Assessment of occupational radiation exposure for two fusion power plant designs

被引:3
|
作者
Natalizio, A
Di Pace, L
Pinna, T
机构
[1] Assoc Euratom, ENEA Fus, I-00044 Frascati, Italy
[2] ENSAC Associates Ltd, Toronto, ON, Canada
关键词
occupational radiation exposure; worker safety; ALARA;
D O I
10.1016/S0920-3796(00)00556-1
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
An assessment of the occupational radiation exposure issues of the fusion power stations has been performed focusing on the primary heat transport system (PHTS) of safety and environmental assessment of fusion power (SEAFP) reactor models. Fuel cycle systems have been considered for completeness, but not assessed. Fission reactor experience and fusion power reactor studies formed the basis of this assessment. Four assessments were performed. Two were based on SEAFP models 1 and 2, and the other two were based on improvements of these models suggested by an as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) review. The following main conclusions are drawn from the assessments. The PHTS dose estimated for SEAFP model 1 (about 300 p-mSv/a) is below the current fission industry norm (about 500 p-mSv/a), but it is not ALARA. An ALARA value of 130 p-mSv/a is achievable and would be a reasonable target for the PHTS. The PHTS dose estimated for SEAFP model 2 (about 3000 p-mSv/a) is well above the current fission industry norm. Some design measures have been identified, that can reduce this dose to about 1200 p-mSv/a. While this is a substantial reduction, it is still well above the fission industry norm, therefore, additional effort is needed to obtain further reductions. The large difference in heat transport system doses between model 1 and model 2 is due to two main factors, the coolant and the coolant tubing material. The helium coolant eliminates the presence of corrosion products, and the vanadium alloy reduces the sputtering rate. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:375 / 385
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Indoor occupational exposure to radiation at the Silmet Plant in Estonia -: A preliminary assessment
    Mustonen, R
    Markkanen, M
    Oksanen, E
    Rajamäe, R
    TURNING A PROBLEM INTO A RESOURCE: REMEDIATION AND WASTE MANAGEMENT AT THE SILLAMAE SITE, ESTONIA, 2000, 28 : 63 - 68
  • [2] An integrated framework for effective reduction of occupational radiation exposure in a nuclear power plant
    Moon, JH
    Kim, HS
    Cho, YH
    Kang, CS
    ANNALS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY, 1998, 25 (17) : 1429 - 1440
  • [3] Assessment of occupational radiation exposure in China
    Pan, ZQ
    IRPA9 - 1996 INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS ON RADIATION PROTECTION / NINTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF THE INTERNATIONAL RADIATION PROTECTION ASSOCIATION, PROCEEDINGS, VOL 1, 1996, : A451 - A456
  • [4] Divertor conceptual designs for a fusion power plant
    Norajitra, Prachai
    Abdel-Khalik, Said I.
    Giancarli, Luciano M.
    Ihli, Thomas
    Janeschitz, Guenter
    Malang, Siegfried
    Mazul, Igor V.
    Sardain, Pierre
    FUSION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN, 2008, 83 (7-9) : 893 - 902
  • [5] Assessment of occupational exposure to radiofrequency fields and radiation
    Cooper, TG
    Allen, SG
    Blackwell, RP
    Litchfield, I
    Mann, SM
    Pope, JM
    van Tongeren, MJA
    RADIATION PROTECTION DOSIMETRY, 2004, 111 (02) : 191 - 203
  • [6] Evaluation of divertor conceptual designs for a fusion power plant
    Ferrari, A
    Giancarli, L
    Kleefeldt, K
    Nardi, C
    Rödig, A
    Reimann, J
    Salavy, JF
    FUSION ENGINEERING AND DESIGN, 2001, 56-57 : 255 - 259
  • [7] ECONOMIC COMPARISON OF FUSION POWER PLANT DESIGNS.
    O'Neill, James E.
    1600, (10):
  • [8] Fusion Energy: Towards Feasible Power Plant Designs
    Kamendje, Richard
    Bachmann, Christian
    Claps, Vincenzo
    Janeschitz, Guenter
    Pan, Hungtao
    Cheng, Yong
    Gliss, Curt
    Steinbacher, Thomas
    Haertl, Thomas
    Marzullo, Domenico
    Yang, Yang
    Mozzillo, Rocco
    DESIGN TOOLS AND METHODS IN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING III, VOL 2, ADM 2023, 2024, : 248 - 256
  • [9] ECONOMIC COMPARISON OF FUSION POWER-PLANT DESIGNS
    ONEILL, JE
    FUSION TECHNOLOGY, 1986, 10 (03): : 1571 - 1576
  • [10] Guidelines for the assessment of nuclear power plant designs
    Fechner, J.B.
    Erven, U.
    Viefers, W.
    Atw. Atomwirtschaft, Atomtechnik, 1985, 30 (01): : 37 - 40