Uncategorized files

Showing below up to 50 results in range #1 to #50.

View (previous 50 | next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

• 

  7a.png 477 × 431; 101 KB
  
• 

  ASENES Menu.png 1,372 × 598; 183 KB
  
• 

  Belarus.Fig.1.png 687 × 270; 34 KB
  
• 

  Belarus.Fig.2.png 687 × 266; 37 KB
  
• 

  Belarus.Fig.3.png 687 × 292; 52 KB
  
• 

  Belarus.Fig.4.png 687 × 508; 206 KB
  
• 

  Belarus.Fig.5.png 687 × 403; 181 KB
  
• 

  Belarus.Fig.6.png 687 × 385; 438 KB
  
• 

  Diagram-INPRO Sustainability Assessment Methodology.png 1,073 × 907; 123 KB
  
• 

  FIG.1. 5th Meeting of the INPRO Collaborative Project GAINS, 27 May 2010..jpg 1,258 × 829; 242 KB
  
• 

  FIG.1. Conceptual comparison of safety characteristics between an NPP and a reprocessing facility..jpg 829 × 542; 39 KB
  
• 

  FIG.1. Steps in radioactive waste management (adapted from Ref (10)).png 596 × 267; 12 KB
  
• 

  FIG.3. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited waste management policy for the Chalk River and Whiteshell laboratories (adapted from Ref (1))..png 501 × 561; 31 KB
  
• 

  FIG.4. Timeline for the development of a geological disposal facility (32)..png 595 × 291; 14 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 1. Accumulated yearly occupational dose (modified from Ref (49))..png 1,223 × 799; 227 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 1. Interfaces of a nuclear energy system with the environment (1)..png 1,029 × 558; 114 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 1. Interfaces of a nuclear energy system with the environment (21)..png 551 × 310; 35 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 1. Public participation ladder..png 544 × 208; 15 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 10. A NES with thermal and fast reactors and multi recycling of spent fuel.png 585 × 218; 12 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 10. Cumulative amounts of spent fuel in BAU(a) and BAU&FR (b) systems for the high GAINS scenario..png 984 × 406; 43 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 10. Expected annual production of uranium from primary resources (27)..png 474 × 287; 75 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 11. Expected global supply from secondary uranium sources based on different assumptions (27)..png 474 × 248; 65 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 11. Potential for fast reactor deployment..png 622 × 470; 55 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 12. Comparison of predicted supply by primary resources and secondary sources with demand for the reference scenario (27)..png 428 × 304; 68 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 12. Plutonium in short-term cooled SNF for the moderate GAINS scenario..png 443 × 341; 44 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 13. Pay-back period for R&D cost for the innovative nuclear energy system for different installed capacities..png 697 × 462; 30 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 13. Selected world models for fuel cycle analysis in GAINS (3)..jpg 648 × 262; 45 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 14. Heterogeneous model with non-synergistic groups NG1–NG3 (3)..jpg 579 × 424; 78 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 15. Heterogeneous model with synergistic groups and specific reactor types and fuel services identified.jpg 596 × 437; 79 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 16. GAINS scenarios for modelling nuclear power generation in the twenty-first century. IPCC — Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change..png 762 × 551; 26 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 17a. Power generation in the BAU+ scenario in a homogeneous world (high case on the left, moderate case on the right). ALWR — advanced light water reactor; HWR — heavy water reactor; LWR — light water reactor..png 628 × 465; 34 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 17b. Power generation in the BAU+ scenario in a homogeneous world (high case on the left, moderate case on the right). ALWR — advanced light water reactor; HWR — heavy water reactor; LWR — light water reactor..png 657 × 384; 35 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 18. Total global uranium usage for the BAU+ scenario in a homogeneous world (high case on the left, moderate case on the right). ktHM — kilotonnes of heavy metal..png 638 × 468; 32 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 18b. Total global uranium usage for the BAU+ scenario in a homogeneous world (high case on the left, moderate case on the right). ktHM — kilotonnes of heavy metal..png 654 × 446; 30 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 19. Power generation for different reactor types in the BAU.png 652 × 483; 39 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 19b. Power generation for different reactor types in the BAU.png 631 × 467; 35 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 2. Components of safety management..png 486 × 447; 21 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 2. Conceptual illustration of a waste classification scheme (11)..png 387 × 325; 13 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 2. Flow chart of an environmental stressor analysis (adapted from Ref. (21))..png 521 × 276; 28 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 2. Set of reactor and fuel types with deployment time frames..jpg 1,162 × 818; 141 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 2. Uranium prices in the time period 1980–2010 (13)..png 452 × 316; 64 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 20. Total global uranium usage for the BAU+–FR scenario in a homogeneous world (high case on the left, moderate case on the right). ktHM — kilotonnes of heavy metal..png 1,051 × 773; 23 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 20b. Total global uranium usage for the BAU+–FR scenario in a homogeneous world (high case on the left, moderate case on the right). ktHM — kilotonnes of heavy metal..png 1,051 × 773; 19 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 21a. Power generation for different types of reactors and groups in the BAU+–FR.png 604 × 446; 37 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 21b. Power generation for different types of reactors and groups in the BAU+–FR.png 665 × 428; 35 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 21c. Power generation for different types of reactors and groups in the BAU+–FR.png 631 × 411; 35 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 21d. Power generation for different types of reactors and groups in the BAU+–FR.png 596 × 387; 25 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 22. Cumulative uranium consumption for the non-synergistic heterogeneous scenario BAU+–FR for the high case . ktHM — kilotonnes of heavy metal..png 503 × 377; 31 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 25. Fuel production chain for a light water reactor using uranium fuel in an open fuel cycle..jpg 1,110 × 253; 72 KB
  
• 

  FIG. 3. Environmental performance envelopes of a current nuclear energy system (blue) and an innovative nuclear energy system.png 535 × 325; 26 KB
  

View (previous 50 | next 50) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)