No abstract

Nine alternative LWR fuel cycles are analyzed in terms of the isotopic content of the fuel material, the relative amounts of primary and recycled material, the uranium and thorium requirements, the fuel cycle costs and the fraction of energy which must be generated at secured sites. The fuel materials include low-enriched uranium (LEU), plutonium-uranium (MOX), highlyenriched uranium-thorium (HEU-Th), denatured uranium-thorium (DU-Th) and plutonium-thorium (Pu-Th). The analysis is based on tracing the material requirements of a generic pressurized water reactor (PWR) for a 30-year period at constant annual energy output. During this time period all the created fissile material is recycled unless its reactivity worth is less than 0.2% uranium enri~hment plant tails. i i ; Among the authors, R. L. Aaberg performed the analysis of Cycles A and B as well as programming the routine which computes the separative work, and migration of the minor isotopes in the enrichment cascade. A. J. Boegel performed the analysis of Cycle C, and wrote the fuel cycles description section of the report. He also contributed to the original plan of analysis. C. M. Heeb guided the revisions to the LEOPARD code, and was responsible for the overall analysis effort. U. P. Jenquin studied the effect of resonance interference and evaluated the 232 Th resonance integral measurements and calculations. D. A. Kottwitz created the new 240 pu resonance treatment in LEOPARD. M. A. Lewallen selected the unit cost assumptions and wrote the section on uranium and thorium requirements. E. T. Merrill wrote the original flow diagrams which form the basis of the analysis, did the cash flow analysis for the power costs, and wrote the economics sections of this report. A. M. Nolan performed the analysis of Cycles D, E, G and H, wrote the fissile loading search subroutines in LEOPARD, wrote the introduction, and the section on non-proliferation and diversion resistance.

CONTENTS 1.0 SUMMARY 29 33.2 1.3• vendor commitment -A firm commitment to accelerate FBR commercialization will entail heavy industry involvement, which has the effect of reducing cost and time uncertainties.3.17 10 J. P. Thereault

Halogenated and nonhalogenated hydrocarbon contaminants are currently found in natural waterways, groundwater, and soils as a result of spills and careless disposal practices. The development of proper treatment methodologies for the waste streams producing this environmental damage is now a subject of growing concern. A significant number of these waste stream compounds are chemically stable and are thus resistant to environmental degradation. Numerous researchers have investigated the use of ionizing radiation to decompose chlorinated hydrocarbons in diverse matrices and have proposed various free‐radical‐induced reaction mechanisms. This article is divided into two sections. First, we present data on experimentally measured, radiolytically induced decomposition of hazardous wastes and toxic substances using accelerator‐generated bremsstrahlung sources and gamma radiation from cobalt‐60. Data are presented on the radiolytically induced reduction in concentration of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) dissolved in water and in air, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) dissolved in oil, high explosives dissolved in groundwater, and chemical weapon surrogates. The results of these studies suggest the potential use of ionizing radiation as a method of hazardous waste treatment. The second section of this article describes the technical aspects of a field‐scale radiolytic decomposition site cleanup demonstration using an electron accelerator. A portable, commercially available electron accelerator was set up at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's (LLNL's) Site 300, a Superfund site, where vacuum extraction wells were removing trichloroethylene (TCE) vapor from a ground spill into the unsaturated soil zone. The accelerator was retrofitted into the existing vacuum extraction system such that the extracted TCE‐containing vapor passed through the accelerator beam for treatment. The concentration of TCE in the vapor was reduced by an amount dependent on the accelerator beam power. Production of reaction products in the vapor was measured as a function of absorbed dose.

No abstract