Fresh Efficient Nuclear Technology

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL34579.pdf

Here is a report to congress that serves as a good briefer on the current and coming technologies and challenges.

I have always believed that sober peer reviewed science is preferable to pundit sky pie.

What ever is to be done we need to get started.

Nice find...Your prudishly stated preference is shared, but the pundits shape public opinion, without who's blessing, even less progress is made......

Very promising!

I hope some enlightened, forward looking state will take the first step soon.

Very difficult to judge the setup.

Claims are that it will be enclosed for 30 years and at the same time burn waste.

How will it be fueled?

I can't imagine that it wil start with the sufficient fuel for 30 years of service. The 12 to 18 months maintenance interval is mainly there to replace used fuel rods.

Actually we are facing a little issue over here: 2 of our 8 power reactors are out of service due to a production error with the reactor vessel, actual status is that they might be lost. They found it as the vessel was taken out of service for maintenance and inspected seriously. In this setup the vessel will remain under pressure for 30 years, no inspection.

My 5cents: recipy for disaster.

Keep on studying the problem and for once dare to think about the Thorium alternative. We anyhow have to much of the stuff.

and for once dare to think about the Thorium alternative.
So True.

In this setup the vessel will remain under pressure for 30 years, no inspection.

Keep on studying the problem and for once dare to think about the Thorium alternative. We anyhow have to much of the stuff.

I favor the Integral Fast Reactor--liquid sodium cooled, not helium cooled. The sodium is not pressurized, therefore there is no pressure vessel, but there is containment.

In addition to thermal reactor used fuel, depleted uranium, transuranics, etc, it will utilize thorium.

This sounds too good to be true.

What's the down side?

Have some fun today,

PAPADOC

RMFR

I'll live life my way until Willie sings.

This sounds too good to be true.

But it's not. The fast reactors are much better than the thermal reactors that people are familiar with.

We are not going to solve the problems unless the INDUSTRY has the economic incentive to do so. Given current law and a FIXED COST of SNF and HLW disposal of 1/10 of 1 cent per KWH sold there is no incentive for the industry to invest in alternatives.

We are in a position where all of the really good experts are in the industry; and that industry has no economic incentive to further develop the technologies.

Give them back their money; with interest AND the responsibility to deal with the very significant cost of solving the SNF and HLW issue.

Why that business cost became a taxpayer liability I will never understand; it not only presented a HUGE artificial advantage over other forms of energy production but brought further development of nuclear energy to a standstill.

Give the industry some incentive to evolve and it will; and let the taxpayer off the hook for what is probably the single largest cost involved in THEIR business.

What the hell happened to sink or swim free enterprise?

I need a bit of education about these fast reactors. Why does it use helium cooling instead of liquid sodium? I know liquid sodium has corrosion concerns, but it seems, qualitatively, that it would be more effective.

Also, why is the cladding silicon carbide? I never heard of that being used for cladding, so my knowledge is missing something.

I can answer on the first question: they want to use the primary coolant as the main fluid in the energy generation process.

The liquid sodium based reactors have very complex energy generation systems.

Less heat exchanger result in a few % gain in efficiency.

Gwen.S said "I can't imagine that it wil start with the sufficient fuel for 30 years of service."

its a fast breeder reactor, it doesnt run out of fuel, it breeds fuel.

But my concern is:

Supercritical coal plants have been running for years at 300 bar pressure and 600 degrees C. Is this is a supercritical nuclear plant?

(Im sorry, both of the links are blocked from my computer system, I cant read them.)