Abstract The Gas Cooled Fast Reactor (GFR), which is among the Generation IV concepts under evaluation for future deployment, will have to satisfy the Gen IV goals in the area of sustainability, safety and economy. This paper discusses challenges posed by the GFR when striving for the achievement of balance among the above Generation IV goals, and the pros and cons of various design choices. Considering these goals, the currently preferred design direction at MIT is a GFR design using a direct supercritical CO2 cycle, traditional containment with design pressure of 5 bars, employment of redundant active emergency cooling systems with highly reliable and diverse power supplies, which can also function in the passive mode as a backup at 5 bars containment pressure, and TRU fueled cores using either block-type (TRU-U)C fuel or pin type (TRU-U)C fuel with double cladding or (TRU-U)O2 fuel vibropacked in a tube-in-duct assembly.
[1]
Lloyd Brown,et al.
The Modular Helium Reactor for Hydrogen Production
,
2006
.
[2]
Kazuhiko Kunitomi,et al.
GTHTR300 design and development
,
2003
.
[3]
Neil E. Todreas,et al.
The Long-Life Gas Turbine Fast Reactor Matrix Core Concept
,
2002
.
[4]
Y. Kato,et al.
Medium temperature carbon dioxide gas turbine reactor
,
2004
.
[5]
P. Saha,et al.
Analysis of a Convection Loop for GFR Post-LOCA Decay Heat Removal
,
2004
.
[6]
J. H. Gittus.
The ESKOM pebble bed modular reactor
,
1999
.
[7]
C. P. Gratton.
The GCFR revisited
,
2003
.