nuclear-news

Small modular nuclear reactors” – is this REALLY “a way for USA to regain leadership in nuclear”

from a strictly commercial perspective, there is no reason to use nuclear power at all. The capital costs are enormous and the operations and maintenance costs are very high, to say nothing liability insurance.

daviddelosangeles  comments on  Feds To Finance Small Nuclear Reactor Designs, Ucilia Wang, Forbes, 21 Jan 12,   “The key question is would that there need to be a certain minimum number of these [small nuclear] reactors in service for a civilian nuclear power system based on these smaller reactors to operate successfully. This is true for mining, processing, research, and waste disposal. It is not clear that that “critical mass” of reactors could be developed in the current environment.

The decision of the Federal government in the 1950′s to subsidize the creation of the civilian nuclear power industry (e.g. The Price-Anderson Act) was made because nuclear power was not commercially viable but the military needed a nuclear power industry (naval powered submarines – and later aircraft carriers- and nuclear warheads for the air force).

The military alone could achieve the necessary critical mass. A federally subsidized commercial nuclear power industry was the answer.
This is also why US commercial reactors share the same fundamental design as naval nuclear reactors. The light water reactor used in aircraft carriers was designed with space saving and the use of salt water a coolant in mind. This type of reactor is very hot with a very high heat density which has many safety issues. Commercial reactors in the US have the same basic design, in no small part so that research in reactor design for military needs could piggy-back on commercial reactor design research – or it might be better to say that the two are essentially the same thing.

The problem lies in that there is no real reason from a power generation perspective, and a safety perspective, for a compact, high density reactor to be used in a commercial reactor. Indeed, from a strictly commercial perspective, there is no reason to use nuclear power at all. The capital costs are enormous and the operations and maintenance costs are very high, to say nothing liability insurance.

After the Nuclear Test Ban treaty and the end of the Cold War, there has been no demand for nuclear warheads. Since the Three Mile Island incident, there has been no new civilian nuclear reactor built. Only the Navy has an on-going nuclear power sector.

If these new, smaller, modular reactors of a fundamentally different design from the Navy’s reactors and existing civilian reactors. As a result, fuel processing and research efforts will not overlap between the Navy’s nuclear sector, the existing civilian reactors, and the new civilian ones, minimizing economies of scale and synergy.

Aside from the creation of a second, parallel, nuclear power industry, after nearly 60 years of operation, no has resolved the long-term storage and disposal issues associated with nuclear waste from any reactor. Further, there is little in the way in growth of uranium sources, “peak uranium” production is a definite possibility.

In short, the question of reactor design is perhaps the least important aspect of figuring out the future of nuclear power.

Feds To Finance Small Nuclear Reactor Designs, Ucilia Wang, Forbes, 21 Jan 12, The U.S. Department of Energy on Friday announced a plan to support the design of the so-called “small modular nuclearreactors” and popularize their use for power generation.

The plan is to fund two reactor designs that will become available for licensing and production by 2022. The department is first asking for advice from the power industry on crafting the details of this project, and it hasn’t said how much it would dole out. But whoever wins the contracts to design the reactors will have to pony up money
as well…..

Energy Secretary Steve Chu has said he’s a big fan of small nuclear reactor technology…. Chu said at a press conference a year ago. “And it’s a way for the United States to regain its
leadership in nuclear.”

Several startups and major power equipment makers are working on small
modular nuclear reactors. They include TerraPower, which is backed by
Bill Gates and recently received funding from Indian conglomerate
Reliance Industries. TerraPower also has been talking to the
governments of China, India and Russia, basically countries where
nuclear power won’t likely receive the kind of intense opposition that
you’ll find in the United States, Germany or Japan…..
Following the energy department’s announcement Friday morning,
Westinghouse Electric Co. issued a statement to say it intends to
apply for the funding. Westinghouse already is in the nuclear reactor
design business. It received approval from the Nuclear Regulatory
Commission’s approval for a large, 1,154-megawatt nuclear reactor
called AP1000 last month. The energy department funded part of the
project to design AP1000…. http://www.forbes.com/sites/uciliawang/2012/01/20/feds-to-finance-small-nuclear-reactor-designs/

January 21, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | spinbuster, Uranium, USA