1978Nuclear TechnologyRequires access

Some Plutonium Recycle Program Fuel Cycles Having Reduced Proliferation Characteristics

A. Eschbach Eugene

Open publisher page 4 citations

Abstract

A review of the plutonium fuel recycle program (1955–1967) did not reveal an economically compelling alternative fuel cycle to slightly enriched uranium, plutonium recycle, or the plutonium breeder. The review included systems involving no chemical separations compared with slightly enriched uranium once through. Nor did freestanding thorium systems appear economic, although synergisms between uranium and thorium may be worth considering, including reduced-density thorium fuels with high fuel durability as an alternative to uranium load following and peaking fuel. The crossed progeny system involving 233U enrichment of uranium in light water reactors (LWRs) and conversion of the plutonium to 233U in fast reactors may offer a method of providing a high-performance denatured LWR fuel for the period beyond the availability of economic slightly enriched uranium.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

A review of the plutonium fuel recycle program (1955–1967) did not reveal an economically compelling alternative fuel cycle to slightly enriched uranium, plutonium recycle, or the plutonium breeder. The review included systems involving no chemical separations compared with slightly enriched uranium once through. Nor did freestanding thorium systems appear economic, although synergisms between uranium and thorium may be worth considering, including reduced-density thorium fuels with high fuel durability as an alternative to uranium load following and peaking fuel. The crossed progeny system involving 233U enrichment of uranium in light water reactors (LWRs) and conversion of the plutonium to 233U in fast reactors may offer a method of providing a high-performance denatured LWR fuel for the period beyond the availability of economic slightly enriched uranium.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 4 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

A review of the plutonium fuel recycle program (1955–1967) did not reveal an economically compelling alternative fuel cycle to slightly enriched uranium, plutonium recycle, or the plutonium breeder. The review included systems involving no chemical separations compared with slightly enriched uranium once through. Nor did freestanding thorium systems appear economic, although synergisms between uranium and thorium may be worth considering, including reduced-density thorium fuels with high fuel durability as an alternative to uranium load following and peaking fuel. The crossed progeny system involving 233U enrichment of uranium in light water reactors (LWRs) and conversion of the plutonium to 233U in fast reactors may offer a method of providing a high-performance denatured LWR fuel for the period beyond the availability of economic slightly enriched uranium.

Key concepts: Plutonium, Uranium, Thorium fuel cycle, Thorium, Breeder (animal), MOX fuel, Nuclear fuel cycle, Spent nuclear fuel

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Some Plutonium Recycle Program Fuel Cycles Having Reduced Proliferation Characteristics — Research Paper | ScholarLens