Reliability and Safety Assessment of a Conceptual Thermochemical Plant for Nuclear-Based Hydrogen Generation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrogen is a clean fuel that can help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as its oxidation does not emit carbon dioxide (a primary greenhouse gas). Generation of hydrogen has attracted much recent worldwide attention. A promising method to generate hydrogen is to use heat from nuclear power plants. The advantages of using nuclear heat are capabilities of large-scale generation of hydrogen and zero greenhouse gas emissions. Nuclear energy is expected to have an important role for hydrogen generation in the future. In this paper, reliability and probabilistic safety assessments of a conceptual nuclear-hydrogen plant will be analyzed. There are two main methods to generate hydrogen from nuclear energy. They include: 1) thermochemical processes and 2) electrochemical processes. The conceptual plant of this paper is based on a Cu-Cl thermocycle developed by Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) and the Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). Using a flowsheet of the hydrogen plant created by an Aspen Plus simulation by ANL, four fault-trees are constructed for potential risk scenarios. Based on the results from the fault tree analyses (FTA), the risk levels of the hydrogen generation plant under different accident scenarios can be calculated. Based on the results, potential problems encountered in Cu-Cl cycle are identified and possible solutions will be recommended for future improvements.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".