Hooray for Nuc Power!!!

[Skeptic]

I knew going in that Obama was sympathetic to nuclear energy. Now we see that bearing fruit. Let's see if the GOP Congress will stall this for the benefit of their good friends, the coal barons.

If Obama is for nuclear energy and the republicans are against it, it's because the evil republicans are in the pay of the coal barons.

If Obama is against nuclear energy and the republicans are for it, it's because the evil republicans care only about money and have no concern for the environment or possible safety hazards.

 

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

^ You've got some straw in your post there.

 

[Just thinking]

^ You've got some straw in your post there.

Looks like you totally ignored reading the OP. From BB:

Let's see if the GOP Congress will stall this for the benefit of their good friends, the coal barons.

Yep ... Skeppy called it spot on ...

 

[Skwinty]

Here is some info on the Westinghouse Small Modular Reactor.

http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/smr/index.htm

 

[Nosi]

If it means lower taxes for them so they can build that new guest house with marble columns they would surely let the rest of America degenerate into an uninhabitable wasteland.

No kidding.

 

[Nosi]

Don't look to government to do anything but pander to special interest. Look to yourselves to do anything at all.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Here is the reason why Small modular reactors are so important.

International team locks themselves in a box for 520 days on simulated trip to mars.

NASA engineer proposes suicide mission to Mars.

Another NASA engineer designs a nuclear powered plasma rocket that can do Earth to Mars and back in 78 days.

This is "destiny of mankind" stuff. The scientist in the second link is right. A mission to mars based on conventional technology is a death sentence. But even he is suffering from a crippling tunnel vision. Real spaceships have reactors. Anyone who says otherwise is not to be taken seriously. If we go out there, it's going to be nukes or nothin.

 

[BenBurch]

Here is the reason why Small modular reactors are so important.

International team locks themselves in a box for 520 days on simulated trip to mars.

NASA engineer proposes suicide mission to Mars.

Another NASA engineer designs a nuclear powered plasma rocket that can do Earth to Mars and back in 78 days.

This is "destiny of mankind" stuff. The scientist in the second link is right. A mission to mars based on conventional technology is a death sentence. But even he is suffering from a crippling tunnel vision. Real spaceships have reactors. Anyone who says otherwise is not to be taken seriously. If we go out there, it's going to be nukes or nothin.

And I think we could cut 78 days to 20. But we'll need a heavy lift vehicle to launch reaction mass tanks. The good news is that reaction mass is cheap and the rocket for this does not need to be particularly reliable. Sea Dragon would be a good starting point.

 

[leftysergeant]

Ilike the idea of smaller nuke plants. It would take a lot more of them to cause a catastrophe the size of the one brewing in Japan right now.

Think about the WTC. The bigger something is, the more horrendous the results of a catastrophic failure.

 

[TragicMonkey]

If Obama is for nuclear energy and the republicans are against it, it's because the evil republicans are in the pay of the coal barons.

If Obama is against nuclear energy and the republicans are for it, it's because the evil republicans care only about money and have no concern for the environment or possible safety hazards.

I think people on both sides of the political spectrum can agree that our politicians would be much improved if they were split into their component molecules and the resulting energy used to heat the homes of poor people in winter.

 

[rjh01]

Here is some info on the Westinghouse Small Modular Reactor.

http://www.westinghousenuclear.com/smr/index.htm

Critical pieces of information missing
1. Dimensions of the reactor. Could they be put on a truck and transported to a location? (It says it can be transported by rail, so I assume it can be done by truck as well.)
2. Then at the end of its life can they be unplugged and taken to a suitable tip?
3. Cost to build and run? Can they produce electricity at a similar cost to coal? Or even twice the cost?
4. Is maintenance minimal?

If the answers to the above are yes then they can be put in cities and no need for long high voltage power lines, with that added expense. Then all you need worry about is where does the peak hour electricity come from? And how do you satisfy the "Not in MY backyard crowd?"

 

[BenBurch]

I think people on both sides of the political spectrum can agree that our politicians would be much improved if they were split into their component molecules and the resulting energy used to heat the homes of poor people in winter.

Amen.

 

[one666]

More to the point, what will they be doing in this Lab that needs so much electricity?

 

[casebro]

Is everybody overlooking the waste energy?

Small reactors on ships use the ocean to dump the waste heat. Large reactors need massive cooling systems. Yes, we can use the reactor out of a submarine. But you can't exactly park it anyplace you want, as is if it were a back up generator.

 

[cesarz]

If Obama is for nuclear energy and the republicans are against it, it's because the evil republicans are in the pay of the coal barons.

If Obama is against nuclear energy and the republicans are for it, it's because the evil republicans care only about money and have no concern for the environment or possible safety hazards.

Well said. And i always look at "motto" of this forum. Place to discuss skrepticism, critical thinking. Oh well.

As for nuclear power - its only alternative for us so its not like you have choice.

 

[BenBurch]

Is everybody overlooking the waste energy?

Small reactors on ships use the ocean to dump the waste heat. Large reactors need massive cooling systems. Yes, we can use the reactor out of a submarine. But you can't exactly park it anyplace you want, as is if it were a back up generator.

Well, sure you can.

The Army had a range of field deployable small power reactors in the 60s. The cooling problem is not any worse than a large diesel would have; Radiators and fans suffice.

 

[Minoosh]

How do you satisfy the "Not in MY backyard crowd?"

You might find a surprise there, I live out West, it's depressed, lots of room. There might be rural areas that would welcome the jobs. For a fact there are rural areas clamoring for revival of uranium mining.

I'll look for answer to your other questions on this thread.

Question of mine, does the structure of the funding take into account the feds are financing R&D for private companies? My share is about $1.50, I want it back with interest.

In terms of alternatives it's good to broaden our portfolio of domestic energy options - solar, wind, gas, hydroelectric, some coal, etc.

 

[BenBurch]

You deal with NIMBYs the way it ought to ALWAYS be dealt with; By a specific law making NIMBY suits on this subject illegal.

 

[Minoosh]

Do spent rods get shipped around at all? Are they still kept on site? And have we advanced very much in mitigating on-site storage?

How dangerous is that stuff compared to a meltdown, and how attractive might the waste be to potential terror groups?

 

[BenBurch]

Do spent rods get shipped around at all? Are they still kept on site? And have we advanced very much in mitigating on-site storage?

How dangerous is that stuff compared to a meltdown, and how attractive might the waste be to potential terror groups?

Mostly they are kept on site. In dry-cask systems once they have cooled for a few years. No longer in the cooling pools indefinitely.

We have a problem; Burying all those rods would waste a LOT of fuel. But we have no reprocessing capabilities since that was shut down for political reasons by Carter.

We need to set up a reprocessing capability ASAP.