Posted on 12/18/2007 9:44:50 PM PST by HAL9000
And think of the energy savings in not having to transport the energy from a plant 50 miles away.
Is that net present value?
If you have to plunk down 35 million to buy it, either you are going to have a mortgage on the thing, or you are going to lose investment income.
> Do you fear the micro reactors enough to demand they not pursue it?
I don’t fear the micro-reactors at all. However, I think the claim in this article of 5 cents/kwh power from one is completely bogus, and I suspect that they will only be deployed in extremely remote locations.
If you planned to deploy these in a city, the only way to make it economical is to get the security for free - perhaps locate it under a police station. The value of the electricity it would deliver is only $10 per hour - you can’t afford ANY round-the-clock staff at that rate.
I could also see these reactors being deployed in a university setting, where they would provide co-generation of hot water, and could also be useful for nuclear research.
We have some wildly varying costs being thrown about on the thread. 3.5 million vs 35 million.
A number of these tied into a city electric grid might provide outstanding peak usage power and backup power for critical operations. Electric purchased at peak rates is very very expensive. If these can be tapped for peak power, they might pay for themselves very quickly.
I wonder if they could be deployed to disaster areas?
Just some ideas. Anyone - feel free to shoot them down.
I think it pretty exciting technology. We need to be less dependent on central power stations that can easily be taken out.
nifty.....
it has two major hurdles:
1) cost effective ???
2) pass the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (very big hurdle)
It would make sense to locate them in the emergency planning centers, police departments, hospitals. This is what needs to stay up when disaster happens.
They have their own built in security system wouldn’t they?
You don’t have the proper codes, zot and you are a crispy critter.
Great read about your experience in Greenland. There were no photos displayed?
Cool !
now to find a cheap island for sale with fresh water....
No, that was in Nevada -- the NERVA project.
> We have some wildly varying costs being thrown about on the thread. 3.5 million vs 35 million
Do the Math - it’s not rocket science:
“American in Israel” made a mistake when he claimed “5 cents per kilowatt hour, at 200kw is 100 bucks an hour”
200 KW times FIFTY cents a kw/h would be $100 per hour.
If the electricity is only worth $0.05 per kilowatt/hour, then you are only looking at an output value of $10 per hour.
Come on, this is fourth grade math here, folks.
But I’m lazy and you did the math for me.
I think nukes and distributed energy sources have to have a future. At some point in the next 50 years we will be transitioning away from fossil fuel.
I can’t help thinking these will not fly in the U.S.
What happens when Abdul goes down to the basement and puts 20 pounds of C4 under the reactor?
With that much power, who needs fresh water? Just RO all the seawater you want.
Fill swimming pools with it, and run fountains!
I agree. Even without a mini-nuke, you can live to first-world standards off the grid, using COTS wind and solar engergy products.
Cool nuclear bump.
He doesn’t get close to the reactor. It has a potent defense system available if designed properly. I won’t say it can’t be done, but we can not write off nuclear power because Achmed might blow it up.
If we do, Achmed has succeeding in dragging us back to the 7th century.
In fact I believe there are two and they’re still there.
There’s something not quite right about that boy...
he seems to have some sort of fetish for radioactive substances, above and beyond that of the typical science geek. Anyway, he never achieved criticality, but apparently he may have successfully produced trace amounts of plutonium.
“But the nuclear fuel in a power reactor won’t explode under any circumstances.”
No, but nuclear reactors, even low powered ones running on natural or low-enriched uranium (LEU) have a tendency to produce some nasty radioactive by-products which could make quite a mess if spread around. I suspect extracting those by-products for use in a dirty bomb would be beyond most, if not all, groups capabilities, but blowing the reactor up could certain create at least a local contamination problem. But, then, we’re not talking about using these in heavily populated areas.
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.