Death of the Pebble Bed Nuclear Reactor

economic realities make any tangible future Pebble Bed as a major source of new energy largely imaginary.

(South Africa) Another feeble-headed nuke drops dead Harvey Wasserman September 24, 2010
For years “expert” reactor backers have touted the “Pebble Bed” design as an “inherently safe” alternative to traditional domed light water models. Now its South African developers say they’re done pouring money into it. 

The Pebble Bed’s big idea was to create a critical mass of uranium particles coated with silicon carbide and encased in graphite. These intensely radioactive “pebbles” would seethe in a passive container, cooled by helium. Without the need for a containment dome, the super-heated mass would produce both heat and electricity. Touted as needing no back-up emergency systems to prevent a major disaster, the plan was to mass-produce these “smaller, simpler” reactors for use throughout the industrial world.

Pebble Bed technology originated in Germany.  But it was adopted and developed by the government of South Africa. For some it was a source of pride that a “developing” nation had become a significant player in the so-called nuclear renaissance.

But the South African government has now cut off funding for the project. Public Enterprises Minister Barbara Hogan has told the National Assembly that “sobering realities” included the lack of working demonstration model, the lack of customers, the lack of a major investment partner and the impending demand for $4.2 billion in new investment capital. As deadlines consistently slipped, Westinghouse withdrew from the project in May.

South African officials say the US and China are still working on the technology. But economic realities make any tangible future Pebble Bed as a major source of new energy largely imaginary. Critics also worry that without a containment dome, the pebble beds would be vulnerable to small groups of terrorists with simple shell-lobbing mortars. And that critical metal components would not perform as needed under the intense stresses of heat and radiation.

September 24, 2010 - Posted by Christina MacPherson | South Africa, technology | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear costs, nuclear renaissance, nuclear technology, reactors