Earlier today, I got around to listening to one of the podcasts I collect off of Itunes - the NPR science magazine - Science Friday. Hour 2 of the show can be heard here, first
under the heading "Recent Episodes.", if you don't use Itunes. This episode featured interviews with Per Petersen, Chair of the Dept. of Nuclear Engineering at Berkeley. They discuss the recently approved new reactors being built at the
Vogtle Plant in Georgia, and a nuclear alternative called Small Modular Reactors, I first heard about over a year ago on a blog of a Navy nuclear engineer...who I lost track of somewhere among my links.
First, the Vogtle 3 and 4 reactors, built from a Westinghouse AP 1000 design, are supposed to have incorporated a system that will allow a reactor to be flooded and remain safely below critical temperatures, if the pressurized cooling system broke down in a manner similar to what happened in Fukishima. For what it's worth, the Fukishima reactors were based on an old General Electric design from the 1960's, and if they at least had a passive system to insert control rods -- as in later designs like the Candu reactors, which have the control rods overhead, so they automatically drop if there is a loss of power -- Japan would not have the dilemma today of having to deal with at least three core meltdowns that will take decades and unknown billions to decommission and clean up. The new designs are at least safer with their passive systems, but there still is that problem of the scale of the disasters if an unknown or unforseen disaster strikes.
A better option would likely be the smaller SMR's, which do not even require a pressurized cooling system to begin with, because a passive cooling system doesn't have the complicated array of pumps, pipes, pressure vessels, and the acquired risks involved when there are leaks or blockages, or loss of power with no backup available, lead to rising core temperature, and the resulting hydrogen gas explosions that pose the risk of full scale disaster :
Small Reactors Could Figure Into US Energy Future . Some of the encumbrances to building smaller, less complicated nuclear reactors start right with the manner in which the Atomic Energy Commission licenses and regulates the building of nuclear stations. From what I gather from the nuclear power advocates, the A.E.C. makes no distinction in the size or design of the facility -- every reactor has the same licensing cost regardless of size and output, so the builders have an incentive to go big or don't go at all. A little reform in the process, along with the proper costing of the main alternative - natural gas, would help the process; since natural gas and fracked gas are only cheaper right now because they don't have to pay for the costs of their emissions. As long as the carbon costs are dumped on the public, all non-carbon alternatives are limited.
But the SMR's could actually be something that is too good to be true...who knows, until they are actually in use and tested in the real world. But, what is the alternative for providing cheap, abundant electricity that will be essential to power a civilization without relying on fossil fuels? Tidal energy can be utilized in many coastal areas, and it is safe and reliable, but they would likely be high maintenance, because of the high costs due to the destructive and corrosive forces of nature in the places where they would be the most effective. And wind and solar power can be used in many regions, but not everywhere...as Germany is finding out now when their new arrays of windmills and solar powered generating stations are brought down by overcast weather and low winds. On the quiet days, they have to rely more on their oil-fired generating stations and try to buy enough power from France or other neighbours. Germany's decision to go No-Nuclear doesn't look rational in the final analysis.
The most effective way to deal with electricity demands would still be to incentivise efficiency and lower the demands on the grid; but if there is any way out of the blind alley we have walked in to in modern times, with too many people, growing scarcities of natural resources, and an increasingly degraded environment, a clean, cheap abundant source of electricity looks like a crucial part of the process of preserving civilization from a path towards gradual grinding down to another dark ages...or something worse.
BTW, the second part of that Science Friday episode I linked at the top, has an expert on a different, but surprisingly connected subject - Concrete:
Concrete Planet: The Strange and Fascinating Story of the World's Most Common Man-made Material
