Comparison of different strategies for decommissioning a tritium laboratory

被引:0
|
作者
Dylst, Kris [1 ]
Slachmuylders, Frederik [1 ]
Gilissen, Bart [1 ]
机构
[1] CEN SCK, Dismantling Decontaminat & Waste, B-2400 Mol, Belgium
关键词
D O I
10.1016/j.fusengdes.2012.12.009
中图分类号
TL [原子能技术]; O571 [原子核物理学];
学科分类号
0827 ; 082701 ;
摘要
Between 2003 and 2009 two rooms that served as tritium laboratory at SCK.CEN and its ventilation system were decommissioned. Initially, the decommissioning strategy was to free release as much materials as possible. However, due to the imposed free release limit this was very labour intensive. Timing restrictions forced us to use a different strategy for the ventilation system. Most of the steel was disposed of to a nuclear melting facility. As a result there was a significant decrease in the required man labour. For the second laboratory room a similar strategy as for the ventilation was used: contaminated steel was disposed of to a nuclear melting facility and other materials that could not be easily decontaminated were disposed of as nuclear waste. At the expense of extra waste generation compared to the first laboratory the decommissioning was done using merely one third of the man hours. Comparison of the used strategies indicated opportunities for cost optimization. Even in absence of time constraints it is best to foresee a safe disposal of metals to a nuclear melting facility, whilst it is worth to invest in the labour intensive decontamination of the other materials to free release them. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2655 / 2658
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Decommissioning strategies being implemented in the USA
    Orlando, DA
    STRATEGY SELECTION FOR THE DECOMMISSIONING OF NUCLEAR FACILITIES, SEMINAR PROCEEDINGS, 2004, : 175 - 180
  • [22] Tritium reduction and control in the vacuum vessel during TFTR outage and decommissioning
    Blanchard, W
    Camp, R
    Carnevale, H
    Casey, M
    Collins, J
    Gentile, CA
    Gibson, M
    Hosea, JC
    Kalish, M
    Langford, J
    Langish, S
    Miller, D
    Nagy, A
    Pearson, GG
    Raucci, R
    Rule, K
    Winston, J
    17TH IEEE/NPSS SYMPOSIUM ON FUSION ENGINEERING, VOLS 1 AND 2, 1998, : 297 - 300
  • [23] THE CRNL TRITIUM-LABORATORY
    MILLER, JM
    HOLTSLANDER, WJ
    JOHNSON, RE
    FUSION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN, 1990, 12 (03) : 349 - 355
  • [24] The integration of the detection of systemic sclerosis-associated antibodies in a routine laboratory setting: comparison of different strategies
    Bonroy, Carolien
    Smith, Vanessa
    Van Steendam, Katleen
    Van Praet, Jens
    Deforce, Dieter
    Devreese, Katrien
    De Keyser, Filip
    CLINICAL CHEMISTRY AND LABORATORY MEDICINE, 2013, 51 (11) : 2151 - 2160
  • [25] TRITIUM PROCESS LABORATORY AT THE JAERI
    NARUSE, Y
    MATSUDA, Y
    TANAKA, K
    FUSION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN, 1990, 12 (03) : 293 - 317
  • [26] DECOMMISSIONING OF THE AMES-LABORATORY RESEARCH REACTOR
    STRUSS, RG
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN NUCLEAR SOCIETY, 1985, 50 (NOV): : 198 - 198
  • [27] A decade of tritium technology development and operation at the Tritium Laboratory Karlsruhe
    Doerr, L.
    Besserer, U.
    Bekris, N.
    Bornschein, B.
    Caldwell-Nichols, C.
    Demange, D.
    Cristescu, I.
    Cristescu, I. R.
    Glugla, M.
    Hellriegel, G.
    Schaefer, P.
    Welte, S.
    Wendel, J.
    FUSION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, 2008, 54 (01) : 143 - 148
  • [28] EXPERIMENTAL APPARATUS FOR TRITIUM PERMEATION STUDIES IN TRITIUM PROCESS LABORATORY
    OKUNO, K
    OHIRA, S
    YOSHIDA, H
    NARUSE, Y
    SUZUKI, T
    HIRATA, S
    MISUMI, M
    FUSION TECHNOLOGY, 1988, 14 (02): : 713 - 718
  • [29] TRITIUM INVENTORY EVALUATION PROGRAM FOR THE TRITIUM LABORATORY KARLSRUHE (TLK)
    BESSERER, U
    HEISS, K
    JOURDAN, G
    FUSION TECHNOLOGY, 1992, 21 (02): : 419 - 424
  • [30] Church heating: comparison of different strategies
    Aste, N.
    Della Torre, S.
    Del Pero, C.
    Leonforte, F.
    Buzzetti, M.
    Adhikari, R. S.
    Oliaro, P.
    2017 6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CLEAN ELECTRICAL POWER (ICCEP): RENEWABLE ENERGY IMPACT, 2017, : 519 - 524