State of the art nuclear reactors?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on defining "state-of-the-art" nuclear reactors, emphasizing advancements in both current and future technologies. Key examples of advanced reactors include Areva's N4 and EPR, as well as Westinghouse's AP-600 and AP-1000, with Gen IV reactors being highlighted as the next generation. Fusion reactors are acknowledged as a potential future development, though they remain in the research phase and are not yet operational. The conversation provides various resources for further exploration of these technologies. Overall, the insights shared will aid in understanding the current landscape and future possibilities of nuclear reactor technology.
RR
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi

I have a report to write title "state of the art nuclear reactors" however the content of this is up to my own interpretation.I have taken "state-of-the-art" to mean the highest level of development of a device/ technique at a particular time, so what would this mean in terms of nuclear reactors, and what does a "state-of-the-art" nuclear reactor give us, (i.e. ideal power generation is cheap, efficient, safe, accessible, environmentally friendly, morally sound, etc)

I had two ideas:

1) Development/ improvement of current reactors.
2) Development of new reactors i.e. fusion reactors. (but do these count if they are not used yet?)

Any advice would be much appreciated.

Rajiv
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The current state of the art in PWR technolgy would be the N4 plant and EPR, both built by Areva.

http://www.worldenergy.org/wec-geis/publications/default/tech_papers/17th_congress/3_2_03.asp

Avreva's European Pressurized-Water Reactor

and Westinghouse (BNFL) offers is AP-600 and AP-1000.

http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/C3a.asp


The next generation plants are Gen IV.

http://gen-iv.ne.doe.gov/



In BWR technology, there is GE's (with Hitachi and Toshiba) ABWR.

http://www.toshiba.co.jp/product/abwr/english/products/reactor/abwr.htm

UC Berkeley's Nuclear Engineeringhttp://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/designs/abwr/abwr.html page.

GE's Nuclear Plant and Instrumentation Page.


There is plenty more information, but these are a good start.

Also read this thread - https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=64525&page=1

Fusion Energy is still in the research phase, and there are no practical fusion plants for electrical generation at the moment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RR said:
Hi

2) Development of new reactors i.e. fusion reactors. (but do these count if they are not used yet?)

Rajiv,

Check out:

Courtesy of Argonne National Laboratory:

http://www.anlw.anl.gov/anlw_history/reactors/ifr.html

Courtesy of PBS's Frontline:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/reaction/interviews/till.html

Courtesy of the Nuclear Engineering Dept. of the
University of California at Berkeley:

http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/designs/ifr/

Dr. Gregory Greenman
Physicist
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for your help guys, I think there is more than enough there to get me started on the report.

Thanks again

Rajiv
 
Hello everyone, I am currently working on a burnup calculation for a fuel assembly with repeated geometric structures using MCNP6. I have defined two materials (Material 1 and Material 2) which are actually the same material but located in different positions. However, after running the calculation with the BURN card, I am encountering an issue where all burnup information(power fraction(Initial input is 1,but output file is 0), burnup, mass, etc.) for Material 2 is zero, while Material 1...
Hi everyone, I'm a complete beginner with MCNP and trying to learn how to perform burnup calculations. Right now, I'm feeling a bit lost and not sure where to start. I found the OECD-NEA Burnup Credit Calculational Criticality Benchmark (Phase I-B) and was wondering if anyone has worked through this specific benchmark using MCNP6? If so, would you be willing to share your MCNP input file for it? Seeing an actual working example would be incredibly helpful for my learning. I'd be really...
Back
Top