SPECIAL REPORT | RESEARCH REACTORS
VTR characteristics The VTR aimed to provide a platform to conduct research in: ● molten salt reactors, ● gas-cooled fast reactors, ● lead-cooled fast reactors, ● sodium-cooled fast reactors, ● structural materials testing, ● Rabbit systems (rapid specimen/test insertion and retrieval), ● digital engineering & virtual design and construction, ● Instrumentation & control.
There will be four test vehicle types, or methods, for inserting experiments: ● Un-instrumented test assemblies: fuels or materials tests embedded in
VTR fuel assemblies. Used for drop-in tests and . Open to the reactor/ primary sodium coolant.
● Fully instrumented test assemblies: with sensors and instruments and able to manipulate the test environment (temperature, flow, etc) during the test. Open to the reactor/primary sodium coolant.
● Fully instrumented cartridge loops: with a coolant system segregated from the primary sodium coolant. The loop coolants or fuel can be molten salt, gas, lead/lead bismuth, sodium etc.
● Rabbit, (rapid shuttle system for short term irradiations): irradiating samples for short periods of time and extracting them quickly.
VTR test vehicles will have large irradiation test volumes — up to 10 litres per vehicle — available to all users. It will be able to accommodate up to 10 test vehicles that can be operated at temperatures above 800°C if needed. More test positions will be available for experiments embedded in VTR fuel assemblies, eg, inserts, lead-test pins, etc. Twenty universities, ten private entities/industry partners and six national
laboratories are collaborating within the eight areas. Each area is led by a national laboratory technical expert and supported by other national laboratory personnel, university and industry partners. The VTR will operate as a national user facility. Users will be provided with
access to the VTR, technical expertise and assistance with experiment design, assembly, safety analysis and examination. Access to user facilities will be through open and competitive review processes. Experiments important to national programmes and important to
addressing emerging needs in the nuclear industry will receive a higher priority. International experiments covered under international collaboration agreements will also be a priority. Other users will be accommodated with full cost-recovery based on availability of experimental positions. ■
missions will result in a reactor that is not efficient at either producing power or providing an advanced irradiation testing environment.” Currently, there are very few capabilities available for
testing fast neutron reactor technology in the world and none in the USA. Russia has the ageing BOR-60, which is widely used by researchers worldwide. It is already constructing its replacement — the MBIR reactor, intended to be the centre of an international research facility. In its description of the VTR, DOE notes: “The United
States has long been a leader in the development of nuclear technologies. However, as there is currently no fast neutron testing capability in the US to support advanced reactor research and development, US industry has gone overseas for this capability.” The VTR “is intended to fill this long-standing gap.” Concerns were voiced in an article in August by the
Center for the National Interest, The Versatile Test Reactor is Crucial for US Global Leadership in Nuclear Energy. The authors, Thomas Graham, Jr and Richard W Mies, each retired admirals and nuclear specialists, say: “If the United States gives up the chance to build the VTR, then it could be another step to relinquishing the mantle of global leadership in advanced nuclear technologies and likely ceding that mantle to Russia ... “Allowing the only fast neutron test facility in the world
to reside in Russia — without building a similar capability in the United States — could also enable the Russian nuclear energy sector to leapfrog over the US nuclear energy industry.”
A post in the Atlantic Council blog suggests that funding opportunities may still exist. It says excluding funding “is a grave error that will have far-reaching ramifications for US nuclear energy leadership”. However, it notes that there are “upcoming legislative opportunities to rectify this error”. The article says the estimated cost of the VTR “pales in
V demonstration reactors both use sodium-cooled fast reactor technology, their principal missions, and therefore their detailed designs, are very different. Each of them has a unique reactor core and operating cycles tailored to their specific mission.” The ARDP mission is to license and operate advanced
fission systems that are affordable and ARDP demonstration reactors will use long lasting fuel for operating cycles generally exceeding one year or more. But the VTR uses high performance fuel with 100-day operating cycles, followed by a 20-day outage to refuel and replace experiments and it is “designed to meet a testing mission of providing an advanced fission environment — specifically, a high flux neutron environment — to support accelerated fuels and materials experiments.” DOE says that while ARDP uses fuel geared toward a marathon, VTR uses fuel geared toward a 100-metre dash. “Trying to combine these two different
16 | January 2022 |
www.neimagazine.com
comparison to the DOE’s annual budget” and that “expert predictions of the annual cost of climate change … further dwarf the estimated cost of the VTR”, while “opportunities exist to defray the VTR’s costs, most notably through international cooperation and funding from civil nuclear allies who wish to test their own nuclear fuel and materials”. The Atlantic Council notes that “Congress still has opportunities to support the VTR, especially through the reconciliation process and — looking ahead — through Fiscal Year 2022 spending. As part of reconciliation, the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology has proposed $95 million for the VTR.” It concludes: “Each of the three requisites of US nuclear
innovation — the demonstration of new reactors, support for new fuels, and a domestic testing capacity — plays a different role in the nuclear ecosystem. All three support the development of the next generation of nuclear energy technologies.” DOE has said that if final design and construction begin
in 2023, VTR will be fully operational by the end of 2026, pending funding appropriations by Congress. The key word here is “pending”, given Congress’s lack of enthusiasm for the project. As Congressman Randy Weber (TX) lamented on the House Floor during the discussions: “The 2022 appropriations bill provides no funds, zero, zip, zilch, nada, to keep the Versatile Test Reactor project on budget and on schedule.” It remains to be seen whether alternative sources of funding can be found. ■
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45
