Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ https://digital.libr...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
versions View all 1 versions
addClaim

Portable treatment systems study

Authors: Sherick, M.J.; Schwinkendorf, W.E.; Bechtold, T.E.; Cole, L.T.;

Portable treatment systems study

Abstract

In developing their Site Treatment Plans (STPs), many of the Department of Energy installations identified some form of portable treatment, to facilitate compliant disposition of select mixed low-level wastestreams. The Environmental Management Office of Science and Technology requested that a systems study be performed to better define the potential role of portable treatment with respect to mixed low-level waste, highlight obstacles to implementation, and identify opportunities for future research and development emphasis. The study was performed by first establishing a representative set of mixed waste, then formulating portable treatment system concepts to meet the required processing needs for these wastes. The portable systems that were conceptualized were evaluated and compared to a fixed centralized treatment alternative. The system evaluations include a life-cycle cost analysis and an assessment of regulatory, institutional, and technical issues associated with the potential use of portable systems. The results of this study show that when all costs are included, there are no significant cost differences between portable systems and fixed systems. However, it is also emphasized that many uncertainties exist that could impact the cost of implementing portable treatment systems. Portable treatment could be made more attractive through private sector implementation, although there is little economic incentive for a commercial vendor to develop small, specialized treatment capabilities with limited applicability. Alternatively, there may also be valid reasons why fixed units cannot be used for some problematic wastestreams. In any event, there are some site-specific problems that still need to be addressed, and there may be some opportunity for research and development to make a positive impact in these areas.

Country
United States
Related Organizations
Keywords

330, Remedial Action, Low-Level Radioactive Wastes, 05 Nuclear Fuels, Portable Equipment, Technology Assessment, Evaluation, Radioactive Waste Processing

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
0
Average
Average
Average