Posted on 08/25/2005 4:11:34 AM PDT by CarrotAndStick
I've always wondered why they can't harness all forms of radioactivity to generate power. That way even nuclear waste could be used to power a generator.
What am I missing here that the U.S. power industry and the US government have not been on top of this "safe" nuclear power development?
Energy from radioactive decay is very low (it's derived from the weak nuclear force). It's generally been used to power things like spacecraft that need a tiny source of energy for a long time.
Fission on the other hand produces a large amount of energy (derived from the strong nuclear force). For fission you need to use fissile or fertile elements like uranium, thorium, and plutonium.
The difference in energy produced by these two means is tremendous. In fact, even newer spacecraft will be using fission.
The US nuclear community has known about this kind of reactor for a while. In fact, many years ago, the US tested plants that burned thorium. The problem in the US is not technological, but economic and regulatory.
I suspected it was more regulatory than economics. As with coal vs natural gas and oil, there is always an economic tipping point.
One word: BHOPAL
One word: BHOPAL
India, as I have said elsewhere, is, if you'll pardon the sweeping generalization on so many levels, God's gift to America. And I'm not just talking about the women.
but you said it twice. anyway, that was in the dark ages for India. And, if not very much mistaken, didn't Union Carbide operate that place?
It's the regulatory framework that makes the economics of nuclear plants so undesirable. You gotta jump through a lot more hoops to build a nuclear plant than a coal or natural gas place. As a result, at this point uranium plants are still not cheaper than coal. These thorium plants would probably cost a lot more than uranium plants -- the advantage is that it destroys weapons-grade plutonium and produces waste that is very difficult to turn into a nuclear weapon. Since it's proliferation concerns and not economics driving the fuel in this plant, I suspect it's heavily subsidized by the Indian government.
Union Carbide OWNED the plant, and provided some management. Far and away the majority of personnel were locals, including the guys who "pulled the wrong lever".
All development int he US has been strictly theoretical since the feds have made building a nuke reactor prohibitively expensive through impossible to meet standards.
i see. so, ownership had no culpability and responsibility to ensure that their employees knew which levers to pull? Sort of like Delta putting people in the cockpit who don't which buttons to push?
"The ABTR needs 2.2 tonnes of plutonium each year."
Sounds like a great future energy source to export around the world. NOT.
Exactly.
It consumes 2.2 tonnes of plutonium, not produces. Besides, what can anyone do about India making the bomb?
"One word: BHOPAL"
Two words: Union Carbide!
(Remember the American Company "Union Carbide"?)LOL!
Oh bull! Blame it on the "locals" pulling the lever!
The every piece of report on Bhopal gas leak ever published clearly indictes the top level management for blatantly flouting local laws and safty standards.
Union Carbide operated it, technically, but the place was on-hands managed by Indians. Not unlike Homer Simpson, a couple of engineers were "sleeping at the wheel" when the cyanide leak occurred and a chain reaction of miscommunication and the lack of emergency stopgaps created that disaster. Essentially, oversight was shoddy and a lot of people died for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.