Skip to comments.
US Plans "Disposable" Nuclear Batteries
NewScientistTech ^
| 3-13-08
| Phil McKenna
Posted on 03/13/2008 4:06:32 PM PDT by HangnJudge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
Saw this on SlashDot
Nice to see progress in Nuclear Energy research
http://www.gnep.energy.gov/gnepUSNuclearPower.html
To: HangnJudge
Does not sound like US built nuc power but we are paying to build power plants for everyone else.
2
posted on
03/13/2008 4:09:28 PM PDT
by
edcoil
(Go Great in 08 ... Slide into 09)
To: HangnJudge
“The Bush administration has ear-marked $20 million in its 2009 budget toward the US Department of Energy’s efforts to design nuclear power plants in the 250-to-500 megawatt range as part of its Global Nuclear Energy Program (GNEP).”
WOW! 20 whole million!
Well, maybe that’s all we have left after giving Fatah $500,000,000.00 and planning on $375,000,000.00 to the KLA terrorists in Kosovo this year.
3
posted on
03/13/2008 4:09:59 PM PDT
by
Kolokotronis
(Christ is Risen, and you, o death, are annihilated!)
To: edcoil
Does not sound like US built nuc power but we are paying to build power plants for everyone else.
Someone has to keep buying oil so the mohammedan infested lands can keep paying for jihadis.
If we go to nukes, our "good friends" in o.p.e.c. won't be buying new solid gold toilets or AK-47s...
4
posted on
03/13/2008 4:13:26 PM PDT
by
Dr.Zoidberg
(Mohammedanism - Bringing you only the best of the 6th century for fourteen hundred years.)
To: edcoil
It would be a very good thing however to remove the income stream to the Middle East, by adding non-fossil fuel sources of energy to the grid, can then power electric cars, generate hydrogen, desalinate water, etc.
Anything to stop the flow of money into the Oil producing Middle East states.
To: Kolokotronis
Wellllllll, ya gotta have yer priorities...
6
posted on
03/13/2008 4:14:29 PM PDT
by
null and void
(It's 3 AM, do you know where Hillary is? Does she know where Bill is? Does Bill know what 'is' is?)
To: HangnJudge
better be Pebble Bed reactors...
7
posted on
03/13/2008 4:16:48 PM PDT
by
Chode
(American Hedonist ©®)
To: HangnJudge
I remember reading a while back that Mitsubishi had something like this already and we were going to buy some. IIRC, some French company said they could safely reprocess the fuel.
To: HangnJudge
Bush has totally failed on energy. He should have came out swinging from day one. If he had, most of these nuclear plants and oil production in ANWR would be online now.
There's already talk of gas topping $5 a gallon.
To: Chode
better be Pebble Bed reactors...
That would work, stable, long fuel cycles
Intrinsically more safe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_reactor
To: edcoil
Does not sound like US built nuc power but we are paying to build power plants for everyone else. This sounds like another global coalition to set some ground rules for the construction of commercial nuclear power plants outside the US.
We already have our rules. They're in the Code of Federal Regulations and they're monitored and enforced by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
11
posted on
03/13/2008 4:25:16 PM PDT
by
cowboyway
("No damn man kills me and lives." -- Nathan Bedford Forrest)
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
Just imagine if he’d expended as much political capital on a decent energy policy and social security reform as he did on pushing amnesty and pushing for nationhood for the Palis. We’d be in much, much better shape, as a party and as a nation.
To: Extremely Extreme Extremist
He should have came out swinging from day one. I agree
The delays on implementation of a rational Nuclear Energy Program are unconscionable. I primarily blame the Environmentalist idiots, and Political fear-mongering for the delay
But every year we wait makes our dependency on Fossil Fuels greater.
To: Chode
They’re not. These reactors are going to be based on the liquid sodium moderated breeder design that the DoE built in the early ‘90s. While the liquid sodium moderator used in this design is tricky to handle, the reactor has several advantages: it has a high negative coefficient of reactivity, meaning that if the core gets too hot, criticality is lost and the reactor shuts down. Also, the sodium-moderated design allows the reactor to use fuel elements that are simply cast instead of precision-machined, thus drastically lowering fuel costs. Another advantage is the fuel itself, a plutonium/uranium mix: as the reactor ages, neutron flux from the plutonium gradually converts the uranium into more fuel, allowing the reactor to recover ±99% of the energy in each fuel element this means the core can be sealed, as one fuelling will last the lifetime of the reactor. This configuration furthermore transmutes the usual long-half-life “poison” byproducts of fission into short half-life isotopes, allowing the spent fuel elements to be safely stored on site. Finally, the alloy fuel elements cannot be reprocessed into weapons-grade nuclear material without the use of huge, heavy, easy-to-find-and-bomb centrifuges, thus greatly reducing the likelihood of proliferation.
I’ll be honest: liquid sodium scares the crap out of me. That stuff oxidizes like crazy, and if it touches water, well... don’t ask. However, the basic design of these reactors is sound and the prototype tested well, so I’m confident the new units will work.
14
posted on
03/13/2008 4:31:28 PM PDT
by
B-Chan
(Catholic. Monarchist. Texan. Any questions?)
To: B-Chan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_breeder_reactor
The fast breeder or fast breeder reactor (FBR) is a fast neutron reactor designed to breed fuel by producing more fissile material than it consumes. The FBR is one possible type of breeder reactor.
To: HangnJudge
""Atoms for Peace" was the title of a speech delivered by U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower to the UN General Assembly in New York City on December 8, 1953.
I feel impelled to speak today in a language that in a sense is newone which I, who have spent so much of my life in the military profession, would have preferred never to use.
That new language is the language of atomic warfare.
The United States then launched an "Atoms for Peace" program that supplied equipment and information to schools, hospitals, and research institutions within the U.S. and throughout the world."
Atoms for Peace.
16
posted on
03/13/2008 4:46:05 PM PDT
by
decimon
To: B-Chan
http://hulk.cesnef.polimi.it/
The International Reactor Innovative and Secure (IRIS) is a smaller-scale advanced light water reactor (LWR), being developed through a strong international partnership for near-term deployment (within the next decade), to offer a simple nuclear plant with outstanding safety, attractive economics and enhanced proliferation resistance characteristics. IRIS provides a viable bridge to Generation IV reactors and has excellent capability to satisfy in the near/mid-term timeframe the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) requirements for Small-Scale Reactors or Appropriately Sized Reactors.
To: decimon
The Industry sources for support read like a
Who’s Who of Nuclear Power
Westinghouse, BNFL, OKBM (Russia)
ORNL, Polytechnic of Milan, MIT, Tokyo Institute of Technology
Just to name a few
To: B-Chan
cool...
19
posted on
03/13/2008 5:09:58 PM PDT
by
Chode
(American Hedonist ©®)
To: lesser_satan
I remember reading a while back that Mitsubishi had something like this already and we were going to buy some.
Toshiba actually...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toshiba_4S
The Toshiba 4S (Super Safe, Small and Simple) is a nuclear battery reactor design. It requires only minimal staffing.
The plant design is offered by a partnership that includes Toshiba and the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI) of Japan.
The technical specifications of the 4S reactor are unique in the nuclear industry. The actual reactor would be located in sealed, cylindrical vault 30 m (98 ft) underground, while the building above ground would be 22 x 16 x 11 m (72 × 52.5 x 36 ft) in size. This power plant is designed to provide 10 Megawatts of power.
The 4S uses neutron reflector panels around the perimeter to maintain neutron density. These reflector panels replace complicated control rods, yet keep the ability to shut down the nuclear reaction in case of an emergency. Additionally, the Toshiba 4S utilizes liquid sodium as a coolant, allowing the reactor to operate 200 degrees hotter than if it used water. This means that the reactor is depressurized, as water at this temperature would run at thousands of pounds per square inch.
The reactor is expected to provide electric energy for between 5 and 13 cents/kWh, factoring in only operating costs. On paper, it has been determined that the reactor could run for 30 years without being refueled.
The Toshiba 4S Nuclear Battery is being proposed as the power source for the Galena Nuclear Power Plant in Galena, Alaska.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-25 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson