Dismiss Notice
Welcome to IDF- Indian Defence Forum , register for free to join this friendly community of defence enthusiastic from around the world. Make your opinion heard and appreciated.

Small Modular Reactors

Discussion in 'Europe & Russia' started by BMD, Sep 16, 2017.

  1. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,660
    Likes Received:
    2,990
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    A simple to manufacture design that hasn't been designed or manufactured yet.
     
  2. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    304
    Pollution linked to one in six deaths

    Pollution has been linked to nine million deaths worldwide in 2015, a report in The Lancet has found.

    Almost all of these deaths occurred in low- and middle-income countries, where pollution could account for up to a quarter of deaths. Bangladesh and Somalia were the worst affected.

    Air pollution had the biggest impact, accounting for two-thirds of deaths from pollution.

    [​IMG]
     
  3. zebra7

    zebra7 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,213
    Likes Received:
    1,248
    Country Flag:
    India
    I am not an expert in this domain, but I would prefer more research on Modular, compact Fuel Cell for Automobiles, Griffin based Static Capacitor to replace Battery, and harness the abundant Geo-Thermal Energy instead of Nuclear, Dams, Diesel/Gas based Generation plant. Never was impressed with the Solar energy and feels, that naming them as the Green energy is a big Joke, when they need Conventional Batteries to store energy, when Sun light is not available. Combination of Real Green Energy source (Natural -- Geo thermal, wind, Tide), with supporting non conventional resource such as Solar panels dual use such as fabricated to cover/replace the Glass structure for the offices/building/structure/roof tops for Air conditioners during day/office hours and Static Capacitor based Power Banks, combined with efficient, minimum loss transmission and Distribution system, and Energy conserving devices such as LEDs could fill the future needs. Modular reactors for the general use, in public would involved the risk due to its uncontrollable natural nature and should be used only for the special purpose only. There are many other un focused/discussed Pollution sources and pollution, which are not discussed, specially the E-Pollutions, the effects of electromagnetic fields on the living bodies due to the growing number of electrical equipments, and the uncontrolled/ineffective handling of Lead, Acids to our environment. Time have come, when the research, investments should be made on the bio-degradable Plastic, polythene, thermocoal, used in packaging and to deal with the mess we have already made in few decades, littering so much undegradable, dangerous waste around every where.
     
    _Anonymous_ likes this.
  4. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    304
    And just how abundant is this. Show us the stats
     
  5. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    304
    Solar Power Alone Won’t Solve Energy or Climate Needs

    Recent reports that solar capacity will soon exceed nuclear capacity reveal an important fact. They also hide a crucial distinction needed to understand the context of energy production, and use and consequences of choices among supply options for the future, writes Jatin Nathwani of the University of Waterloo. Courtesy The Conversation.


    As executive director of the Waterloo Institute for Sustainable Energy(WISE) and lead author of the Equinox Blueprint Energy 2030, a technological roadmap for a low-carbon electrified future, I have investigated energy options, alternatives and their utility. I have also found that people get confused with terminology.

    Capacity installed in kilowatts (kW) is not equal to energy produced in kilowatt hours (kWh) — and the energy services we demand and pay for (such as cooking, cooling, lighting, entertainment) is measured in kilowatt hours. For large-scale, industrial purposes, output is measured in megawatt hours (MWh) or gigawatt hours (GWh).

    The technical capacity of any energy technology to deliver useful energy is measured as energy output. Because of the efficiency of energy conversion, solar energy output tends to be low.

    Distributed energy resources can be best recognized as a positive force that will help reinforce and increase the reliability and resilience of the “big grid”

    For example, the energy produced from a large number of solar arrays combined as 1,000 megawatts (MW) installed capacity will deliver, on average, an energy equivalent of 10 to 12 per cent of its capacity. In contrast, a nuclear plant delivers energy at 80 to 90 per cent of its rated capacity.

    The current global installed capacity of 224,684 MW provides energy output of 253,593 GWh, equivalent to an annual capacity factor of 11 per cent:dude:. Similarly, Germany’s installed capacity of 39,784 MW results in energy output of 36,056 GWh at a capacity factor of 10.3 per cent.:facepalm:

    So, for the same installed capacity, solar energy produced is eight to nine times less than nuclear. If you want the same amount of energy, then you would need to install an equivalent solar capacity that is higher by as large a margin — eight to nine times the number of additional solar arrays.
    :lol:

    http://www.theenergycollective.com/...r-power-alone-wont-solve-energy-climate-needs
    @randomradio @BMD


    [​IMG]
     
    zebra7 likes this.
  6. zebra7

    zebra7 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,213
    Likes Received:
    1,248
    Country Flag:
    India
    First tell me do you know what is geo thermal energy.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_energy

    It has been pointed out by many experts that the quake belt of the northern part that passes through our country needs pockets to release the pressure build up below, and if we tap the geo thermal energy, that pressure could be released, thus decreasing the earth quake danger. Plus there are certain areas in Bihar, where the underground crust is very thin.
     
  7. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    304
    Waah waah
    Where are my statistics?
     
  8. zebra7

    zebra7 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,213
    Likes Received:
    1,248
    Country Flag:
    India
    What kind of stats you need???
     
  9. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    304
    The economically extractable sources of abundant geo thermal energy. How they match current human requirements of 600 EJ energy annually and it's growth in the future.
    And what is this?
     
  10. zebra7

    zebra7 Captain FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,213
    Likes Received:
    1,248
    Country Flag:
    India
    First read the wiki link I posted, then come back
     
  11. PeegooFeng41

    PeegooFeng41 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    439
    Country Flag:
    India
    I have a question for you, do you think ZERO radioactivity exists in the natural world? BTW, radioactivity (alpha beta and gamma) coming from any source is same so long its intensity is same. I know in Kerala quite a bit of radioactivity exists naturally due to thorium. Background radiation is very real and it varies from places to places. Heck unless you are carrying a Geiger counter you cann't be sure that background radiation within your own house is not severe enough. In my college we know a particular wing of hostel where the background radiation is as high as a pitch-blend mine. From the looks of it, it is due to underground radon source. I wonder how trace amount of radioactive material leak from a nuclear power plant can make any real issue...

    It is much harder to bring down a 3rd or 4th generation nuclear reactor, especially one with a negative void coefficient in a huge blow-up. Most of these reactors have passive safety which do not depend upon any power source. Plus a nuclear power station will always have much higher security due to nuclear material involved. Having a bad-rep makes people take it more seriously.

    ADS allows you to burn transuranics enough so radiation is almost near background radiation.

    My biggest gripe with any 'wood' based approach is the scale. It requires massive amount of land and to make it sustainable, even bigger amount of land. It will be hard pressed to meeting the requirement of say India if Indians were consuming as much energy as average american does. Nuclear is only scalable solution.
     
  12. BMD

    BMD Colonel ELITE MEMBER

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    10,660
    Likes Received:
    2,990
    Country Flag:
    United Kingdom
    I'm well aware of radiation, I worked in the nuclear industry for some time.

    It's hard to bring down any reactor due to construction, but it's possible.

    ADS is nowhere near commercialised yet. The timescales are similar to fusion power.

    There are massive amounts of forest and new forests can be grown solely for pellet production.
     
    Last edited: Nov 18, 2017 at 11:12 PM
  13. The enlightened

    The enlightened Lieutenant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2012
    Messages:
    538
    Likes Received:
    304
    A good post on Another Indian forum (whose name is automatically edited out)>>>>>


    Some of the advantages of Moltan salt reactor(LFTR) over current reactors:-


    1. It's safe to operate and maintain: Molten fluoride salts are mechanically and chemically stable at sea-level pressures at intense heats and radioactivity. Fluoride combines ionically with almost any transmutation product, keeping it out of circulation. Even radioactive noble gases come out in a predictable, containable place, where the fuel is coolest and most dispersed, the pump bowl.

    2. A molten salt reactor's fuel can be continuously reprocessed with a small adjacent chemical plant. The requirement is a 4-meter-tall molten niobium column to separate proactinium from the fuel salt, and a small vapor-phase fluoride-salt distillation system to remove fission waste products. The amounts involved are about 80kg of waste per year per GW generated, so the equipment is very small. A sparge of fluorine will even remove U233 from the salt. There has to be a small storage facility to let the proactinium from the niobium column decay to U233. A very small reprocessing facility will service a large 1Gw power plant.

    3. With continuous reprocessing, a fluid-salt-fueled reactor has >97% burn-up of fuel. This is -very- efficient, compared to -any- system, -anywhere-.

    4. The molten-salt-fueled reactor operates much hotter than LWR reactors, near 900C, so that very efficient Brayton cycle (turbine) generators are possible. This is -also- -very- efficient, a -goal- of so-called generation IV reactors. MSRs have -already- reached this goal.

    5. MSRs work in small sizes, as well as large, so a utility could easily build several small reactors (say 100Mwe) from income, reducing interest expense and business risks.

    6. Molten salt fuel reactors are not experimental. Several have been constructed and operated at high temperatures for extended times, with simple, practical validated designs. There's no need for new science at all, and very little risk in engineering new, larger or modular designs.

    Combining 3 to 6, a molten-salt thorium breeder is the most efficient well-developed way of converting a fuel metal into electricity.

    7. Extensive validation (fuel rod design validation normally takes -years- and prevents effective deployment of new nuclear technologies) is not needed. The fuel is molten, chemical reprocessing eliminates reaction products, and there are tested fuel mixtures.

    8. There's no need for fuel fabrication. This makes the reactors even cheaper to operate. It poses a business challenge to the industry, because reactor manufacturers are customarily paid by fuel fabrication profits. A government agency could, however, type-license a design, and license it to utilities.

    9. Molten-fuel reactors can be made inherently safe: Tested fuel-salt mixtures have negative reactivity coefficients, so that they decrease power generation as they get too hot. Most fuel-salt reactor vessels also have a freeze-plug at the bottom that has to be actively cooled. If the cooling fails, the fuel drains to a subcritical storage facility.

    10. Continuous reprocessing reduces numerous reactor design issues. For example, the poisoning effects from Xenon-135 are not present. Neutron poisoning from fission products can be continuously mitigated.

    11. A fuel-salt reactor is mechanically and neutronically simpler. There are only two items in the core: fuel salts and moderators. This reduces concerns with moderating interactions with positive void coefficients as water boils, chemical interactions, etc.

    12. Coolant and piping need never enter the high-neutron-flux zone, because the fuel is used to cool the core. The fuel is cooled in low-neutron-flux heat-exchangers outside the core. This reduces worries about neutron effects on pipes, testing, development issues, etc.

    13. The salt distillation process means that chemical separation and recycling of fission products, say for nuclear batteries, is actually cheap. Xenon and other valuable transmuted noble gases separate out of the molten fuel in the pump-bowl. Any transuranics go right back into the fuel for burn-up.

    Don't confuse molten-salt-fueled reactors (MSFR) with molten-salt-cooled reactors (MSCR), a Gen IV proposal. The MSCR can't reprocess fuel easily and has fuel rods that need to be fabricated and validated, delaying deployment by up to twenty years from project inception.

    There are some advantages from Thorium fuel, that the India project might capture:

    14. The thorium fuel cycle produces almost no (theoretically none) long-lived transuranic wastes. The fission wastes are less radioactive than natural ores in 300 years. The India proposal may get this, but only by adding a large, expensive fuel reprocessing factory.

    15. Thorium can resist proliferation. An easy variation of the thorium fuel cycle contaminates the Th232 fuel with chemically inseparable Th230. The Th230 breeds into U232, which has a powerful gamma emitter in its decay chain (Tl-208) that makes the reactor fuel U233/U232 impractical in a bomb, because it harms electronics.

    16. Thorium is more abundant than uranium, especially in India.According to recent estimates india have 8,46,477 tonnes of thoriumPress Information Bureau English Releases which is more than 50% of the total proven thorium reserves of the world.
     
  14. PeegooFeng41

    PeegooFeng41 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    439
    Country Flag:
    India
    Not exactly, Fusion reactors have still not been proven to be 'net energy producer', while ADS reactors for burning transuranic do not need to be net producer of energy, just energy efficient is enough. A sub critical reactor driven by neutrons from spallation which burns transuranic fission products is very much doable, not cheaply though. It needs to be made economical. BTW, waste burning designs like ADS is an important part of Gen IV designs.

    Well, here is the rub. It takes half a century for a oak tree to grow 20 m tall and absorbing all the carbon. It takes few hours to cut it down. Plus the way economies work is 'speculative' so if you go for pellet as fuel you are inviting businesses to over produce pellets by cutting huge part of forests while planting trees which will take about 50 years to grow big. Meanwhile, you will have a huge carbon foot print. Better to stick with something which is carbon neutral to start with, like nuclear.
     
  15. PeegooFeng41

    PeegooFeng41 2nd Lieutant FULL MEMBER

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2017
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    439
    Country Flag:
    India
    Same goes for dams. Yet we dont see too many news of terrorist attack on dams even in 10-20 years.
     

Share This Page