DailyDirt: Towards Safer Nuclear Energy

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Nuclear energy has the obvious drawbacks of dealing with its waste (potentially for hundreds of years) and getting political support. But on the other hand, nuclear power can be more convenient as a power source compared to alternatives like solar or wind. Newer nuclear power plant designs are supposedly much safer than any of the current commercial reactors in operation, but there's no operational history for power plants that haven't actually been built. Here are just a few links on building safer nuclear reactors.

• Smaller, more efficient nuclear reactor designs promise to reduce nuclear waste significantly and become competitive with some fossil fuels for producing electricity at similar costs. However, the startup costs for a nuclear power plant are still much higher than power plants running on coal or natural gas. [url]
• Next generation nuclear reactors could be made from more radiation-tolerant metals that can withstand the effects of constant radiation. Nanotwinned metals retain their mechanical properties better than typical metals, but it might take some time to make these materials economical as building materials. [url]
• Thorium has been touted as a "wonder fuel" for next generation nuclear power, but it isn't as resistant to being used in weapons as some folks might believe. Nuclear energy experts point out that *just* 1.6 tons of thorium metal can be used to produce enough uranium-233 (about 8kg) for a viable bomb in less than a year. [url]

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post via StumbleUpon.

Filed Under: energy, nanotwinned metal, nuclear, nuclear proliferation, nuclear reactor, nuclear waste, thorium, uranium-233, weapons

DailyDirt: Nuclear Power Plants 101

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

It's hard to express the devastation caused by the earthquake in Japan. And even though the aftershocks have subsided, now there's the threat of radioactive pollution from a nearby nuclear power plant. But make no mistake, the majority of the disaster has been caused by natural forces -- and the nuclear power plant meltdown(s) shouldn't shoulder too much blame.

• Japan is currently dealing with some serious problems after its Fukushima nuclear power plant couldn't quite handle both an earthquake AND a tsunami. Considering the scale of the damage, though, direct comparisons to Chernobyl seem unwarranted. [url]
• The Fukushima power plant has "generation II" reactors which need to actively pump cooling water through the system. Newer reactor designs rely on passive systems that don't require cooling water to be pumped into them. [url]
• So far, Fukushima is a "level 4" severity event. (Chernobyl was a "level 7" -- the most severe). There's still some debate if Fukushima will become a "level 5" with more than just local effects, but it won't get to level 7.... [url]
• Thorium reactors have been getting some renewed attention as "greener" nuclear power. China has stated a goal of producing a third of its electricity demand using thorium reactors by 2050. [url]
• There are also a bunch of "generation IV" reactor designs in various stages of planning. These reactors now face even more scrutiny (which is good), but the construction of future nuclear reactors will probably be delayed while everyone debates the risks. [url]
• To discover other kinds of alternative energy projects, check out what's currently floating around the StumbleUpon universe. [url]  

As always, StumbleUpon can also recommend some good Techdirt articles, too.

Filed Under: earthquake, japan, nuclear power, thorium, tsunami