The ENEA participation to the Expert Group on Fuel Cycle Transition Scenarios Studies (FCTS) of NEA-WPFC aims at the identification and analysis of several possible scenarios for nuclear fuel cycle management. In particular, ENEA activity is being focused on three main branches: 1. the analysis of national and regional scenarios, to advance sustainable hypotheses for the development of cooperative nuclear fuel cycle policies and the installation of common facilities; 2. the generation of code specific libraries to model the burn up behaviour of new reactors (in particular, Gen-IV fast reactors) and transmuters (in particular, ADS like facilities such as EFIT) for achievable scenarios; 3. the use and benchmarking of the COSI6 [1] code for fuel cycle analysis, developed and maintained at CEA-Cadarache. To begin the ENEA WPFC-FCTS participation, an initial set-up phase is needed, in order to align the internal knowledge about the scenarios simulation instruments and techniques with other Working Party members. A series of benchmarking exercises have been performing by the WPFC [2] to take aim at covering the most part of cases for both statical, single reactor Burn Up (BU) analysis and more complex scenarios with different types of reactors running together. The benchmark is therefore divided in two parts: 1. the first one is devoted to depletion calculations of three different reactors: • a PWR loaded with UOX fuel; • a PWR loaded with MOX (U, Pu and Am) fuel; • a Na-FR loaded with MOX (U, Pu, Am, Np and Cm) fuel; 2. the second one is dedicated to three transition scenarios: • an open cycle in PWRs; • the monorecycling of Plutonium in PWRs; • the monorecycling of Plutonium in PWRs and then the deployment of Gen IV fast reactors (FRs) recycling Plutonium and Minor Actinides (MAs). A more detailed presentation of the benchmark exercises will be presented in the following § 2 and 3. All the described cases have then been analyzed with the COSI6 code for fuel cycle analysis, and the results, reported in § 5, will be presented to the FCTS Expert Group in April, 2008.
S. Monti, G. Grasso, M. Sumini (2009). NEA-WPFC/FCTS Benchmark for Fuel Cycle Scenarios Study with COSI6. ROMA : ENEA.
NEA-WPFC/FCTS Benchmark for Fuel Cycle Scenarios Study with COSI6
GRASSO, GIACOMO;SUMINI, MARCO
2009
Abstract
The ENEA participation to the Expert Group on Fuel Cycle Transition Scenarios Studies (FCTS) of NEA-WPFC aims at the identification and analysis of several possible scenarios for nuclear fuel cycle management. In particular, ENEA activity is being focused on three main branches: 1. the analysis of national and regional scenarios, to advance sustainable hypotheses for the development of cooperative nuclear fuel cycle policies and the installation of common facilities; 2. the generation of code specific libraries to model the burn up behaviour of new reactors (in particular, Gen-IV fast reactors) and transmuters (in particular, ADS like facilities such as EFIT) for achievable scenarios; 3. the use and benchmarking of the COSI6 [1] code for fuel cycle analysis, developed and maintained at CEA-Cadarache. To begin the ENEA WPFC-FCTS participation, an initial set-up phase is needed, in order to align the internal knowledge about the scenarios simulation instruments and techniques with other Working Party members. A series of benchmarking exercises have been performing by the WPFC [2] to take aim at covering the most part of cases for both statical, single reactor Burn Up (BU) analysis and more complex scenarios with different types of reactors running together. The benchmark is therefore divided in two parts: 1. the first one is devoted to depletion calculations of three different reactors: • a PWR loaded with UOX fuel; • a PWR loaded with MOX (U, Pu and Am) fuel; • a Na-FR loaded with MOX (U, Pu, Am, Np and Cm) fuel; 2. the second one is dedicated to three transition scenarios: • an open cycle in PWRs; • the monorecycling of Plutonium in PWRs; • the monorecycling of Plutonium in PWRs and then the deployment of Gen IV fast reactors (FRs) recycling Plutonium and Minor Actinides (MAs). A more detailed presentation of the benchmark exercises will be presented in the following § 2 and 3. All the described cases have then been analyzed with the COSI6 code for fuel cycle analysis, and the results, reported in § 5, will be presented to the FCTS Expert Group in April, 2008.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
