ORNL-TM-7207 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

More documents

Recommendations

Info

96 233U production capability would be less than 3 kgfyear, which seems im- practically low. AI%hough the removal of fissile material from a DMSR may be awkward, if it could be ascomplfshed without removing large quantities of salt, then the removal could be easily ~~ncesled by additions of denatured 235U to the fuel salt. The change in total uranium concentration would not become significant until after the exchange of a few tens of kilograms of fissile fuel Although a much more detailed, quantitative analysis that considered the relative values of various foms of SSMM would be required to permit a comprehensive ~SS~SSTIER~ of the proliferation sensitivity of the once- through DNSR, this general treatment suggests that this concept may corn- pare favorably with other alternatives in terns of resistance to proliferation of nuclear explosives. . ... . . . . . . . . v.3
. . . :.w . . . . , 4. ALTERNATIVE DMSR CONCEPTS Of the several MSR concepts that have been considered, the DMSR de- scribed in the preceding seetion was judged to be the one most firmly based on currently available technology. However, it is not the only proliferation-resistant MSR concept that could be considered. However, because a high level of proliferation resistance in an MSR apparently re- quires denatured fuel, which imposes some design restrictions, the major differences among the alternate concepts involve the fuel cycle. 4.1 Fuel Cycle Choices Possibly the most favorable fuel cycle for any DMSR, at least from the point of resource utilization, would be one with break-even breeding performance. Calsulations for a DMSR core without neutron €lux flatten- ing to extend the life expectancy of the graphite moderator showed9 that break-even breeding was marginally possible with full-scale fission- product treatment of the fuel using a redustive-extraction/mgtaB-tPansfer process'" similar to that proposed for the MSBR. performance were not attained, the initial fuel change could be "used" for several reactor plant lifetimes by feeding moderate amounts of fissile fuel. Even if break-even Tne next step downward in performance might be a concept involving treatment of the fuel for partial fission-product removal by chemical operations significantly different from the reference process. This ap- proach probably would lead to still lower conversion ratios, but it might permit internal recycle of the fuel through a few generations of reactors and, therefore, offer better resource utilization than the once-through fuel cycle. Some improvement in fuel utilization over current-technology LWRs could be achieved even without on-site chemical treatment for fission- product removal. covery and return of only the uranium) with material that is free of %is- sion products and higher actinides WQUM improve the utilization of fissile fuel, though it would increase the consumption of other fuel-salt constituents e Periodic replacement of the fuel carrier salt (after re-
Page 1:
i *w . . I
Page 5 and 6:
P iii CONTENTS ....................
Page 7 and 8:
CONCEPTUAL DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS O
Page 9 and 10:
3 The primary purpose of this study
Page 11 and 12:
.. .... . w..w c Y ... . r 5 2. GEN
Page 13 and 14:
ii.... :.: ..... .,. \ ..... %& . 3
Page 15 and 16:
addition StathQR would be required.
Page 17 and 18:
!I \.... . , . ~ .... .. . . / I I
Page 19 and 20:
... .. ...... . . . $i 13 Table 1.
Page 21 and 22:
15 Initial scoping studies showed t
Page 23 and 24:
.. . E 6> I S N 0.45 k- 0.50 B --.
Page 25 and 26:
:.:..y ,. . . w, E9 The code calcul
Page 27 and 28:
h 3. Additional 238Y is added as re
Page 29 and 30:
...z,y .. . c .A, Table 9. Actinide
Page 31 and 32:
';x.w' .... Relative power distribu
Page 33 and 34:
........ . . . :..i 27 a Inner 2.54
Page 35 and 36:
29 Table 16. Effect of neutron spec
Page 37 and 38:
ob E 2 a 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Page 39 and 40:
.. . . . . . . . . . 'a# 0.1 0.2 0.
Page 41 and 42:
35 (Doppler effect), (2) changing t
Page 43 and 44:
where Ci = relative delayed-neutron
Page 45 and 46:
.... . . . . , c.y..p c "
Page 47 and 48:
.... :...w . . . . . :, %. , dimens
Page 49 and 50:
,. ::.y ~. . .... , 40 0 43 1 2 3 4
Page 51 and 52: .,.,. . . ., , .. . . . . . . . %..
Page 53 and 54: .... ... . ....... . .%.W 3.3.1.1 C
Page 55 and 56: 49 Variation of fuel composition wi
Page 57 and 58: .. .*,p. . . . . . . . Table 25. Ph
Page 59 and 60: ;: c.... x. . w ..i 53 Table 26, St
Page 61 and 62: would be expected to have an equili
Page 63 and 64: .... . . . . :i ,.*,&s 57 Corrosion
Page 65 and 66: . ;;..,..I . . . . . . "LW 0 9 m -
Page 67 and 68: of the fissioned atom. ea ~arly ass
Page 69 and 70: 63 n e results of a program of solu
Page 71 and 72: 65 Table 27. Sources and rates Sf p
Page 73 and 74: operation of the PISRE. 67 analyses
Page 75 and 76: UP3/UF4 ratio would be possible. DM
Page 77 and 78: $ .p9 3.3.3.1 Preparation of initia
Page 79 and 80: 73 Contamination of fuel by seconda
Page 81 and 82: *w- through the walls of the primar
Page 83 and 84: 77 4 will apparently be necessary (
Page 85 and 86: such contamination. For a demonstra
Page 87 and 88: 8% 3.4 Reactor Materials Although s
Page 89 and 90: : ....., . .’ -. ..WY used in the
Page 91 and 92: ..... i.. ....., . .Yd 85 QRPIL-DWG
Page 93 and 94: ... w . . .y and to salt containing
Page 95 and 96: With the different ~Bjectives of ns
Page 97 and 98: t.;$- ... quite different from thos
Page 99 and 100: 93 during noma1 operation. Minor am
Page 101: ............. . . .. . .=w as SSm,
Page 105 and 106: .. . ... . . . . . . .. . . "W 3. T
Page 107 and 108: .,.. w .." by removing some uranium
Page 109 and 110: , . . . . . . , -c%w probably still
Page 111 and 112: and the ~ dvent (or carrier) salt a
Page 113 and 114: BO 7 TPle fuel makeup requirements
Page 115 and 116: 5. CQPIPIERCIWLPZATION CONSIDERATIO
Page 117 and 118: 11% At the close of MSRE operation,
Page 119 and 120: 12YS 75 22”” 955 30” 1””
Page 121 and 122: 115
Page 123 and 124: aa 7 some components in common with
Page 125 and 126: Ae eo un t No * Table 3%. Capital c
Page 127 and 128: - ,.,.,.,., p .. ..... . G is based
Page 129 and 130: 123 Table 34. Summary of annual non
Page 131 and 132: ...... . . . . ., x.:w* 4 i.. ... _
Page 133 and 134: E2 7 There are no detailed estimate
Page 135 and 136: 129 particularly if such activities
Page 137 and 138: . ~.........* . . . . . :*. ... . -
Page 139 and 140: . .. . . . . . . . ;.:w b 133 the i
Page 141 and 142: _... ..&/ ; .; with reactor scram m
Page 143 and 144: 137 includlng $900 million for the
Page 145 and 146: 139 The authors want to acknowledge
Page 147 and 148: . ... . .,.,.,.,.,. . , i.rc- q....
Page 149 and 150: .:. _.i .. ..... -.=* 45. A. L. Mat
Page 151 and 152: ...... &;.& 3 14 5 74. W, R. Grimes
Page 153 and 154:
p 103. 6. Re Hudson 11, CQNCEPT-5 U
Page 155:
... . . . . . . . , . ,.Y&fl 149 ap
Page 158 and 159:
Account No. -0- Three- digit digit
Page 160 and 161:
.... ..
Page 162:
156 77. He 6. MacPherson, Institute
show all

ORNL-TM-7207 - the Molten Salt Energy Technologies Web Site

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?