Mini Nuclear Power Plants

[Tyler_Legrand]

They seem to have invented some newer, safer, kinds of nuclear power plants. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/09/miniature-nuclear-reactors-los-alamos)

However, in the past we've always heard about some exciting new technology, like bugs that produce crude oil or some insane gadget that produces more energy than it uses, and then we never hear about them again and forget about them. Is that gonna happen again with this one, or will this actually have an effect on us?

[Tweek]

Nuclear power is already one of the safest methods of getting power and shit, isn't it?
I'm all for nuclear power. The sooner this sort of stuff happens, the sooner we can stop whinging about the stupid environment.

[FoeoftheUniverse]

I agree 100%

[TheKelfouran]

there should be one in every garage.

[CasinoCloudz]

At least it doesn't use oil i guess but it wont do much until we truly start running low on crude.

[TheKelfouran]

Atomics is more efficient, but it still gives off small amounts of waste product. Which could kill all of mankind if mishandled. Do we really know how to handle that much nuclear material if the world moves away from carbon fuels?

[Antisaint]

Atomics is more efficient, but it still gives off small amounts of waste product. Which could kill all of mankind if mishandled. Do we really know how to handle that much nuclear material if the world moves away from carbon fuels?

Launch it into the sun on a nuclear powered rocket.

Also at the current size of nuclear power plants we would run out of space before being able to run on only nuclear power.

[Tweek]

Nuclear power is incredibly efficient and to my understanding, you only need one plant to power like, a really big area. The only downside is shit like Chernoble, which was a freak occurrence and I'm sure technology has improved a lot since then.
There isn't that much nuclear waste, is there?

[Casalen]

There's that much nuclear waste, yes.

My local power plant, which shut down the nuclear side of things a long time ago, has massive silos to keep waste in. The US Government is supposed to provide a place to put it, but that hasn't gone so well. No one really wants to be known as the place with the nuclear waste dump.

While nuclear is nice, there are other directions to move for primary powering needs. Geothermal, wind, wave and solar are the most important, with hydrogen for certain applications. Also, millions of hamsters on hamster wheels. Prisoners, too.

Tiny nuclear generators would be a great addition to our massive spaceships, though. That and huge, very efficient ion thrusters. The main debate on that has been that if there were to be an explosion in the upper atmosphere, the fallout would be incredibly wide spread.

[Matterialize]

What exactly is the waste? Is it spent uranium or heavy water?

[BurgerKueen]

I think it's a combination of different radioactive isotopes. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_waste#Physics)

[El Mojado]

Either way, we can bury it in a concrete coffin and for several thousand years no one will give a shit.

EDIT: Won't this be a temporary phase till we get a renewable and no pollution (including by products) energy source?

[Tyler_Legrand]

At least it doesn't use oil i guess but it wont do much until we truly start running low on crude.

It does use oil in the sense that you need oil to make just about anything. You know that oil is needed for more than just an energy source, right?

Also, about nuclear waste.

The reactors need to be refueled about every seven to ten years. After five years of generating power, Hyperion says that the module produces a total waste of about the size of a softball, which could be a candidate for fuel recycling.

http://pda.physorg.com/lofi-news-power-plants-modules_145561984.html

[Antisaint]

Nuclear power is incredibly efficient and to my understanding, you only need one plant to power like, a really big area. The only downside is shit like Chernoble, which was a freak occurrence and I'm sure technology has improved a lot since then.
There isn't that much nuclear waste, is there?

Chernobyl was run by retards who didn't follow protocol.

Either way, we can bury it in a concrete coffin and for several thousand years no one will give a shit.

The nuclear waste will eventually seep out, fucking everything up. It would get into the water table and then we'd all have radioactive water to drink. Current plans are for a mountain in Nevada (forgot the name), but they don't want it.

[whangadude]

Sounds all good to me. Sounds awesome infact. I wonder how much food ya could grow if one was hooked up to a massive hydroponics system.

[Souldrinker]

Australia should be sweet with this. We have the largest geologically stable landmass in the world and no one lives in the middle of it because it's a fucking wasteland. We can bury this shit with ease and not have to worry about earthquakes etc breaking open the dumps and leaking nuclear waste throughout the ground.

Lastly, no, you cannot dump your waste here.

[Alcoholic]

Nuclear power is already one of the safest methods of getting power and shit, isn't it?
I'm all for nuclear power. The sooner this sort of stuff happens, the sooner we can stop whinging about the stupid environment.

It is both the safest and cleanest, along with the most efficient, as your other post stated.

There's that much nuclear waste, yes.

My local power plant, which shut down the nuclear side of things a long time ago, has massive silos to keep waste in. The US Government is supposed to provide a place to put it, but that hasn't gone so well. No one really wants to be known as the place with the nuclear waste dump.

While nuclear is nice, there are other directions to move for primary powering needs. Geothermal, wind, wave and solar are the most important, with hydrogen for certain applications. Also, millions of hamsters on hamster wheels. Prisoners, too.

Tiny nuclear generators would be a great addition to our massive spaceships, though. That and huge, very efficient ion thrusters. The main debate on that has been that if there were to be an explosion in the upper atmosphere, the fallout would be incredibly wide spread.


There shouldn't be that much waste. Someone else mentioned that uranium is generally good for fuel recycling - which is very true. I'm having trouble thinking of any radioactive fuel source that isn't able to be refined from the waste state. Also, concerning the silos you mentioned: generally, the Nuclear Regulatory Committee holds to a 90 day storage limit on-site. What is in those silos is most likely to come out, be refined and/or be disposed to properly - assuming there are amounts of it unable to be recycled, which at the most going to be a minute amount.

The way the field is going, in the future there will only be less waste from the products.

Oh, and Chernobyl was basically housed in a backwoods hick-ass tin shed. It was an accident waiting to happen, and held no accountability to any type of organization like the NRC. With all the modern safeguards and direct human specialist intervention on so many levels involving the different aspects going into nuclear work, you're more likely to hear about a man being beaten to death with an elephant cock than a nuclear meltdown.

[Souldrinker]

Also, it is entirely possible that if you freeze nuclear waste down to a temperature approaching absolute zero the half-life of the material decreases (effectively meaning it isn't as radioactive for as long).

[Mirrorman]

Nuclear power is all in all awesome. But theres a russian nuclear power plant not far from me, that has the same reactor that Chernobyl did. That makes you think.

[Clerlic]

Chernobyl didn't blow up just like that. They were screwing with the reactor, turned off cooling and shut down all emergency backups, of course shit would get nasty.

Anyways, I remember reading on wiki that some reactor type was able to consume radioactive waste and give out power, turning waste into some degenerate material. I guess it's not technologically feasible yet, but it would be pretty cool. As would be fusion.

[IronWire]

My small city of Pickering has a Nuclear power plant that provides alot of power for Ontario, I think the size of the plant is made up for by the amount of power output.

[Crabstick]

Australia should be sweet with this. We have the largest geologically stable landmass in the world and no one lives in the middle of it because it's a fucking wasteland. We can bury this shit with ease and not have to worry about earthquakes etc breaking open the dumps and leaking nuclear waste throughout the ground.

Minor setbacks include the political twats around here not wanting a bar of it, because they're too conservative and set in their ways to do anything more than talk about finding 'alternative resources'.

And I can just imagine driving along the Nullabor at night and having a nice healthy green glow to guide my way.

[Christoffason]

Last year the British government unveiled plans to reduce nuclear projects. They plan to close 1/3 of our nuclear stations, so I don't know what effect this breakthrough will have, or if the government knew about it and started downscaling.

Either way I know there's a lot of money going into wind farms and hydro power here, which is pretty awesome if it works and is reliable. And that's a big if.

[Ikin]

I'll give about a week or so before the environmental freaks start protesting this. "Don't make our homes Chernobyl!"

[Clerlic]

Here in Finland, we have 2 nuclear power plants, one of them is currently building a new reactor to double the power. We also have a place to store waste underground, which is also under construction, but already usable. It creates a shitload of jobs, especially physicists (like me), is clean and safe people fish in the water that comes out because it's warm and has more fish. I bet most politicians who are against nuclear power are a bunch of ignorant pricks.

[Haggis McSpud]

Last year the British government unveiled plans to reduce nuclear projects. They plan to close 1/3 of our nuclear stations, so I don't know what effect this breakthrough will have, or if the government knew about it and started downscaling.

Either way I know there's a lot of money going into wind farms and hydro power here, which is pretty awesome if it works and is reliable. And that's a big if.

Wasn't there some talk about selling our nuclear stations to the french recently?
Clicky (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1060811/The-great-nuclear-sell-Our-atomic-power-giant-falls-foreign-hands--youll-pay-price.html)
I'm with you in the hoping that wind and hydro power is sustainable, otherwise we're screwed for electricity bills from now on.

[ButlerBoy]

"With all the modern safeguards and direct human specialist intervention on so many levels involving the different aspects going into nuclear work, you're more likely to hear about a man being beaten to death with an elephant cock than a nuclear meltdown." By Alcoholic (not sure how to quote just yet)

I'm quite pessimistic about this, what I gather it's just buried in the ground...Where's the humans specialists? Who would maintain the mini plants? Who would pay for the refuelling? What types of radiation would it give off to it's immediate surroundings?

They said that they would be targeting "developing countries and isolated communities" where I can imagine there would be a serious lack of nuclear scientists.

As for the " nearly impossible to steal " statement, that's just an invitation to thieves. Imagine what a mini nuclear power plant would fetch on the black market.

Just imagine something did go wrong 5 years down the line and there where mini Chernobyl accidents around the world, I don't think a developing county or an isolated community could could deal with the damage.

[Haggis McSpud]

Just imagine something did go wrong 5 years down the line and there where mini Chernobyl accidents around the world, I don't think a developing county or an isolated community could could deal with the damage.

Do [ QUOTE] [ /QUOTE] or just click reply under the persons posts.
I agree with this point. Rigorous safety checks are performed nowadays because memories of Chernobyl are still fresh in peoples minds. We can't deny the idea that another incident like Chernobyl could occur because with an ever growing usage of nuclear energy, sooner or later someone is going to screw up and then we'll all pay the price. I like the idea of nuclear energy, it's relatively clean and plentiful, but the consequences of a slip up could prove fatal.

[hoopymo]

I'm for it, nuclear all the way!

[Clerlic]

Do [ QUOTE] [ /QUOTE] or just click reply under the persons posts.
I agree with this point. Rigorous safety checks are performed nowadays because memories of Chernobyl are still fresh in peoples minds. We can't deny the idea that another incident like Chernobyl could occur because with an ever growing usage of nuclear energy, sooner or later someone is going to screw up and then we'll all pay the price. I like the idea of nuclear energy, it's relatively clean and plentiful, but the consequences of a slip up could prove fatal.

Robots don't make mistakes, just make machines shut down the reactor in case of any intrusion/fault/unusual behaviour.

[Smelz]

I'm all for nuclear energy, but the problem is where, no matter how safe you tell people it is, they're not gonna want to live near it. Here in England, there really isn't that much open space, at least not enough so that no one would be in range in the unlikely event of something happening.

[Mirrorman]

Chernobyl didn't blow up just like that. They were screwing with the reactor, turned off cooling and shut down all emergency backups, of course shit would get nasty.
.

Yeah but think of how old and unstable that plan is, fuck even you are in danger.

[Quadros]

Atomics is more efficient, but it still gives off small amounts of waste product. Which could kill all of mankind if mishandled. Do we really know how to handle that much nuclear material if the world moves away from carbon fuels?

Send it to Mars. At least we'd find out if there was life there that way.

[Alcoholic]

I'm quite pessimistic about this, what I gather it's just buried in the ground...Where's the humans specialists? Who would maintain the mini plants?

They would be one and the same. Is this really even a question when we already have specialists, engineers, and trained workers running plants and a larger scale than the proposed miniature plants?

Who would pay for the refuelling?

The companies, the same way a company pays for any expense they run across. Sometimes there are large private donations, too.

What types of radiation would it give off to it's immediate surroundings?

Unless you have fuck-ups running your plant, none. Radioactive particles can be contained with something as simple as thick concrete, and there are strict measures taken to remove loose particles from the radioactivity clothing people where while in hot zones.

[Casalen]

Unless you have fuck-ups running your plant

This is the flaw in your reasoning; you overestimate people's competence.

Here's a quote from my local paper, dealing with a law suit. It's relevant as far as the competence of at least one well trained radiologist.

"A... family is suing... after a radiology technician allegedly overexposed their 2-year-old son to radiation during a test, leaving the boy with “radiation burns and chromosome damage to his DNA,”...

The suit alleges that Knickerbocker committed 151 medical batteries in the form of 151 scans in the 65-minute period, exceeding the amount of radiation that should have been administered for a 28-pound child.

...Knickerbocker was talking incessantly and rapidly about her personal life. "

[Alcoholic]

That never happens in the nuclear field though. The NRC I mentioned is too responsible on an internation level to ever let that happen. They can shut down a plant in a heartbeat.

That, and no single job relies solely on one person. In a field like medicine where radiation is used for certain tools, the usage is determined by a single person at a time, I.E., "Oh, didn't seem to work, let me just run that test again. Oops, again. Oops..." and onward. There are too many team checks for even the tiniest details within power plants, fuel refineries, core design labs, and processing plants to have something messed up by a single person. The way the safeguards go in the industry, if there is a flaw in one stage, the entire project, activity, inspection, whatever, has to be wiped out, cleaned up, and restarted from scratch.

So while you're right - people mess up - there are too many precautions taken to let an individual, or even a small group of individuals, mess something like that up!

[Haggis McSpud]

The areas where you could place nuclear power plants would be limited though. I wouldn't like to see a power station set up in or around a high earthquake/ volcano risk zone. That means that countries such as Japan, Mexico, Iceland and parts of America would have to rely on another form of energy.

[hoopymo]

I have a mini nuclear power plant in my pants.


No Chernobyl 2 yet.

[Haggis McSpud]

And that's what happens when you jerk off using radioactive waste as lube, kids.

[Dodger]

Either way, we can bury it in a concrete coffin and for several thousand years no one will give a shit.

EDIT: Won't this be a temporary phase till we get a renewable and no pollution (including by products) energy source?

It'll eat through it given enough time.

Even lead. After Chernobyl I think they covered with a SHITTON of lead and concrete and shit, and it's still eating through it.

[Prawnatron]

We need to do this, this is a great idea. Well except the waste.

[Phrozt]

Before anyone types the word "Chernobyl" again, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster

There's a ton of information in there that will not only straighten up half the crap mentioned about Chernobyl, but also a lot of questions that have been raised about nuclear energy. It's a really good article.

Also, if there is a way to, I highly recommend checking this show out: http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/worlds-toughest-fixes/3342/Overview . That program was IMMENSELY educational about a wide range of nuclear energy topics. I recall the end of the program showing where they kept all of their radioactive material, with the notation that something was supposed to have been decided about what to do with it, but nothing has been decided yet (as several people have already mentioned).


EDIT: More info on the nuke plants:
http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/

[I_Smell]

I was thinking about the sentence "Would power a house for 40 years". I was thinking that meant it'd power 40 houses for one year- and they want to power 200,000 houses. So by my maths they'd have to refuel 50 plants every year? That sounds like alot of waste.
But then I read that:
The reactors need to be refueled about every seven to ten years. After five years of generating power, Hyperion says that the module produces a total waste of about the size of a softball, which could be a candidate for fuel recycling.
Ok, sure. I don't think recycling nuclear waste into new softballs is a good idea, but these guys obviously know what they're doing.

We also have a place to store waste underground, which is also under construction, but already usable. It creates a shitload of jobs, especially physicists (like me), is clean and safe people fish in the water that comes out because it's warm and has more fish.


You might say it's so clean that you could go fission in it.

[Matterialize]

I was thinking about the sentence


You're mixing up two different reactors there, bud - Toshiba is making the 40-years one, Hyperion is making the one the article is mostly about (powers 20000 homes for 7-10 years). They're both about the size of a tool shed tho, makes Toshiba's seem kind of pointless.

[TheKelfouran]

You know what? The navy's been running nuclear on its carriers and subs for decades now. And no catastrophic failure. Hell, even k-13 managed to handle the situation...not too badly. Maybe this is the way to go. I think if we can find away to manage the waste issue, we're good to go. Hell, we still don't have an answer to the waste products of fossil fuels, but that hasn't stopped me from driving my Dodge Dakoda.

[Panda]

You know what? The navy's been running nuclear on its carriers and subs for decades now. And no catastrophic failure. Hell, even k-13 managed to handle the situation...not too badly. Maybe this is the way to go. I think if we can find away to manage the waste issue, we're good to go. Hell, we still don't have an answer to the waste products of fossil fuels, but that hasn't stopped me from driving my Dodge Dakoda.

Exactly and the only thing that is keeping us from burying all of the waste products underground in Yucca Mountain (which was calculated to be the PERFECT candidate for this type of underground storage) are those fags who are in organizations like NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) who don't want anything to be done to their "backyard" even though it is in a secluded area. Now sure, I can understand the fact that someone wouldn't want a potentially dangerous environment for their loved ones like kids etc but they are naive to the fact that the containers that hold this spent nuclear fuel are extremely resilient to almost any kind of damage. I remember watching a video that had two seperate semis crashing into a giant concrete barrier while hauling one of these casks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_cask_storage). One going 40 mph, the other going 80. They had also lifted one of these casks in a helicopter 50-80 feet in the air (I forget the exact details seeing as I seen the video like 3-4 years ago.) and dropped it on a concrete slab on one of the corners of the cask (the weakest point). The only damage that any one of the casks had was there was a single 2" (I think) crack in the outer most layer on the exact point where the helicopter had dropped it.
And this is all aside from the fact that these storage containers would be stored in a giant concrete storage facility in the middle of a fucking mountain...


Also: Yucca Mountain n shit (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yucca_mountain)

[Casalen]

(Not In My Back Yard) who don't want anything to be done to their "backyard" even though it is in a secluded area. ]

What I love about this is that most objections don't come from environmentalists, but from people are all for nuclear power and developing a waste storage area. They want all the benefits, but that's it. Wanting to push the negatives onto someone else is a big deal in our culture; if a job is hard to find, the government should come help us out, but if we make money from a job we (or they) found we shouldn't have to give up taxes... things like that. Screws up a lot of things.

Despite my posts previous, I do think nuclear power is the way to go, and that recycling fuel from spent waste can be extremely effective if put into practice on a large scale. Much better than a lot of what we're doing now.

[CnGy]

Have they figured out a use for the waste yet?

[Ercoledi]

The government secretly keeps barrels of the stuff in Area 51, in case we suddenly have the need for a race of superhero mutants, presumably to battle off the Saudis.

[TheKelfouran]

They're secretly leaching it off into the drinking water, in very small amounts. They figure that spread evenly over 5 billion people, how bad can it be?

[Ercoledi]

I don't know, but I'm always clueless when my neck hump starts to itch.

[Gilligan]

http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/index.html
70 MW thermal output, aye? Sounds like just another hot rock to me. There goes my hopes of the steam plant being phased out. Oh how I hate heat engines.

[Ikin]

http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/index.html
70 MW thermal output, aye? Sounds like just another hot rock to me. There goes my hopes of the steam plant being phased out. Oh how I hate heat engines.

Hyperion produces only 25 MWe — enough to provide electricity for about 20,000 average American sized homes or its industrial equivalent

[Gilligan]

It produces a 70 MW thermal output and a 25 MW electrical output with the help of a steam turbine. If you have a steam turbine you're going to need the rest of the steam plant too.

[Alcoholic]

Just wanted to let you know, some nuclear power companies are starting to test more with Cr2O3. Infusing uranium pellets and the likes with chromium oxide is supposed to help them burn cleaner and safer, and unless I'm mistaken, cuts the waste bi-product down. It also gives off more energy than standard nuclear fuel. I know that throughout the U.S., Germany, France, and in all likelihood our Japanese ties, my particular company is sampling the infused fuel. Looks like it might be an alleviation to a lot of what we've talked about in this thread, but not a complete panacea.

[Clerlic]

Just wanted to let you know, some nuclear power companies are starting to test more with Cr2O3. Infusing uranium pellets and the likes with chromium oxide is supposed to help them burn cleaner and safer, and unless I'm mistaken, cuts the waste bi-product down. It also gives off more energy than standard nuclear fuel. I know that throughout the U.S., Germany, France, and in all likelihood our Japanese ties, my particular company is sampling the infused fuel. Looks like it might be an alleviation to a lot of what we've talked about in this thread, but not a complete panacea.

Could you send me a sample? Like 15 kg sphere would be great, thanks!

[lollercaust]

I heard that the Playstation 4 is going to be using miniature nuclear power plants because a house's electricity won't be enough.

[hmn47]

Sounds like half the poeple here got there nuclear power plant info playing Fallout 3.

[Gilligan]

Just wanted to let you know, some nuclear power companies are starting to test more with Cr2O3. Infusing uranium pellets and the likes with chromium oxide is supposed to help them burn cleaner and safer, and unless I'm mistaken, cuts the waste bi-product down. It also gives off more energy than standard nuclear fuel. I know that throughout the U.S., Germany, France, and in all likelihood our Japanese ties, my particular company is sampling the infused fuel. Looks like it might be an alleviation to a lot of what we've talked about in this thread, but not a complete panacea.
Who do you work for?

[Alcoholic]

An international nuclear fuel, enrichment, and core-designing company called Areva, NP. We deal mostly with uranium, like I've been mentioning.