DailyDirt: Nuclear Power Making Progress?
from the urls-we-dig-up dept
The problems with nuclear power via fission have obviously not been overcome by technology (or politics). European countries have started to back off nuclear power, and the US isn't expanding its nuclear power capacity in the near future. However, nuclear power isn't dead yet. Maybe some people think it should be, but what if someone figures out how to prevent meltdowns and burn nuclear waste as fuel?- China is expected to have an operational Generation IV nuclear fission power plant within the next few years, not sometime in 2030 or 2040. High temperature pebble-bed reactors that use helium instead of water to transfer heat are designed to avoid meltdowns with passive systems. China is looking to sell their nuclear power plants to countries like Saudi Arabia, and it also has some molten-salt reactors using thorium on the way, too. [url]
- Bill Gates has invested in TerraPower, a company that is developing nuclear energy technology called a travelling wave reactor. This kind of reactor doesn't require enriched fuels, so it avoids proliferation problems and can even consume some depleted uranium waste as fuel. But these reactors aren't fully operational just yet. [url]
- Tens of thousands of metric tons of nuclear waste is currently in "temporary" storage, above ground in power plants across the US. A few geologically stable sites have been considered for nuclear waste storage, but shale deposits have only recently been investigated. A handful of European countries, as well as Canada and Japan, have already been looking into shale deposits to store radioactive waste, but the NIMBY factor for nuclear waste makes it tough to commit to any long-term storage plans. [url]
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: energy, fission, nuclear energy, nuclear meltdown, nuclear power, nuclear waste, pebble bed reactor, shale deposits, traveling wave reactor
Companies: terrapower
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Breeder reactors
These reactors have been used to make more fuel than they produce, and they have been used to burn transuranics including waste and weapons grade plutonium.
They make about a hundred times more energy from fuel than the common reactors. (Increased from about 1% to close to 100%.) And makes about 1% of the waste, that is also does not stay as dangerous as long as conventional waste. This is also true if it uses conventional waste as fuel, and thereby reduces the dangerous waste to a fraction.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
s/that is also does/that doesn't/g
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Breeder reactors
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hodgepodging
Chernobyl is of Ukraine fame.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You Mis Spelled "Nucular"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Time for Plan B
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:Clean nuclear?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]