Didcot, United Kingdom
Didcot, United Kingdom

Time filter

Source Type

News Article | December 1, 2016
Site: news.yahoo.com

Thirty years ago, LaserSnake2 would be the name of a video game we would badly, badly want to get our hands on. In 2016, it’s the name of a real-life robot which looks, for all intents and purposes, like one of the terrifying creatures from Tremors and happens to shoot out five-kilowatt laser blasts for good measure. Recently, LaserSnake2 — described by its creators OC Robotics as an “integrated snake-arm robot and laser cutting” technology — turned its terrible, terrible wrath on a nuclear power plant in the U.K., carrying out the in-situ decommissioning of a nuclear cell at the First Generation Reprocessing Plants in Sellafield, England. The snake robot’s job was to cut through a thick dissolver vessel, which was previously part of the core nuclear reactor hardware. More: Snake robots will crawl up your nose to help surgeons perform surgery on you “The active deployment at Sellafield was a world first,” Rebecca Smith, a member of the business development team at OC Robotics, told Digital Trends. “There are significant benefits to using the LaserSnake system for size reduction in an active cell: the system can be deployed quicker and more practically than alternative size reduction techniques, and can dramatically reduce the costs of nuclear decommissioning.” Snake-arm robots, she noted, are routinely used across a broad spectrum of industries, including aerospace, construction, and defense due to their ability to maneuver into areas that might otherwise be tough to access. LaserSnake is a particularly impressive example of such a robot: boasting almost 15 feet of articulation and not only the aforementioned high-power laser cutting head but also high-definition cameras and supercharged illumination LEDs for easy operation. “The LaserSnake arm has two degrees of freedom at each joint allowing it to ‘snake’ through environments,” Smith continued. “Snake-arm robots are particularly suited to nuclear applications, as the sensitive electronics are situated outside of the environment — away from potential contamination or radiation, with only the arm deployed into the workspace.” It’s certainly done enough to win over the necessary decision-makers. In November, the LaserSnake project won the Technology/Innovation Implementation Award at the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Supply Chain Awards. For those unfamiliar with it, that is pretty much the Oscars for nuclear decommissioning. Does that make the LaserSnake2 Leonardo DiCaprio? We’re not sure, to be honest; we’re still kind of hung up on that whole ‘it’s-a-giant-laser-toting-snake-robot’ thing.

News Article | December 28, 2016
Site: www.theguardian.com

“Serious industrial unrest” at Europe’s biggest nuclear site could threaten the Conservatives’ chances of winning a forthcoming byelection, unions have warned. The byelection in the marginal Cumbrian seat of Copeland has been described as “Theresa May’s to lose”. But the Conservative candidate hoping to overturn Labour’s 2,564 majority will have to explain to thousands of workers at the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing site why the government is trying to downgrade their final-salary pension scheme. Trade unions representing many of Sellafield’s 10,000 workers have written to the government warning they cannot support either of the options being considered. The Guardian has seen a letter sent shortly before Christmas to Lady Neville-Rolfe, minister of state at the business department. It comes from the Prospect union, which represents more than 5,000 Sellafield engineers and specialists. The letter, signed by Prospect’s deputy general secretary, Dai Hudd, on behalf of his union, the GMB, Unite and Aslef, tells the minister “serious industrial unrest” cannot be ruled out by workers employed by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The NDA is the public body that owns Sellafield, a huge site in Copeland that processes nuclear waste from the old Windscale nuclear power station, where a fire in 1957 caused the UK’s worst nuclear accident. It says: “Employees across the NDA estate fought hard to secure the statutory pension protections that currently apply. There will be an understandable adverse reaction with any proposals that trample over those protections. “They will certainly not respond well to a raid on their pension benefits intended to achieve arbitrary savings agreed between the NDA and the Treasury, and agreement to which the workforce and their representatives played no part. “If the NDA proceeds with its proposed consultation in its current form there will inevitably be a significant reaction from the members affected. The likelihood of serious industrial unrest cannot be ruled out.” The two money-saving proposals on offer involve either a series of changes including increasing the pension age from 60 to 65 or state pension age (whichever is higher), or breaking the final-salary link for the pension scheme, according to Prospect. A 60-day consultation period on the options opens on 9 January. According to Hudd, either proposal will affect thousands of Sellafield employees as well as thousands of employees at other nuclear sites, some of which are also in the constituency. Each member of the scheme would lose tens of thousands on average, he claimed. “I expect the reaction will be particularly robust because this group of members were granted statutory pension protection in the legislation that effectively privatised the industry and these proposals would mean overriding those protections,” he told the Guardian. “There are few constituencies where a single industry (indeed employer) is as significant as the nuclear industry and Sellafield is to Copeland. For the government of the day to attack the pension terms for the employees in this industry in the run-up to a crucial byelection, there is incredibly bad timing to say the least.” A spokesman for the NDA said: “Government policy is that all public sector final-salary pensions schemes should reformed by 2018, and 4 million public sector workers have already moved to new pension arrangements. “Specific decisions on how to change the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s estate pension schemes have yet to be taken. We expect to begin formal consultation in the new year.” More than 10,000 people are employed at the Sellafield site, which measures 6 sq km and is the largest nuclear site in Europe, containing more than 1,000 nuclear facilities. Almost half of the UK’s nuclear workforce is based at Sellafield, which is home to among the largest inventories of untreated waste in the world. The NDA purpose is to deliver the decommissioning and cleanup of the UK’s civil nuclear legacy in a safe and cost-effective manner.

Krouse D.,Callaghan Innovation | Laycock N.,University of Birmingham | Padovani C.,Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Corrosion Engineering Science and Technology | Year: 2014

We describe work in modelling pitting corrosion of 300 series stainless steel during exposure to chloride containing environments, with a focus on atmospheric conditions. It is well known that, under certain conditions of temperature and humidity, pitting corrosion can initiate on stainless steel if sufficient quantities of chloride containing salts are deposited on its surface. One of the key hypotheses that this work intended to test is the existence of bounds on maximum pit depths in the presence of fixed and possibly limited amounts of cathodic current. In the presence of the relatively high cathodic currents associated with high relative humidity and high surface contamination by hygroscopic salts, which are most likely to be representative of outdoor environments, maximum pit depths are predicted to be of the order of 150-300 μm, developed over periods of several months. In conditions more likely to be representative of indoor conditions with corrosion occurring under thin moisture layers, pit propagation is severely inhibited and very high chloride concentrations are required that favour the development of shallow, dish shaped pits. © 2014 Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining.

News Article | April 6, 2016
Site: www.theenergycollective.com

A very unusual exchange is about to take place over the Atlantic. The UK is sending some 700kg of highly enriched uranium to be disposed of in the US, the largest amount that has ever been moved out of the country. In return, the US is sending other kinds of enriched uranium to Europe to help diagnose people with cancer. The vast majority of the UK’s waste comes from its fleet of nuclear power stations. Most of it is stored at the Sellafield site in north-west England. But the material being sent to the US is a particularly high (weapons usable) grade of enriched uranium that you wouldn’t want to move to Sellafield from its current location at Dounreay in the north of Scotland without building a new storage facility – presumably more expensive than the cost of transportation. The decision to move this radioactive waste out of the UK has been presented as making it harder for nuclear materials to get into the hands of terrorists, but this is implausible. The UK is capable of managing homegrown highly enriched uranium itself. The plan also contradicts the principle that countries are responsible for managing their own nuclear legacy. The announcement draws new attention to an old issue: how to find a long-term solution to nuclear waste. Countries with atomic weapons or civilian nuclear power have been wrestling with this for several decades. This is partly because the problem was neglected for years, but more fundamentally because governments have failed to develop a strategy acceptable to the communities affected. This reflects the uniqueness of the problem, of course – we are talking about substances which could harm human health for tens of thousands of years into the future. It raises profound ethical issues of equity between generations. The scientific community does in fact agree on how to dispose of these materials safely: deep underground in appropriate geology such as clay or granite, with well engineered radiation barriers as an extra defence. Yet only Sweden and Finland, with political systems built on more trust and consensus than most countries, have a clear repository plan – and it will be several years before they become operational. Most of the storage facilities at Sellafield are designed to last mere decades. The UK has been sporadically focused on deep disposal since the early 1980s, but for a long time approached it top-down and secretively. This became known as the “DAD” method – decide, announce, defend. But it has always led to “abandon” when local communities, having had no part in the siting decision, have rebelled successfully. It was not until 2008 that the government introduced a system of rules under which local communities would conditionally volunteer a site and then negotiate a deal with the authorities. So far it has produced no result: attempts by district councils around Sellafield to volunteer it were overruled in 2013 by Cumbria county council, the local-authority tier above them, and no other communities have come forward. The government has reserved the right to override the voluntary process but shows no sign of doing so yet. In such circumstances it becomes tempting to look for short cuts. One occasionally raised is to put all the world’s problematic waste somewhere very remote like the west Australian desert. This is a non-starter. The Czech and Slovak experience illustrated this. As a single country they planned a single repository, but after their “velvet divorce” each insisted it would not permanently manage the other’s waste. Such an international solution also contradicts the aforementioned issue of being responsible for your own legacy. The other major hope is that science will find a convincing way either to use waste as fuel for reactors, and/or that “partitioning and transmutation” would drastically reduce the half-lives of the relevant isotopes. Yet these approaches are complex and expensive, involving molten salt reactors or accelerator-driven systems. And critically, there would still be some volume of long-lived waste that needed to be managed – no method can yet promise to drastically reduce the half-lives of all the different waste types. The only credible way forward is deep burial. In the absence of a deep-disposal plan, the UK has a more immediately pressing issue – what to do with Sellafield’s contaminated materials and waste from the UK’s near-70 years in the nuclear power and weapons business, much of which is housed in dilapidated facilities that are not fit for purpose. The Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) expects it will cost some £68 billion to clean up Sellafield by stabilising and safely packaging the waste and building new stores. This will only be completed by around 2120. This problem is at least now getting serious attention and resource – despite the climate of public austerity. Currently the country is spending over £1.5 billion a year on the site, which is one of the most hazardous in Europe. Sellafield stores a further 140 tonnes of waste plutonium that also stems from British and some overseas nuclear power. If used in bombs this amount could obliterate humanity several times over. The NDA is now focusing on what to do about this too, after years of political inattention. Yet the decision-making is laboured and the currently favoured solution of using the plutonium as fuel for conventional reactors lacks credibility – no operator wants to use plutonium-based fuel because it is more difficult and expensive to manage than conventional fuel; and moving it around the country is a security risk. So nuclear waste remains the Achilles heel of the nuclear industry, in the UK and elsewhere. While the financial problems behind the proposed new nuclear station Hinkley Point C attract most of the headlines, the waste problem hangs over the industry behind the scenes. Until we find a way forward that is scientifically and politically acceptable, it will continue to do so. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Williams S.J.,Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Mineralogical Magazine | Year: 2012

Gases will be generated in waste packages during their transport to a geological disposal facility (GDF), this generation will continue during GDF operations and after GDF closure. The range of gases produced will include flammable, radioactive and chemotoxic species. These must be managed to ensure safety during transport and operations, and the post-closure consequences need to be understood. The two primary post-closure gas issues for a GDF are the need for the system pressure to remain below a value at which irreversible damage to the engineered barrier system and host geology could occur, and the need to ensure that any flux of gas (in particular gaseous radionuclides) to the biosphere does not result in unacceptable risk. This paper provides an overview of the research of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, Radioactive Waste Management Directorate into gas generation and its migration from a GDF. © 2012 The Mineralogical Society.

Norris S.,Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Mineralogical Magazine | Year: 2012

This paper gives an overview of the geosphere research studies being undertaken by the Radioactive Waste Management Directorate (RWMD) of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The approach of the RWMD in the current generic phase of the UK managing radioactive waste safely (MRWS) programme is to maintain an understanding of key processes and to carry out research and development into techniques so capability can be built. Although RWMD can demonstrate a general understanding of geosphere processes at this stage in the UK project, it is recognized that this will need to be made site-specific as the MRWS programme progresses. An understanding of the geosphere at the selected site(s) will be an important part of the future programme. Where possible, the RWMD will participate in international studies so that relevant site-based information can be accessed. In this way, the RWMD will be prepared for site-specific work in stage 5 of the MRWS process. © 2012 The Mineralogical Society.

Tweed C.J.,Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Mineralogical Magazine | Year: 2012

The safe implementation of geological disposal must be underpinned by sound science. This paper describes the approaches taken by the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority Radioactive Waste Management Directorate, the implementing body for geological disposal in the UK, to build an evidence base of scientific data and understanding which is robust to scrutiny and so provides confidence in the safety of geological disposal. © 2012 The Mineralogical Society.

Woods A.W.,University of Cambridge | Norris S.,Nuclear Decommissioning Authority
Water Resources Research | Year: 2010

Waste stored in a geological disposal facility can generate gas, and depending on the geological environment, this gas may migrate into the rock mass. Here we develop a simplified physical model to describe the initial stages of the dispersal of a gas plume as it rises from such a geological disposal facility, located at a depth of many hundreds of meters below the surface. Typically, the plume becomes confined below a low-permeability layer and then spreads laterally until reaching a fault or fracture zone, when it may continue rising upward. Since the gas is soluble in the groundwater, the gas may partially dissolve as it displaces the groundwater. In addition, in the generic geology considered herein, since the source of gas gradually wanes with time, the spreading plume tends to thin out, leading to some residual trapping of the gas behind the plume. We show that depending on the distance of the fault or fracture zone from the geological disposal facility, different fractions of the source gas may be diverted farther upward into the formation rather than being trapped in the original layer. This can have an important impact on the subsequent pattern of dispersal of the gas by the groundwater flows, which may be key information in any safety assessment. © 2010 by the American Geophysical Union.

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority | Date: 2011-01-21

The invention provides a storage device adapted for use for the storage of waste materials in a glovebox, the device comprising support means incorporating engaging means, the support means comprising a substantially hollow body and the engaging means being adapted to restrain an object therein. It is a particular advantage of the device that the support means defines a hollow interior section in the device, thereby facilitating the storage of additional waste materials integrally within the device in a safe and orderly manner. The device finds particular application in a method for the removal of waste materials located in a glovebox, wherein the waste materials comprise hazardous biological or radioactive materials. In a particularly preferred embodiment, the storage device comprises an essentially cylindrical stacker comprising a collar and, extending therefrom, three elongate members each comprising, at the distal end thereof, engaging means comprising flanges and rims which thereby defining a groove and form feet which allow the device to stand upright.

Nuclear Decommissioning Authority | Date: 2010-09-10

The invention provides a lighting apparatus which comprises housing means, illumination means and fixing means, wherein the illumination means is comprised in an end surface of the housing means, and the fixing means is located on an outer surface of the housing means and is adapted to securely locate the lighting apparatus in a window for use in a glovebox. Preferably, the housing means comprises an essentially cylindrically shaped carrier, adapted for insertion within a CRL window, the illumination means comprises a lighting element comprising a LED light source and a lens arrangement, and the fixing means comprises an annular seal which is integral with the housing means. The invention also provides a lighting system including a plurality of lighting apparatus, an illuminated glovebox and a method of illuminating a glovebox.

Loading Nuclear Decommissioning Authority collaborators
Loading Nuclear Decommissioning Authority collaborators