Delays in the construction of nuclear reactors due to licensing issues have been a problem across the world, affecting projects in Finland, France, and the United States. Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) emerge as a transition between Generations III+ and IV in order to make nuclear energy more competitive with other energy sources, including renewables. In this study, the SMR NuScale, one of the most promising projects today, is investigated for its conversion into a U-233-producing reactor through the Radkowsky seed-blanket fuel element concept, applied in the Shippingport reactor, in a parametric study. Initially, a validation of the reference reactor (NuScale) was carried out with data from technical documents and papers, thus demonstrating the agreement of the computational model carried out with the SERPENT code. Then, a parametric study is carried out to define the area of the seed and blanket region, proportions of enrichment and pitch length. Finally, a comparison is made between the production of U-233, TRU reduction, burn-up extension and neutronic and thermohydraulic safety parameters. This study demonstrates an improvement in the conversion factor and a considerable reduction in the production of TRU, in addition to the production of U-233 with a low proportion of other uranium isotopes that can lead to the beginning of the thorium cycle with already consolidated technologies.
References
[1]
GIF (2014) Technology Roadmap Update for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems. Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA).
[2]
Deutsche Welle (2022) Finland’s Much-Delayed Nuclear Plant Launches. https://www.dw.com/en/finlands-much-delayed-nuclear-plant-launches/a-61108015
[3]
ANS (2022) Vogtle Project Update: Cost likely to Top $30 Billion. https://www.ans.org/news/article-3949/vogtle-project-update-cost-likely-to-top-30-billion/
[4]
ANS (2022) Another Delay, Cost Bump, for Flamanville-3. https://www.ans.org/news/article-3573/another-delay-cost-bump-for-flamanville3/
[5]
Kröger, W., Sornette, D. and Ayoub, A. (2020) Towards Safer and More Sustainable Ways for Exploiting Nuclear Power. World Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 10, 91-115. https://doi.org/10.4236/wjnst.2020.103010
[6]
Boarin, S. and Ricotti, M.E. (2014) An Evaluation of SMR Economic Attractiveness. Science and Technology of Nuclear Installations, 2014, Article ID: 803698. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/803698
[7]
Freire, L.O. and Andrade, D.A. (2021) Novel Technological Developments with Impacts on Perspectives for Mobile Nuclear Power Plants. World Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology, 11, 141-158. https://doi.org/10.4236/wjnst.2021.114011
[8]
Stewart, W.R. and Shirvan, K. (2022) Capital Cost Estimation for Advanced Nuclear Power Plants. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 155, Article ID: 111880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111880
[9]
Lloyd, C.A., Roulstone, T. and Lyrons, R.E. (2021) Transport, Constructability, and Economic Advantages of SMR Modularization. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 134, Article ID: 103672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2021.103672
[10]
NuScale Power. A Cost Competitive Nuclear Power Solution. https://www.nuscalepower.com/benefits/cost-competitive
[11]
Lung, M. and Gremm, O. (1998) Perspectives of the Thorium Fuel Cycle. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 180, 133-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0029-5493(97)00296-3
[12]
Humphrey, U.E. and Khandaker, M.U. (2018) Viability of Thorium-Based Nuclear Fuel Cycle for the Next Generation Nuclear Reactor: Issues and Prospects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 97, 259-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.08.019
[13]
Galperin, A., Reichert, P. and Radkowsky, A. (1997) Thorium Fuel for Light Water reactors—Reducing Proliferation Potential of Nuclear Power Fuel Cycle. Science & Global Security, 6, 265-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/08929889708426440
[14]
Maiorino, J.R., Moreira, J.M.L., Stefani, G.L., Busse, A. and Santos, T.A. (2014) Thorium as a New Primary Source of Nuclear Energy. In: Proceedings of IX Congresso Brasileiro de Planejamento Energético (CBPE), Florianópolis, 25-27 August 2014, 1-11.
[15]
IAEA (2014) Technology Roadmap Update for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems.
[16]
Maiorino, J.R., Stefani, G.L., Moreira, J.M.L., Rossi, P.C.R. and Santos, T.A. (2017) Feasibility to Convert an Advanced PWR from UO2 to a Mixed U/ThO2 Core—Part I: Parametric Studies. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 102, 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2016.12.010
[17]
De Stefani, G.L., Maiorino, J.R. and de Losada Moreira, J.M. (2020) The AP-Th 1000—An Advanced Concept to Use MOX of Thorium in a Closed Fuel Cycle. International Journal of Energy Research, 45, 11642-11655.
[18]
Rosales, J., Francois, J.L. and Garcia, C. (2022) Neutronic Assessment of a PWR-Type SMR Core with TRISO Particles Using Mixed-Oxide Fuel Strategies. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 154, Article ID: 104470. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2022.104470
[19]
Akbari-Jeyhouni, R., Ochbelagh, D.R., Maiorino, J.R., D’Auria, F. and Stefani, G.L. (2018) The Utilization of Thorium in Small Modular Reactors—Part I: Neutronic Assessment. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 120, 422-430. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.06.013
[20]
Alam, S.B., de Oliveira, R.G.G., Goodwin, C.S. and Parks, G.T. (2019) Coupled Neutronic/Thermal-Hydraulic Hot Channel Analysis of High Power Density Civil Marine SMR Cores. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 127, 400-411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.12.031
[21]
Peakman, A., Owen, H. and Abram, T. (2021) Core Design and Fuel Behaviour of a Small Modular Pressurised Water Reactor Using (Th,U)O2 Fuel for Commercial Marine Propulsion. Progress in Nuclear Energy, 141, Article ID: 103966. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2021.103966
[22]
Alam, S.B., Goodwin, C.S. and Parks, G.T. (2019) Parametric Neutronics Analyses of Lattice Geometry and Coolant Candidates for a Soluble-Boron-Free Civil Marine SMR Core Using Micro-Heterogeneous Duplex Fuel. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 129, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2019.01.037
[23]
Alam, S.B., Ridwan, T., Kumar, D., Almutairi, B., Goodwin, C. and Parks, G.T. (2019) Small Modular Reactor Core Design for Civil Marine Propulsion Using Micro-Heterogeneous Duplex Fuel. Part II: Whole-Core Analysis. Nuclear Engineering and Design, 346, 176-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2019.03.004
[24]
Watts, D.G., Adams, F.P., Masala, E., Blomeley, L. and Bromeley, B.P. (2022) Physics Modeling for Conceptual Designs of Proposed Experiments in the Zero Energy Deuterium-2 Critical Facility for Testing Small Modular Reactor-Type Fuels. Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science, 8, Article ID: 031501. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4054079
[25]
Bayomy, A.M., Bromley, B.P., Dominguez, A.N. and Kelly, S. (2022) Steady-State Subchannel Thermalhydraulic Assessment of a Full-Scale Pressurized Water Reactor-Small Modular Reactor Fuel Assembly with Conventional and Advanced Fuels. Journal of Nuclear Engineering and Radiation Science, 8, Article ID: 031601. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4053829
[26]
Sadegh-Noedoost, A., Faghihi, F., Fakhraei, A. and Amin-Mozafari, M. (2020) Investigations of the Fresh-Core Cycle-Length and the Average Fuel Depletion Analysis of the NuScale Core. Annals of Nuclear Energy, 136, Article ID: 106995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2019.106995
[27]
Kasten, P.R. (1998) Review of the Radkowsky Thorium Reactor Concept. Science & Global Security, 7, 237-269. https://doi.org/10.1080/08929889808426462
Frick, K. and Bragg-Sitton, S. (2021) Development of the NuScale Power Module in the INL Modelica Ecosystem. Nuclear Technology, 207, 521-542. https://doi.org/10.1080/00295450.2020.1781497
[30]
NuScale Power LLC (2020) NuScale Standard Plant Design Certification Application. Chapter 4: Reactor. Rev. 5.
