How to make Nuclear Power safer

[xelasnave]

I think nuclear power although currently expensive will one day be an option we will need
Given the problems we have experienced how do we make reactors safer?
Miles from anything built under a lake or what
Any ideas given we need to embrace this technology
Alex

[Amaranthus (Barry)]

Easier answer - rely on passive (inherent) safety systems that depend on the laws of physics rather than engineered intervention. Then reactors become "walk away" safe.

You can read about it (e.g. the Integral Fast Reactor) on my blog -- this Q&A/FAQ is a really good start:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2010/09/18/ifr-fad-7/

[xelasnave]

Thanks for that
I have been to your blog at some stage must have missed it
Anyways I shall take a look

[xelasnave]

Very interesting and encouraging
But I am I correct could put off mining for years

[pluto (Hugh)]

That's a good read Barry.
I'm also interested to see the next generation of Thorium reactors as they have the potential to be very clean and, most importantly, very safe.

IMO it's a shame that public debate about the future of nuclear power generation usually assumes that the type of reactor that would be built would be based on old cold-war technology and is generally ignorant of technology that has been designed for safe power production as opposed to weapon fuel production.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Nuclear fusion. Maybe not within our lifetime. There is ITER which should answer a few questions soon enough but it's cost a bundle to date.

[acropolite (Phil)]

IMO Nuclear power isn't an option, there's no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor (on this planet at least) and no real need for one. By implementing nuclear power we're only prolonging the inevitable, we're already living beyond our means and destroying our habitat in the process.

Renewables are the only sustainable future, the expectation of continuous growth has to go. Take a trip to Denmark or Germany and see the proliferation of wind and solar, they at least have the sense to decommission their ageing nuclear capacity and build sustainable infrastructure.

[multiweb (Marc)]

Originally Posted by acropolite

Renewables are the only sustainable future, the expectation of continuous growth has to go. Take a trip to Denmark or Germany and see the proliferation of wind and solar, they at least have the sense to decommission their ageing nuclear capacity and build sustainable infrastructure.

Problem is energy produced by unit of surface. Wind and Solar as all renewables have an efficiency of bugger-all. It's all simple high school maths. Would be great if it worked though. Germany is the biggest power consumer in the EU and what's not coming from coal comes from Nuclear.

[pluto (Hugh)]

Originally Posted by acropolite

IMO Nuclear power isn't an option, there's no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor (on this planet at least)

I'm a huge fan of renewable energy sources, especially solar combined with some clever storage, but I think there is room to consider other clean options.

Would you mind explaining what you think is unsafe about a liquid fluoride thorium reactor?
I'm not being cheeky, I promise, I'm genuinely interested as, from my limited understanding of them, LFTRs are by design unable to have a runaway reaction (or as Mr Burns put it: an unrequested fission surplus), and they produce very little waste.

[Amaranthus (Barry)]

there's no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor

Phil, by that logic there is no such thing as a safe ANYTHING, including solar panels, wind turbines etc. In fact, more people are killed falling off roofs installing or cleaning PV panels each year than have ever been killed by commercial nuclear power.

The key point here is not that solar PV is not 'safe' (it is), it is simply that all risk comparisons are relative, NOT absolute as your statement implies.

[Amaranthus (Barry)]

Hugh, yes, that is what I meant when I referred to inherent safety. The LFTR has many inherent safety properties, and so does the IFR (with metal fuel and liquid metal coolant) -- both of these are "Generation IV" designs that emphasize this aspect of design, along with fuel sustainability.

Even the latest Gen III+ reactors like the AP1000 have partly inherently safe systems -- better here termed 'passive' safety, such as gravity-and-convection fed emergency cooling water systems that do not require powered pumps to operate (the Achilles Heel of the old Fukushima reactors during the station blackout).

[tlgerdes (Trevor)]

Originally Posted by acropolite

IMO Nuclear power isn't an option, there's no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor (on this planet at least)

Cars fit into that same category then, they are not safe as they can be driven by idiots (I neither confirm nor deny that I fit into that category )

The current deployed technology of nuclear power has potential problems, but if you were to design and build a new version, you can mitigate or possibly eliminate all catastrophic problems.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

There are many countries - France, Germany, the UK, and the US for example - that have operated nuclear facilities very safely for many decades at this point, regardless of these design flaws. Incidents occur when humans do stupid things. Just like in cars

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by acropolite

IMO Nuclear power isn't an option, there's no such thing as a safe nuclear reactor (on this planet at least) and no real need for one. By implementing nuclear power we're only prolonging the inevitable, we're already living beyond our means and destroying our habitat in the process.

Renewables are the only sustainable future, the expectation of continuous growth has to go. Take a trip to Denmark or Germany and see the proliferation of wind and solar, they at least have the sense to decommission their ageing nuclear capacity and build sustainable infrastructure.

In large part I agree but there are designs that default to stable and that's an option that is worth exploring. I noticed today an enorous solar farm came online in NSW, bigger to come. Australia certainly has the potential to win big time in this area. Need a bit a vision in Aus.

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by tlgerdes

Cars fit into that same category then, they are not safe as they can be driven by idiots (I neither confirm nor deny that I fit into that category )

Ah yes, but badly designed cars certainly aid in the process of winning Darwin awards...

[AndrewJ]

There is no money in cleaning up after you have made your profit.

What i think will be very interesting with nuclear power is how the "utilities" that own them and make money "now" will behave when they have to be decommissioned. Even if there is no accident along the way, the costs of dealing with radioctive waste wont be cheap, and i'll bet some operators will declare bankruptcy and/or run for the hills, just like happened with asbestos when the true costs came out.

Andrew

[el_draco (Rom)]

Originally Posted by AndrewJ

There is no money in cleaning up after you have made your profit.

What i think will be very interesting with nuclear power is how the "utilities" that own them and make money "now" will behave when they have to be decommissioned. Even if there is no accident along the way, the costs of dealing with radioctive waste wont be cheap, and i'll bet some operators will declare bankruptcy and/or run for the hills, just like happened with asbestos when the true costs came out.

Andrew

Good point. I always thought a mass accelerator was the way to go with nuclear waste. I mean, launch it at high velocity straight at sol... not even a burp.... Start up costs would be a beach though.

[JB80 (Jarrod)]

Originally Posted by multiweb

Nuclear fusion. Maybe not within our lifetime. There is ITER which should answer a few questions soon enough but it's cost a bundle to date.

My wife was offered a job there last year, it would of been a very eye opening experience but unfortunately it couldn't compete with what was offered in Spain.

[PeterEde (Peter)]

Nuclear power is today the safest form of power. Energy cycles from mining power out put Nuclear is by far the least dangerous killing less than every other form of power

[tlgerdes (Trevor)]

Originally Posted by el_draco

Ah yes, but badly designed cars certainly aid in the process of winning Darwin awards...

And so to with badly designed "anything"