Search

The emergence of an advanced nuclear industry has renewed the pursuit of small modular and advanced reactor technologies to supply low carbon energy. By the same token, these developments potentially expose gaps in current safeguards practices, particularly for reactor designs utilizing novel coolants and fuel forms–underscoring calls for the early application of Safeguards-by-Design to effectively and efficiently detect diversion and misuse. Other innovations may necessitate additional measures to credibly assure the absence of undeclared activities. This paper discusses three types of advanced nuclear and nuclear-related technologies as illustrations of these challenges: 1) micronuclear reactors, 2) molten salt reactors, and on the balance-of-plant side, 3) thermal energy storage and dry cooling. It then identifies high-level safeguards development needs associated with these on-the-horizon technologies so as to elevate safeguards considerations in the minds of reactor developers and investors.

Long-term planning for nuclear energy systems has been an area of interest for policy planners and systems designers to assess and manage the complexity of the system and the long-term, wide-ranging societal impacts of decisions. However, traditional planning tools are often poorly equipped to cope with the deep parametric, structural, and value uncertainties in long-term planning. A more robust, multiobjective decision-making method is applied to a model of the nuclear fuel cycle to address the many sources of complexity, uncertainty, and ambiguity inherent to long-term planning. Unlike prior studies that rely on assessing the outcomes of a limited set of deployment strategies, solutions in this study arise from optimizing behavior against multiple incommensurable objectives, utilizing goal-seeking multiobjective evolutionary algorithms to identify minimax regret solutions across various demand scenarios. By excluding inferior and infeasible solutions, the choice between the Pareto optimal solutions depends on a decision-maker's preferences for the defined outcomes - limiting analyst bias and increasing transparency.Though simplified by the necessity of reducing computational burdens, the nuclear fuel cycle model captures important phenomena governing the behavior of the nuclear energy system relevant to the decision to close the fuel cycle - incorporating reactor population dynamics, material stocks and flows, constraints on material flows, and outcomes of interest to decision-makers. Technology neutral performance criteria are defined consistent with the Generation IV International Forum goals of improved security and proliferation resistance based on structural features of the nuclear fuel cycle, natural resource sustainability, and waste production. A review of safety risks and the economic history of the development of nuclear technology suggests that safety and economic criteria may not be decisive criteria as the safety risks posed by alternative fuel cycles

Long-term planning for nuclear energy systems has been an area of interest for policy planners and systems designers to assess and manage the complexity of the system and the long-term, wide-ranging societal impacts of decisions. However, traditional planning tools are often poorly equipped to cope with the deep parametric, structural, and value uncertainties in long-term planning. A more robust, multiobjective decision-making method is applied to a model of the nuclear fuel cycle to address the many sources of complexity, uncertainty, and ambiguity inherent to long-term planning. Unlike prior studies that rely on assessing the outcomes of a limited set of deployment strategies, solutions in this study arise from optimizing behavior against multiple incommensurable objectives, utilizing goal-seeking multiobjective evolutionary algorithms to identify minimax regret solutions across various demand scenarios. By excluding inferior and infeasible solutions, the choice between the Pareto optimal solutions depends on a decision-maker's preferences for the defined outcomes - limiting analyst bias and increasing transparency.Though simplified by the necessity of reducing computational burdens, the nuclear fuel cycle model captures important phenomena governing the behavior of the nuclear energy system relevant to the decision to close the fuel cycle - incorporating reactor population dynamics, material stocks and flows, constraints on material flows, and outcomes of interest to decision-makers. Technology neutral performance criteria are defined consistent with the Generation IV International Forum goals of improved security and proliferation resistance based on structural features of the nuclear fuel cycle, natural resource sustainability, and waste production. A review of safety risks and the economic history of the development of nuclear technology suggests that safety and economic criteria may not be decisive criteria as the safety risks posed by alternative fuel cycles