Utilization of nuclear waste plutonium and thorium mixed fuel in candu reactors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spent nuclear fuel out of conventional light water reactors contains significant amount of even plutonium isotopes, so called reactor grade plutonium. Excellent neutron economy of Canada deuterium uranium (CANDU) reactors can further burn reactor grade plutonium, which has been used as a booster fissile fuel material in form of mixed ThO2/PuO2 fuel in a CANDU fuel bundle in order to assure reactor criticality. The paper investigates incineration of nuclear waste and the prospects of exploitation of rich world thorium reserves in CANDU reactors. In the present work, the criticality calculations have been performed with 3-D geometrical modeling of a CANDU reactor, where the structure of all fuel rods and bundles is represented individually. In the course of time calculations, nuclear transformation and radioactive decay of all actinide elements as well as fission products are considered. Four different fuel compositions have been selected for investigations: ① 95% thoria (ThO2) + 5% PuO2, ② 90% ThO2 + 10% PuO2, ③ 85% ThO2 + 15% PuO2 and ④ 80% ThO2 + 20% PuO2. The latter is used for the purpose of denaturing the new 233U fuel with 238U. The behavior of the criticality k∞ and the burnup values of the reactor have been pursued by full power operation for ~10 years. Among the investigated four modes, 90% ThO2 + 10% PuO2 seems a reasonable choice. This mixed fuel would continue make possible extensive exploitation of thorium resources with respect to reactor criticality. Reactor will run with the same fuel charge for ~7 years and allow a fuel burnup ~55 GWd/t. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".