DailyDirt: Nuclear Power Making Progress?

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Mon, Feb 22nd 2016 5:00pm — Michael Ho

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]

After you've finished checking out those links, take a look at our Daily Deals for cool gadgets and other awesome stuff.

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

12 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 22 Feb 2016 @ 5:53pm

Hope we can hack Chinese nuclear power plants to figure out how to build better fission reactors.......
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Socrates, 22 Feb 2016 @ 6:57pm

Breeder reactors
Breeder reactors is nothing new. Interest in breeder reactors declined after the 1960s as more uranium reserves were found, and handling of the waste were delegated to future generations.

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 ]
- Socrates, 22 Feb 2016 @ 7:32pm
  
  s/that is also does/that doesn't/g
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mark Pawelek, 23 Feb 2016 @ 3:24am
  
  Re: Breeder reactors
  I think interest in breeder reactors declined because of political opposition from the Carter and Clinton administrations. Breeder reactors were described as proliferation threats, which they never were. Anti-nuclear activists still wrongly believe that plutonium breeders can be used to make nuclear bombs.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Socrates, 22 Feb 2016 @ 7:26pm

Hodgepodging
To the extent that Ukraine is a European country, the Kiev regime have fired the naysayers that were critical to hodgepodging nuclear plants. These naysayers jobs were to ensure safe operation of these plants. There have already been several large mishaps, that temporally have caused elevated radiation levels in bordering nations, but it is unknown if this is related to the hodgepodging or something else as the regime never notified or informed about it, at all. One of the most gullible nations on the planet, Norway, have been hoodwinked into assisting them.

Chernobyl is of Ukraine fame.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr Big Content, 22 Feb 2016 @ 9:37pm

You Mis Spelled "Nucular"
What a Bunch of ILITERATES!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TechDescartes (profile), 22 Feb 2016 @ 10:38pm

Time for Plan B
[T]he NIMBY factor for nuclear waste makes it tough to commit to any long-term storage plans.
Guess that means Floor63 is off limits.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Socrates, 22 Feb 2016 @ 11:41pm
  
  [T]he NIMBY factor for nuclear waste makes it tough to commit to any long-term storage plans.
  Guess that means Floor63 is off limits.
  Being on top of things, as usual!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 23 Feb 2016 @ 5:08am

Why mess with adding more fission when you've got solar, wind, thermal? They are less expensive and more friendly to the environment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 23 Feb 2016 @ 7:46am
  
  Re:
  I believe nuclear is still cleaner than solar when it comes to volume. The process to make solar panels is toxic and then also the disposing of them is a problem. They are becoming popular so hopefully those problems will be solved.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - seedeevee (profile), 23 Feb 2016 @ 11:34am
    
    Re: Re:Clean nuclear?
    Nuclear will never be clean.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- nasch (profile), 23 Feb 2016 @ 9:37am
  
  Re:
  Solar and wind are hard to use for base load, and geothermal isn't available everywhere.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]