Pages

▼

Thursday, 16 February 2012

Feature: Small modular nuclear reactors - the future of energy?


This year is an historic one for nuclear power, with the first reactors winning US government approval for construction since 1978. Some have seen the green lighting of two Westinghouse AP1000 reactors to be built in Georgia as the start of a revival of nuclear power in the West, but this may be a false dawn because of the problems besetting conventional reactors. It may be that when a new boom in nuclear power comes, it won't be led by giant gigawatt installations, but by batteries of small modular reactors (SMRs) with very different principles from those of previous generations. But though a technology of great diversity and potential, many obstacles stand in its path. Gizmag goes in depth with an examination of the many forms of SMR, their advantages, and the challenges they must overcome... Continue Reading Feature: Small modular nuclear reactors - the future of energy?
at

3 comments:

  1. eonThursday, 16 February 2012 at 10:48:00 GMT-8

    Excellent article, David.

    Another advantage of SMRs is that unlike large fixed WMRs, there is a large pool of trained technicians and operators in the U.S. ready to run them. They're called retired U.S. Navy nuclear power officers.

    On a related topic, the new issue of Popular Science has an article concerning nuclear fusion research. Small fusion reactors are running sustained, stable reactions now. The punch line is that one of them was built by a 17-year-old boy. Check out "The Boy Who Played With Fusion" in the March 2012 issue, or on PopSci's website.

    Of course, even now the Obama crowd is no doubt planning a moratorium on all of the above- unto eternity. (It would interfere with their plans for us all living in mud huts.)

    cheers

    eon

    ReplyDelete
  2. RipbergerThursday, 16 February 2012 at 14:55:00 GMT-8

    I never hear much about Thorium reactors. I saw a documentary about them once, but the subject never seems to come up as a viable alternative to traditional uranium reactors. Is there much support for them?

    ReplyDelete
  3. eonThursday, 16 February 2012 at 18:03:00 GMT-8

    Ripberger;

    Google "pebble-bed reactor". Most PBR designs are intended to be thorium-fueled, mainly because (a) a PBR can adjust subcrit masses, and thus crit thresholds, almost at will, (b) startup and shutdown aren't much more involved than a typical "water tank" reactor, (c) the pebble-bed design is pretty much goof-proof from an accident potential standpoint, and last but not least, (d) thorium is considerably more plentiful in the Earth's upper crust than uranium. In fact, it's only slightly less common than lead.

    The surprising thing is that it's taken this long for anybody to notice thorium's advantages, especially in this application.

    cheers

    eon

    ReplyDelete

Rules for submitting comments:

1. No profanity. I maintain the pretense that this is a family-friendly site.

2. Stay on topic. A bit of straying and off-hand commenting is okay, but hijacking the discussion is right out.

3. No ad hominem attacks. Attack the subject, not the other person on the thread and keep the discussion civil.

4. No spamming or commercial endorsements. These get deleted immediately.

Tip: Beware of putting hyperlinks in your comments–especially at the end. For some reason, Blogger interprets these as spam.

Note: Due to the recent spate of anonymous spamming, registration for comments is now required.