Nukes for boxley

Post #299,264 by malraux 11/9/08 1:48:19 PM Reply	Nukes for boxley http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/nov/09/miniature-nuclear-reactors-los-alamos Regards, -scott <i>Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.</i>
Post #299,265 by boxley 11/9/08 1:49:25 PM Reply	we have some on order Yes, Virginia, there really is an Obama Claus. You can hear him shouting, "On Pelosi, on Reid, on Kennedy, on Biden. Cash away, cash away, cash away all!"
Post #299,277 by drook 11/9/08 2:31:42 PM Reply	About damn time I saw an article years ago saying they could bury something like this -- well, the one described in the last couple of paragraphs -- in the foundation of a skyscraper and power several city blocks for 50 years. No refueling. When it runs down, just unplug the leads and backfill the "plug" with lead and concrete.
Post #299,318 by Another Scott 11/9/08 10:26:18 PM Reply	Here comes the cold water. Color me skeptical. The physics doesn't appear to be anything new - people have worked on intrinsically safe reactors for decades. The main issues in nuclear power are: 1) The pre-startup economics (The costs of financing, fuel, construction, inspection, certification. Will it produce more revenue than it costs, and produce useful power for the money?). 2) The regulations (Are they addressable in a reasonable amount of time for a reasonable cost? Will they change before the system is complete, requiring expensive changes?) 3) The issues in decommissioning (Where to put the stuff? Who will pay for it?). I'd be flabbergasted if Hyperion could solve these problems in 5 years. Though it's not clear what "on sale within five years" really means since the article also says they have "more than 100 firm orders". What little they do say about it doesn't strike me as being a mass-market power source - though it may work in some important niches (like remote military bases). http://www.hyperionp...on.com/about.html Among other things, it has to be dug up, and sent back to the factory for refueling every 5 years. I don't think most people in subdivisions would like that. What will customers do for power during those down times? Let me know when they have a commercially viable prototype running and the necessary NRC approvals. :-/ Cheers, Scott.
Post #299,345 by drook 11/10/08 12:23:24 PM Reply	Re: inspection, certification costs By making them small and self contained, you eliminate the majority of the environmental impact issues. By using a 50-year-old design, you ensure the majority of the defects have been found. By using the same freaking design more than once (major pet peeve of mine with the way nuke power is done today) you amortize the costs across multiple installations. This is "the right way" to do nuke power.
Post #299,348 by beepster 11/10/08 1:02:55 PM Reply	Re: Here comes the cold water. If the 20k home figure is accurate as well as the 7 yr life span, the monthly cost of the system is about $15 per household. Considering that most folks are used to paying 10-20 times that figure per month for electricity...I'd say the economics make some sense.
Post #299,351 by jake123 11/10/08 1:54:27 PM Reply	That doesn't include some hefty items such as the distribution system to get the energy from the plant to the house.
Post #299,353 by boxley 11/10/08 2:26:37 PM Reply	you dont need to run new wires Yes, Virginia, there really is an Obama Claus. You can hear him shouting, "On Pelosi, on Reid, on Kennedy, on Biden. Cash away, cash away, cash away all!"
Post #299,359 by beepster 11/10/08 3:09:45 PM Reply	Re: you dont need to run new wires Even so, distribution would normally be about 50% of the cost of your average utility bill. So for people average bills in the range of $200...about 100 of that would be distribution. Their bills would still go down significantly if average generation costs were 15-20/month.
Post #299,363 by jake123 11/10/08 3:32:19 PM Reply	No, but you do need to maintain them. Otherwise you get what happened a few August's back... thanks to Ohio not taking care of their infrastructure.
Post #299,366 by folkert 11/10/08 3:44:55 PM Reply	Re: No, but you do need to maintain them. Otherwise you get Yes, but each problematic area is more centralized and only affect a a few customers vs... LOTS.
Post #299,378 by jake123 11/10/08 4:40:48 PM Reply	Sure, but it still costs to do it. Also, it will still (in all likelihood) be necessary to maintain those large networks as they will be required to balance load across different customers and sources.

Welcome to IWETHEY!