1 |
W.S. Charlton, R.F. Lebouf, C. Gariazzo, D.G. Ford, C. Beard, S. Landsberger, M. Whitaker, Proliferation resistance assessment methodology for nuclear fuel cycles, Nucl. Technol. 157 (2007) 143-156, https://doi.org/10.13182/NT07-A3809.
DOI
|
2 |
C.G. Bathke, B.B. Ebbinghaus, B.A. Collins, B.W. Sleaford, K.R. Hase, M. Robel, R.K. Wallace, K.S. Bradley, J.R. Ireland, G.D. Jarvinen, M.W. Johnson, A.W. Prichard, B.W. Smith, The attractiveness of materials in advanced nuclear fuel cycles for various proliferation and theft scenarios, Nucl. Technol. 179 (2012) 5-30, https://doi.org/10.13182/NT10-203.
DOI
|
3 |
E.M. Glanfield, in: Lattice Physics Calculations for Alternative Fuels for the Canadian SCWR, MA.Sc Thesis, McMaster University, 2017.
|
4 |
C.G. Bathke, R.K. Wallace, K.R. Hase, B.W. Sleaford, B.B. Ebbinghaus, B.W. Collins, K.S. Bradley, A.W. Prichard, B.W. Smith, An assessment of the attractiveness of material associated with thorium/uranium and uranium closed fuel cycles from a safeguards perspective, in: Annual Meeting of the Institute of Nuclear Materials Management (INMM), 2010. Baltimore, United States, 11-15, July.
|
5 |
W. Peiman, I. Pioro, K. Gabriel, Thermal-hydraulic and neutronic analysis of a reentrant fuel-channel design for pressure-channel supercritical water-cooled reactors, J. Nucl. Eng. Radiat. Sci. 1 (2015), https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4026393.
DOI
|
6 |
A. Moghrabi, D.R. Novog, Investigation of reactor physics phenomena in the Canadian pressure tube supercritical-water reactor, CNL Nucl. Rev. 5 (2016) 253-268, https://doi.org/10.12943/CNR.2016.00031.
DOI
|
7 |
J. Pencer, A. Colton, Progression of the lattice physics concept for the Canadian supercritical water reactor, in: 34th Annual Conference of the Canadian Nuclear Society, 2013. Toronto, Canada, June 9-12.
|
8 |
Goorley, J.T., James, M.R., Booth, T.E., Brown, F.B., Bull, J.S., Cox, L.J., Durkee Jr, J.W., Elson, J.S., Fensin, M.L., Forster III, R.A. and Hendricks, J.S. Initial MCNP6 release overview-MCNP6 version 1.0 (No. LA-UR-13-22934). Los Alamos National Lab.(LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States). https://doi.org/10.2172/1086758.
DOI
|
9 |
C. Lloyd, B. Goddard, Proliferation resistant plutonium: an updated analysis, Nucl. Eng. Des. 330 (2018) 297-302, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2018.02.012.
DOI
|
10 |
H.R. Trellue, C.G. Bathke, P. Sadasivan, Neutronics and material attractiveness for PWR thorium systems using Monte Carlo techniques, Prog. Nucl. Energy 53 (2011) 698-707, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2011.04.007.
DOI
|
11 |
C. Lloyd, B. Goddard, R. Witherspoon, The effects of U-232 on enrichment and material attractiveness over time, Nucl. Eng. Des. 352 (2019) 1-6, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nucengdes.2019.110175.
DOI
|
12 |
R. Moir, U232 Nonproliferation Features, Lawrence Livermore National Lab.(LLNL), 2010. LLNL-TR-438648.
|
13 |
J. Kang, F.N. von Hippel, U-232 and the proliferation-resistance of U-233 in spent fuel, Sci. Global Secur. 9 (2001) 1-32, https://doi.org/10.1080/08929880108426485.
DOI
|
14 |
Generation IV International Forum, Evaluation methodology for proliferation resistance and physical protection of Generation IV nuclear energy systems, Rev. E. 6 (2011).
|
15 |
C.H.M. Breeders, G. Kessler, Fuel cycle options for the production and utilization of denatured plutonium, Nucl. Sci. Eng. 156 (2007) 1-23, https://doi.org/10.13182/nse07-a2681.
DOI
|
16 |
A.L. Nichols, M. Verpelli, D.L. Aldama, Handbook of Nuclear Data for Safeguards: Database Extensions, IAEA, 2008. August.
|
17 |
B.T. Rearden, M.A. Jessee, SCALE Code System, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2018. ORNL/TM-2005/39, Version 6.2.3.
|
18 |
A. Kuperman, Plutonium for Energy?: Explaining the Global Decline of MOX : a Policy Research Project of the LBJ School of Public Affairs, University of Texas at Austin, Nuclear Proliferation Prevention Project, 2018.
|
19 |
D.O.E. Us, A Technology Roadmap for Generation IV Nuclear Energy Systems, 2002. https://www.gen-4.org/gif/jcms/c_40481/technology-roadmap.
|
20 |
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, Guidance for the Application of an Assessment Methodology for Innovative Nuclear Energy Systems, IAEATECDOC-1575 Rev.1, IAEA, Vienna, 2009, https://www.iaea.org/publications/8158/guidance-for-the-application-of-an-assessment-methodology-forinnovative-nuclear-energy-systems.
|
21 |
T. Aoki, H. Sagara, C.Y. Han, Material attractiveness evaluation of inert matrix fuel for nuclear security and non-proliferation, Ann. Nucl. Energy 126 (2019) 427-433, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2018.10.063.
DOI
|
22 |
Y. Kimura, M. Saito, H. Sagara, Evaluation of proliferation resistance of plutonium based on decay heat, J. Nucl. Sci. Technol. 48 (2011) 715-723, https://doi.org/10.1080/18811248.2011.9711754.
DOI
|
23 |
Y. Kimura, M. Saito, H. Sagara, C.Y. Han, Evaluation of proliferation resistance of plutonium based on spontaneous fission neutron emission rate, Ann. Nucl. Energy 46 (2012) 152-159, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anucene.2012.03.032.
DOI
|
24 |
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY, IAEA Safeguards Glossary, International Nuclear Verification Series No. 3, IAEA, Vienna, 2003.
|
25 |
R. Ibrahim, A. Buijs, J. Luxat, A simplified core model of the SCWR, in: 39th Annual Conference of the Canadian Nuclear Society and 43rd Annual CNS/CAN Student Conference, 2019. Ottawa, Canada, June 23-29.
|
26 |
Nuclear Data Center at KAERI, Table of Nuclides. http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/.
|