Progress in International Radioactive Fusion Waste Studies

Zucchetti, Massimo; Chen, Z.; El-Guebaly, L.; Khripunov, V.; Kolbasov, B.N.; Maisonnier, D.; Someya, Youji; Subbotin, M.L.; Testoni, Raffaella; Tobita, K.

doi:10.1080/15361055.2019.1602457

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The large volume of radioactive materials discharged from fusion power plants compared to fission reactors has been analyzed by fusion designers throughout the world [11][12][13][14] in recent decades [5].…”

Section: Comparison Of Fusion Inventory With Other Nuclear Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Another concern for in-vessel steels is 14 C [35], particularly when, as with EUROFER97, its production is enhanced by the addition of small quantities of nitrogen to the steel composition to improve its high-temperature performance. This nuclide is only a beta emitter, but extra precautions are necessary for materials containing 14 C to limit the chance of release into the environment (typically by water leaching). Figure 6 exemplifies the significance of these two nuclides, showing that 14 C could exceed the total activity limit for LLW waste in UK repositories, while the 94 Nb activity could exceed the nuclide-specific limit under France's LLW regulations.…”

Section: Identification Of Main Contributors To a Radioactive Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This nuclide is only a beta emitter, but extra precautions are necessary for materials containing 14 C to limit the chance of release into the environment (typically by water leaching). Figure 6 exemplifies the significance of these two nuclides, showing that 14 C could exceed the total activity limit for LLW waste in UK repositories, while the 94 Nb activity could exceed the nuclide-specific limit under France's LLW regulations. Note that this calculation, which was performed with FISPACT-II for the latest European DEMO designs, assumed 0.005 wt% Nb and 0.045 wt% N. While the latter concentration may be unavoidable to guarantee the correct operational performance of the steel, the former (niobium) is an impurity with no functional use.…”

Section: Identification Of Main Contributors To a Radioactive Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Overview on the management of radioactive waste from fusion facilities: ITER, demonstration machines and power plants

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the absence of official standards and guidelines for nuclear fusion plants, fusion designers adopted, as much as possible, the well-established standards for fission based Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs). This often implies interpretation and/or extrapolation, due to differences in structures; systems and components; materials; safety mitigation systems; risks; etc. This approach could result in considering overconservative measures that might lead to an increase of cost and complexity with limited or negligible improvements. One important topic is the generation of radioactive waste in fusion power plants. Fusion waste is significantly different from the fission NPP waste, i.e., the quantity of fusion waste is much larger, however it is mostly comprised of Low-Level Waste (LLW) and Intermediate Level waste (ILW). Notably, the waste does not contain many long-lived isotopes, mainly tritium and other activation isotopes but no-transuranic elements. Important benefit of fusion is the lower decay heat removal and rapid radioactivity decay overall. The dominant fusion wastes are primarily composed of structural materials, such as different types of steel, including reduced activation ferritic martensitic (RAFM) steels, like EUROFER97 and F82H; AISI 316L; bainitic; and JK2LB. The relevant long-lived radioisotopes come from alloying elements such as niobium, molybdenum, nickel, carbon, nitrogen, copper, and aluminum and also from uncontrolled impurities (of the same elements, but also e.g., of potassium and cobalt). After irradiation, these isotopes might preclude disposal in LLW repositories. Fusion power should be able to avoid creating High-Level Waste (HLW), but the amount of fusion ILW and LLW will be significant. Thus, the efforts of recycling and clearance are essential to support fusion deployment, reclaim resources (through less ore mining), minimize the radwaste burden for future generations, and continue holding the promise of fusion energy production with low environmental impact.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Fusion Inventory With Other Nuclear Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Identification Of Main Contributors To a Radioactive Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Identification Of Main Contributors To a Radioactive Inventorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Overview on the management of radioactive waste from fusion facilities: ITER, demonstration machines and power plants

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Due to higher neutron flux levels, longer operating times and application of tritium breeding blankets, it is probable that more activated materials and more tritiated wastes will be produced by future fusion DEMO and beyond. Managing so much waste is a real challenge, and the fusion community came up with two ways: first, developing low activation materials to avoid the generation of long‐lasting radionuclides; and second, developing feasible recycling/clearing processes to minimize the waste assigned for geological disposal 51 …”

Section: Quantitative Safety Goals Proposed For Fusion Reactorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantitative safety goals for fusion power plants: Rationales and suggestions

Wang

Chen

et al. 2021

Int J Energy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Zucchetti et al (2019) proposed a unique waste management strategy. The goals of the study included avoiding underground disposal, maximizing the recycling and reusing of activated materials, from nuclear activities, and reselling the recycled materials on the commercial market.…”

Section: Tritiated Waste Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Radioactive waste: A review

Deng

Zhang

Dong

et al. 2020

Water Environment Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The reviewed papers presented here provide a general overview of worldwide radioactive waste-related studies conducted in 2019. The current review includes studies related to safety assessments, decommission and decontamination of nuclear facilities, fusion facilities, and transportation. Further, the review highlights radioactive wastewater decontamination, management solutions for the final disposal of low-and highlevel radioactive wastes (LLRW and HLRW), interim storage and final disposal options for spent fuel (SF), and tritiated wastes, with a focus on environmental impacts due to the mobility of radionuclides in the ecosystem, water and soil along with other research progress made in the management of radioactive waste. © 2020 Water Environment Federation • Practitioner points • The release of radionuclides and their subsequent fate and transport in the environment poses public health concern and has stimulated recent research on the waste management techniques. • Seeking a safe and environmental-friendly solution is the current trend for existing and projected inventories of radioactive waste. • Significant progress in the field of geological disposal of radioactive waste has been made in the last two decades.

show abstract

Progress in International Radioactive Fusion Waste Studies

Cited by 10 publications

References 16 publications

Overview on the management of radioactive waste from fusion facilities: ITER, demonstration machines and power plants

Overview on the management of radioactive waste from fusion facilities: ITER, demonstration machines and power plants

Quantitative safety goals for fusion power plants: Rationales and suggestions

Radioactive waste: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About