Nuclear disasters and AGW fears

[CapelDodger]

The long term price of electricity via nukes seems all over the place. Certainly the current fleet is an important mitigator for C02 emissions and China building 26 seems to indicate a worthwhile endeavor.

China covering all bases in the plan because it can. It's a long way from the flat-pack safe modern nuclear design that would re-invigorate the industry.

 

[EHocking]

...There is also the unbalanced agreement between the two groups. The five groups I see.

People who fear AGW also fear nuclear

People who fear AGW love nuclear

People don't fear AGW but fear nuclear

People don't fear AGW or nuclear

and people never post in a topic about either.

Which are you?

None of these four groups describes my attitude to the subjects.

If you don't answer, it pretty much means you are group 5.

By dint of this post, I don't sit in group 5 either.

Is there a Planet X option?

 

[macdoc]

China covering all bases in the plan because it can. It's a long way from the flat-pack safe modern nuclear design that would re-invigorate the industry.

Someone needs to whisper in Ikea's ear about a new opportunity.
I'm interested in these mini-nukes - I love to host one in the back yard and provide power for the neighborhood.

If anything ever begged for a small collective form of activity this would seem ideal.

But I need to understand more the technology and limitations.

On the plus side, the overall trend for the growth of nuclear power around the world is positive, with a very aggressive construction schedule in China, and ongoing construction projects or plans in a number of other countries. In the United States, several construction projects continue to be active, and good progress was made during the past year.

Another positive sign is the continued interest in advanced designs, particularly Small Modular Reactors (SMRs) that could expand the market for nuclear power in a number of directions--to smaller grids and smaller markets, for remote applications, and in places where the water supply is limited. The interest, which has been building for several years, passed a milestone in 2013 with awards from the Department of Energy for two light water designs.

Interest also continues on non-light water designs that would offer many of the same benefits as light-water SMRs, plus additional benefits, such as suitability for high-temperature industrial applications.

http://nukepowertalk.blogspot.ca/2014/01/nuclear-power-in-2013-and-2014.html

If we could make electricity as pervasive as the internet then maybe some aspects of urban sprawl could be avoided. I suspect there is far more going on in that "remote work" demographic than is charted as much may be disguised as retirement when in fact like me people are choosing remote places and just continuing to telecommute.

Here is a popular science view of the potential of small nukes.

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

By David Szondy

February 16, 2012

http://www.gizmag.com/small-modular-nuclear-reactors/20860/

hah I didn't know this

Germany, for example, decided to abandon nuclear power completely in favor of alternative energy, but then the severe winter of 2011-12 got so cold that the Danube was freezing and Berlin had to put some of the mothballed reactors back into service.

maybe we an ice age instead of AGW to get the nuclear ball rolling again

 

[Trakar]

Until you need to dispose of the waste. Nuclear waste is the dirtiest thing we've ever created. I have a Guard buddy who drives nuke waste from wherever it was created to where it's gonna be stored for 10,000 years. The trucks get checked at the sequestration site, and if the truck or trailer is hot the equipment is bought and immediately buried on site. Everything from screwdrivers and glove boxes to forklifts and dump trucks that comes into contact with nuclear material becomes nuclear waste. Everything.

We'll need to keep people out of the waste sequestration sites for longer than we've been wearing stitched clothing, longer than we've been planting grain, longer than any language on earth has yet existed.

While I accept the science of both AGW and the possibility of more technically advanced nuclear reactors, I'm not a fan of driving hot waste around the continent.

Actually, "burning" nuclear waste to help generate additional power, is neither that hard nor complicated.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Current-and-Future-Generation/Accelerator-driven-Nuclear-Energy/

http://www.utexas.edu/news/2012/09/...ing-technology-change-face-of-nuclear-energy/

Sub-critical reactors:

http://cerncourier.com/cws/article/cern/47513

http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull392/arkhipov.html

For those interested in going a bit beyond scratching the surface:

The physics of accelerator driven sub-critical reactors
http://www.ias.ac.in/pramana/v68/p161/fulltext.pdf

Transmutation of Nuclear Waste and the future MYRRHA Demonstrator
http://iopscience.iop.org/1742-6596/420/1/012059/pdf/1742-6596_420_1_012059.pdf

I don't want to flood the thread with references, but this is literally the tip of the iceberg.

 

[Trakar]

You might have said just that twenty years ago, and yet there's been no advance in that direction since. Serious people keep looking at it and walking away, and this is nothing to do with Fukushima or environmental concerns. The numbers don't work.

Actually, I was saying that 20 years ago, and 30 years ago, and variants of it (minus the emphasis on AGW) 40 years ago. I disagree about the numbers, especially when talking about modern design systems. Of course, my preferences would to reframe electrical power as public venture rather than a private commercial venture, but that's probably a discussion for another day/post.

 

[macdoc]

Be nice if coal wastes were required to be disposed in the same manner....
poof....no more coal plants...

The technology is being used in the immobilisation of many toxic and hazardous wastes that arise outside the nuclear industry and has the potential to be used in many more cases.

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/N...Treatment-and-Conditioning-of-Nuclear-Wastes/

 

[geni]

Be nice if coal wastes were required to be disposed in the same manner....
poof....no more coal plants...



http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/N...Treatment-and-Conditioning-of-Nuclear-Wastes/

Err cementation is one of the standard methods of dealing with coal waste. Difference being is that we build houses out of the resulting bricks. Compaction isn't particularly useful in the case of coal and Vitrification is overkill.

 

[geni]

Actually, I was saying that 20 years ago, and 30 years ago, and variants of it (minus the emphasis on AGW) 40 years ago. I disagree about the numbers, especially when talking about modern design systems. Of course, my preferences would to reframe electrical power as public venture rather than a private commercial venture, but that's probably a discussion for another day/post.

Given the amount of money the UK goverment just had to throw at getting even one nuclear power plant built the numbers don't support your position.

 

[The Don]

Given the amount of money the UK goverment just had to throw at getting even one nuclear power plant built the numbers don't support your position.

Well it could be that or it could have been an opportunistic move by the generators to extract the very best deal once the government had painted itself into a corner.

 

[Trakar]

Given the amount of money the UK goverment just had to throw at getting even one nuclear power plant built the numbers don't support your position.

The numbers reflect not merely public perception pressures but the need to make a profit while producing electrical power at a price that is competitive to highly subsidized fossil-fuelled power generation. Charge fossil fuelled systems for the carbon emissions at an appropriate rate and nuclear becomes much more competitive. Consider not just different economic settings and fundamentally different nuclear power technologies, but potentially different industry (and societal) structures as well.

 

[geni]

The numbers reflect not merely public perception pressures but the need to make a profit while producing electrical power at a price that is competitive to highly subsidized fossil-fuelled power generation. Charge fossil fuelled systems for the carbon emissions at an appropriate rate and nuclear becomes much more competitive.

No it doesn't. Natural gas still beats it so badly is isn't even funny.

Consider not just different economic settings and fundamentally different nuclear power technologies, but potentially different industry (and societal) structures as well.

Err you've managed to make nuclear fission mildly less viable as a near term energy solution than nuclear fusion. Thats impressive.

 

[Trakar]

No it doesn't. Natural gas still beats it so badly is isn't even funny.

Natural Gas still has a heavy carbon emission content. It is much better than coal, but it still has a lot of unaccounted for externalities. These externalities skew its market prices by interfering with and artificially manipulating the market and offsetting the costs of the use of the product with increased public taxations, instead of forcing the product itself to bear the full costs of using the product.

Err you've managed to make nuclear fission mildly less viable as a near term energy solution than nuclear fusion. Thats impressive.

Until controlled fusion actually demonstrates the capability to produce power, we can't assess its ability to produce competitively priced power. Fission power can be priced and assessed in contrast to high carbon power systems.

If we are to address issues of carbon emissions, it will require the changes to industry and society. If we aren't going to address the carbon emissions, nothing else really matters much anyway.

 

[ingoa]

Here is a popular science view of the potential of small nukes.

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

By David Szondy

February 16, 2012

http://www.gizmag.com/small-modular-...eactors/20860/

hah I didn't know this

Quote:
Germany, for example, decided to abandon nuclear power completely in favor of alternative energy, but then the severe winter of 2011-12 got so cold that the Danube was freezing and Berlin had to put some of the mothballed reactors back into service.

maybe we an ice age instead of AGW to get the nuclear ball rolling again

This needs verification.This is news to me too. I am a German nuclear scientist not working in nuclear industry. I should have heared that.

 

[Trakar]

This needs verification.This is news to me too. I am a German nuclear scientist not working in nuclear industry. I should have heared that.

Hired hands are always the last to be informed!

 

[r-j]

but then the severe winter of 2011-12 got so cold that the Danube was freezing

http://www.gizmag.com/small-modular-nuclear-reactors/20860/

Because global warming theory predicted winters would become so bad rivers would freeze, rivers that haven't been froze up since the winter of 1984.

 

[Corsair 115]

Because global warming theory predicted winters would become so bad rivers would freeze...

Which studies predicted this? When were they published? You seem to have left out very relevant citations.

 

[r-j]

I was being sarcastic. No climate models or studies predicted much colder winters, especially not the sort of record cold that could cause the Danube to completely freeze.

 

[Trakar]

Which studies predicted this? When were they published? You seem to have left out very relevant citations.

That and 1984 is pretty recent to be citing as if it were an extremely unlikely or historically rare event.

 

[macdoc]

This needs verification.This is news to me too. I am a German nuclear scientist not working in nuclear industry. I should have heared that.

I picked the gizmodo article as it was simple but the technology is emerging and if you google small nukes you can read the state of the progress.

SMR LICENSING TECHNICAL SUPPORT PROGRAM
To date, none of the existing SMR concepts have been designed, licensed or constructed. DOE believes that SMRs may play an important role in addressing the energy, economic and climate goals of the U.S. if they can be commercially deployed within the next decade.

http://energy.gov/ne/nuclear-reactor-technologies/small-modular-nuclear-reactors

http://www.nationaldefensemagazine....lNuclearReactorsforMilitaryInstallations.aspx

Let's face it - there are lots of small nukes floating around the oceans.

Energy & Sustainability :: News :: January 8, 2014 :: 78 Comments :: Email ::

Is There a New Nuclear Kid on the Block?
Small reactors in kit form are the latest idea aimed at reviving the fortunes of the nuclear power industry
By Paul Brown and The Daily Climate

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=is-there-a-new-nuclear-kid-on-the-block

Evolve your SMR strategy: Secure your license, fund your project and source your supply chain to begin construction

Leading names already confirmed include:

Stuart Magruder Chris Fallon Jamie Mallon Robin Rickman
Stuart Magruder
Chief, Advanced Reactor Program
NRC Chris Fallon
VP Nuclear Development
Duke Jamie Mallon
Nuclear Development Manager
PSEG Robin Rickman
Director, Small Modular Reactor Project Office
Westinghouse
Returning for its fourth year, the Small Modular Reactor Conference is back in its new location of Charlotte. Hinging off the success of 2013's event, bringing together over 400 of the industry's leading names, 2014's meeting promises to be the only place where you can do real business, establish your SMR supply chain and cement your name in nuclears' most important innovation in decades.

Get the latest on SMR technology and site licensing from the NRC to guarantee your projects are moving in line with new regulatory developments
Understand the financing options for SMRs - turnkey, BOO, government funding - to ensure you are aware of all the available opportunities for commercial SMR deployment
Build a robust SMR supply chain in advance of licensing to avoid costly delays once deployment has begun
Understand the current status of the international SMR industry to take away lessons learned from the most advanced SMR programs

http://www.nuclearenergyinsider.com/smr/

 

[Trakar]

I was being sarcastic. No climate models or studies predicted much colder winters, especially not the sort of record cold that could cause the Danube to completely freeze.

True, every climate model I've ever looked at acknowledges that winters will still get cold and that natural variation within seasonal weather will mean that some local areas may still generate extreme records. About the only thing I've ever seen regarding these seasonal predictions in relation to AGW is that, on a globally averaged basis, over climatically relevant periods, we will see more warming records than cooling records.