of SFR fuel. These secondary wastes have been summarized and volumes estimated by type and classification. The important waste management data gaps and research needs have been summarized for each primary waste stream and selected waste process.