Subscribe
It’s been nearly 60 years since Isaac Asimov’s Foundation was released. The future world Asimov set up was powered by advanced nuclear power. The key difference between Asimov’s nuclear reactors and ours is scalability. The reactors in Foundation could be of any size, according to the need. Some of them were small enough to behave as uber-batteries. That’s a far cry from the giant cooling towers required for today’s reactors.
Toshiba is one step closer to realizing that ideal. They have just introduced a new nuclear power plant that is 100 times smaller than the ones we are used to. At 6 feet wide and 20 feet long, this baby could fit into your garage. This dramatic size reduction is accomplished with the use of liquid lithium-6. Lithium-6 is highly efficient at absorbing neutrons, an important step in nuclear fission that keeps the reaction going. Furthermore, the reaction takes place at much lower temperatures, obviating the need for large cooling towers.
This new reactor produces 200 kilowatts of electrical power and 5 megawatts of thermal power (so I wouldn’t suggest keeping it in your garage). The outlet, molten sodium coolant is 510°C, which could be used to power a steam generator, further increasing the electrical power output, and/or it could be used to produce pure hydrogen as a transportable fuel. Alas, those features are not built into the Toshiba model. What their model does promise is 40 years of nearly maintenance-free, safe power. The main safety feature is a thermal feedback loop that decreases the reaction rate as the temperature rises. This prevents the possibility of a meltdown. Finally, at an operation cost of $0.05 per kilowatt-hour, this energy source is less than the cost of traditional coal-fire power plants and comparable in cost to diesel generators. Finally this nuclear generator has, of course, zero carbon emissions.
The new micro-nuclear reactor is being marketed as a power source for office buildings, small businesses, remote neighborhoods, apartment buildings, and even city blocks. The first is to be installed in nuclear-friendly Japan in 2008. Don’t look for them here in nuclear-phobic (although less so now, thanks to global-warming fears) America until 2009.
I often wondered why everyone is so afraid of nuclear power. Of course, there is no “perfect energy,” but it always seemed to me like nuclear power got a particularly bad rap because of just a couple accidents, especially when compared to other power sources.
Then, one day on the internet, I saw why it was that people feared nuclear power. It is centered in one word: “ATOMZ!!1!”
Long live fear of that which you don’t understand. Not that I’m a nuclear engineer, but seriously America: give atomz a chance.
I’ve never quite understood the fear either, Snurp. I think you are correct. People don’t understand nuclear power and thus fear it. What’s odd is that the Japanese experienced nuclear power in the worst possible way… twice, and the are in love with the power source.
Other than the irrational fear of nuclear power many feel, there was a massive economic barrier. Coal is so plentiful in the States that coal power plants were much more cost effective at $0.05 to $0.11 per kilowatt-hour compared to $0.11 – $0.14 for traditional nuclear. Now nuclear is just as cost effective, at least at the small scale.
What I think might be one of, if not the, biggest barriers at this point, though, even if nuclear power becomes cheaper, is the entrenched interests of fossil fuel giants. I vaguely recall reading something about electric car research being bogged down for that reason. And when you think about the financial might of fuel corporations, not to mention their growing profits, it makes me wonder. Granted we probably (hopefully) won’t get to the worst case scenario where fossil fuel Big Brothers run conventional energy into (out of, technically) the ground and leave us with nothing as we suffer with no developed alternatives and fall victim to our evil corporate overlords, but I think we could be moving a lot faster if there wasn’t the presence of those groups to begin with. But if that’s the case, I wonder what countries like Japan and France, who accept nuclear power with open arms, do differently? Just a different economic situation?
I’ve always been very interested in the potential of nuclear power. And thanks for your post about technological advances in the industry. However, I thought that your post was a bit lopsided with respect to the benefits/problems with this sort of power. For instance, where is your discussion about the problems with nuclear waste? To me, that is the biggest obstacle for nuclear power being implemented on a large scale. Nuclear waste is very very bad stuff. Absolutely the worst byproduct of any sort of energy production. We’d be much better off with a warming world than with a world with unchecked nuclear waste. Currently there is no long term strategy for dealing with this waste. And until there is I will not be convinced that nuclear is the way to go. However, solve the waste problem and I would be in favor.
Also, I don’t think that the previous accidents with nuclear power plants should be diminished. For instance, the Chernobyl disaster was easily the worst man-made environmental disaster ever. There are still great stretches of land that cannot be accessed due to the high levels of radiation. And there is no way to remediate the problem other than to wait for natural degradation which is still hundreds of years away. Thus, I don’t believe that the fear is irrational at all. If the US can’t even stop an airplane from crashing into one of the most highly secured buildings in the world (i.e., pentagon) then how can we feel about the security of nuclear power plants.
To sum up, I think nuclear has a great potential as a power source. However, until security and waste disposal concerns can be addressed nuclear power is just to risky. Solve these problems then I’ll come on board.
Dysfuncional Nuclear Family…
In a recent post, I wrote about my excitement over a major engineering advance in nuclear power generation. In the ensuing discussion, chopdeli berated me for giving short-shrift to the downsides of nuclear power.
……