Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:30:47.881Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cermet Spent Nuclear Fuel Casks and Waste Packages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2011

Charles W. Forsberg
Affiliation:
[email protected], Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Nuclear Science and Technology Division, P. O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, 37831-6165, United States, 865-574-6783
Leslie R. Dole
Affiliation:
[email protected], Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Nuclear Science and Technology Division, P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN, 37831-6165, United States
Get access

Abstract

Multipurpose transport, aging, and disposal casks are needed for the management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF). Self-shielded cermet casks can outperform current SNF casks because of the superior properties of cermets, which consist of encapsulated hard ceramic particulates dispersed in a continuous ductile metal matrix to produce a strong high-integrity, high-thermal-conductivity cask.

A multiyear, multinational development and testing program has been developing cermet SNF casks made of steel, depleted uranium dioxide, and other materials. Because cermets are the traditional material of construction for armor, cermet casks can provide superior protection against assault. For disposal, cermet waste packages (WPs) with appropriate metals and ceramics can buffer the local geochemical environment to (1) slow degradation of SNF, (2) reduce water flow though the degraded WP, (3) sorb neptunium and other radionuclides that determine the ultimate radiation dose to the public from the repository, and (4) contribute to long-term nuclear criticality control. Finally, new cermet cask fabrication methods have been partly developed to manufacture the casks with the appropriate properties. The results of this work are summarized with references to the detailed reports.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Forsberg, C. W. and Dole, L. R. in Proc. Advances in Nuclear Fuel Cycle Management III (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 2003).Google Scholar
2. Haire, M. J. and Shapovalov, V. I. in Proc. 10th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management (Glasgow, Scotland, 2005), ICEM051387.Google Scholar
3. Forsberg, C. W., Tiegs, T. N., and Sikka, V. K. in Proc.10th International Conference on Environmental Remediation and Radioactive Waste Management (Glasgow, Scotland, 2005), ICEM051350.Google Scholar
4. Forsberg, C. W. and Tiegs, T. N. in Proc. 2006 International High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 2006), pp. 12921298.Google Scholar
5. Gotovchikov, V. T. et al. in Proc. 2006 International High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 2006), pp. 886–870.Google Scholar
6. Forsberg, C. W., Swaney, P. M., and Tiegs, T. N. in Proc. 14th International Symposium on the Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials, PATRAM-2004 (Berlin, Germany, 2004).Google Scholar
7. Shapovalov, V. I. et al. in Proc. 2006 International High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 2006), pp. 885889.Google Scholar
8. National Research Council, Safety and Security of Commercial Spent Nuclear Fuel Storage (Washington, DC, 2005).Google Scholar
9. Lange, F., Hormann, E., and Koch, W. in Proc. 13th International Symposium on the Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Materials, PATRAM-2001 (Chicago, IL, 2001).Google Scholar
10. Alekseev, O. G. et al. in Proc. 2006 International High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 2006), pp. 12111216.Google Scholar
11. Forsberg, C. W. and Landingham, R. L. in Trans. American Nuclear Society 2002 Winter Meeting (Washington DC, 2002), p. 313.Google Scholar
12. Forsberg, C. W. and Dole, L. R. in Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 757 (Pittsburgh, PA, 2003), pp. 677684.Google Scholar
13. Longcheng, L. and Neretnieks, I., Nuclear Technol. 137, 228240 (March 2002).Google Scholar
14. Kozak, M. W. et al., “An Independent Total Systems Performance Assessment of Yucca Mountain”, Nucl. Technol. (in press).Google Scholar
15. Kazakovskaya, T. V. et al. in Proc. 2006 International High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 2006), pp. 379384.Google Scholar
16. Kessler, J. H., Kozak, M. W., Apted, M. J., Zhou, W., and Mungov, G. in Proc. 2006 International High-Level Radioactive Waste Management Conference (American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, IL, 2006), pp. 990995.Google Scholar
17. Forsberg, C. W., Nucl. Technol. 131 (3), 337353 (September 2000).Google Scholar
18. Hicks, T. W., Review of the Use of Depleted Uranium for Criticality Control, 0525–1 (Galson Sciences LTD, Rutland, England, 2005).Google Scholar
19. Sassani, D. C., Disposal of Depleted Uranium at Yucca Mountain: An Assessment of Costs and Direct Impacts to Potential Repository Performance (Yucca Mountain Project, Las Vegas, Nevada, 1999).Google Scholar