Production of High Specific Activity 144Ce for Artificial Sources of Antineutrinos

Герасимов, А. С.; Kornoukhov, V. N.; Saldikov, Ivan; Tikhomirov, G. V.

doi:10.1007/s10512-014-9816-1

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding aligns with other empirical evidence pertaining to radiopurity and age estimation (i.e., time since removal from irradiation) for spent nuclear fuel obtained from measurement of the 103 Ru: 106 Ru ratio (1). An age estimate of ∼2 y is considerably less than the usual time (≥3 y) allotted before reprocessing under typical reactor operating conditions (52). Therefore, a RuO 4 trapping process in HCl would undoubtedly be exothermic, exacerbating an already energetic mixture that, in light of the high volatility and potential explosive decomposition of RuO 4 (15), gives credence to the occurrence of an abrupt, uncontrolled release (i.e., explosion).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of ¹⁰⁶ Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing

Cooke

Botti

Zok

et al. 2020

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The undeclared release and subsequent detection of ruthenium-106 (106Ru) across Europe from late September to early October of 2017 prompted an international effort to ascertain the circumstances of the event. While dispersion modeling, corroborated by ground deposition measurements, has narrowed possible locations of origin, there has been a lack of direct empirical evidence to address the nature of the release. This is due to the absence of radiological and chemical signatures in the sample matrices, considering that such signatures encode the history and circumstances of the radioactive contaminant. In limiting cases such as this, we herein introduce the use of selected chemical transformations to elucidate the chemical nature of a radioactive contaminant as part of a nuclear forensic investigation. Using established ruthenium polypyridyl chemistry, we have shown that a small percentage (1.2 ± 0.4%) of the radioactive106Ru contaminant exists in a polychlorinated Ru(III) form, partly or entirely as β-106RuCl3, while 20% is both insoluble and chemically inert, consistent with the occurrence of RuO2, the thermodynamic endpoint of the volatile RuO4. Together, these findings present a clear signature for nuclear fuel reprocessing activity, specifically the reductive trapping of the volatile and highly reactive RuO4, as the origin of the release. Considering that the previously established103Ru:106Ru ratio indicates that the spent fuel was unusually young with respect to typical reprocessing protocol, it is likely that this exothermic trapping process proved to be a tipping point for an already turbulent mixture, leading to an abrupt and uncontrolled release.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of ¹⁰⁶ Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing

Cooke

Botti

Zok

et al. 2020

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The mass of uranium in feed is determined by the condition of conservation of equivalent fuel density. Modeling [5][6][7][8] of multiplying properties of cluster consisting of 6 fuel assemblies differing by the irradiation time in the reactor is carried out by averaging the multiplication factor of fuel assemblies of the cluster. This approach was justified by a series of direct calculations of realistic models of cluster consisting of 6 fuel assemblies.…”

Section: Methods Of Estimation Of Reactor Characteristics In the Refumentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of equilibrium fuel composition for fast reactor in closed fuel cycle

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Technique of evaluation of multiplying and reactivity characteristics of fast reactor operating in the mode of multiple refueling is presented. We describe the calculation model of the vertical section of the reactor. Calculation validations of the possibility of correct application of methods and models are given. Results on the isotopic composition, mass feed, and changes in the reactivity of the reactor in closed fuel cycle are obtained. Recommendations for choosing perspective fuel compositions for further research are proposed.

show abstract

“…Initial enrichment 4.4% was accepted for burnup of 40 MW·d/kg with corresponding enrichment increase for higher burnup. Calculations were made using MCU, ORIGEN-SCALE codes [1][2][3][4][5][6]. Decay heat power in storage facility was calculated separately for actinides and fission products.…”

Section: Annual Unloading Of Americium and Curium Isotopes From The Vmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decay heat power of spent nuclear fuel of power reactors with high burnup at long-term storage

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Decay heat power of actinides and fission products from spent nuclear fuel of power VVER-1000 type reactors at long-term storage is calculated. Two modes of storage are considered: mode in which single portion of actinides or fission products is loaded in storage facility, and mode in which actinides or fission products from spent fuel of one VVER reactor are added every year in storage facility during 30 years and then accumulated nuclides are stored without addition new nuclides. Two values of fuel burnup 40 and 70 MWÂd/kg are considered for the mode of storage of single fuel unloading. For the mode of accumulation of spent fuel with subsequent storage, one value of burnup of 70 MWÂd/kg is considered. Very long time of storage 10 5 years accepted in calculations allows to simulate final geological disposal of radioactive wastes. Heat power of fission products decreases quickly after 50-100 years of storage. The power of actinides decreases very slow. In passing from 40 to 70 MWÂd/kg, power of actinides increases due to accumulation of higher fraction of 244 Cm. These data are important in the back end of fuel cycle when improved cooling system of the storage facility will be required along with stronger radiation protection during storage, transportation and processing.

show abstract

Production of High Specific Activity 144Ce for Artificial Sources of Antineutrinos

Cited by 10 publications

References 2 publications

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of ¹⁰⁶ Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of ¹⁰⁶ Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing

Determination of equilibrium fuel composition for fast reactor in closed fuel cycle

Decay heat power of spent nuclear fuel of power reactors with high burnup at long-term storage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Production of High Specific Activity 144Ce for Artificial Sources of Antineutrinos

Cited by 10 publications

References 2 publications

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of 106 Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of 106 Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing

Determination of equilibrium fuel composition for fast reactor in closed fuel cycle

Decay heat power of spent nuclear fuel of power reactors with high burnup at long-term storage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of ¹⁰⁶ Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing

Identification of a chemical fingerprint linking the undeclared 2017 release of ¹⁰⁶ Ru to advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing