Skip to main content

The More Molybdenum the Merrier

MolyCell4 Yesterday, we mentioned GE Hitachi is putting together a radioisotope reactor to cover the short fall from the temporary shuttering of Canadian and Belgian plants. We also teased the notion there might be more announcements of a similar sort. We didn’t expect the similar sort of announcement to, um, be announced so quickly:

One year after Babcock & Wilcox announced that it would seek to produce medical isotopes in the U.S., the company has received a $9 million boost to that project.

The National Nuclear Security Administration has awarded the grant to the Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group, one of the company’s operations in Lynchburg [Virginia]. The money will be used to continue developing B&W’s reactor technology for isotope production, B&W announced Monday.

But it makes sense, since the NNSA was also involved in the GE announcement. The government really wants to ensure a reliable supply of molybdenum-99 and it’s clearly willing to seed the market with these grants to make it happen. Babcock & Wilcox’s plan has another benefit:

The project has garnered support from nuclear security interests because molybdenum-99 producers currently use weapons grade uranium. B&W’s project, and a similar project proposed by the University of Missouri-Columbia, would use low enriched uranium.

Better to use weapons grade uranium for this purpose than for weapons – in fact, what could be better? – but we certainly understand wanting to avoid the issue entirely.

In any event, a true nuclear good news story.

---

The New York Times tells the tale of the wind:

Despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets, the American wind power industry grew at a blistering pace in 2009, adding 39 percent more capacity. The country is close to the point where 2 percent of its electricity will come from wind turbines.

Let’s note that every single New York Times story could begin “Despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets,” since anything reported in a newspaper will happen despite those things. “Despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets, more cats and dogs were born last year than in 2008.” See? Easy.

We assume this is meant to convey that the wind industry has seen an increase despite elements that would discourage it – and maybe it still has, since that number could be, say, 3 per cent without those elements – but industry and government interest in wind has assured some progress. That’s to the good – and the Times even notices it:

The group [The American Wind Energy Association] said the growth of wind power was helped by the federal stimulus package that passed a year ago, which extended a tax credit and provided other investment incentives for the industry.

But:

“The U.S. wind industry shattered all installation records in 2009, and this was directly attributable to the lifeline that was provided by the stimulus package,” said Denise Bode, the trade association’s chief executive. “The second half of the year was extraordinary. But manufacturers didn’t see much growth because they had built up so much inventory.”

We guess next year, the Times can say write, “Because of a crippling recession, etc., wind capacity suffered a shattering blow” or something similar. Frankly, we think momentum is with the wind folks. Like a turbine, it just goes round and round.

You can see the Wind Association’s press release here.

A Molybdenum cell. ANSTO Health (in Australia) is in the process of commissioning a new plant which will be used to manufacture Molybdenum-99. Molybdenum-99 is used in the basis of 80% of nuclear medicine procedures performed around the world. See here for more.

Comments

Joffan said…
Like many a good-news story, the "good" is only in contrast to some earlier "bad" (eg. "Families adopt orphans"). The best of news would have been that the entirely unnecessary stop order was never applied to the MAPLE reactors, and the world would have had plenty of nuclear medicines available.
Jay Alt said…
Despite a crippling recession and tight credit markets, no new nuclear plants were built last year. Again.

Popular posts from this blog

Activists' Claims Distort Facts about Advanced Reactor Design

Below is from our rapid response team . Yesterday, regional anti-nuclear organizations asked federal nuclear energy regulators to launch an investigation into what it claims are “newly identified flaws” in Westinghouse’s advanced reactor design, the AP1000. During a teleconference releasing a report on the subject, participants urged the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to suspend license reviews of proposed AP1000 reactors. In its news release, even the groups making these allegations provide conflicting information on its findings. In one instance, the groups cite “dozens of corrosion holes” at reactor vessels and in another says that eight holes have been documented. In all cases, there is another containment mechanism that would provide a barrier to radiation release. Below, we examine why these claims are unwarranted and why the AP1000 design certification process should continue as designated by the NRC. Myth: In the AP1000 reactor design, the gap between the shield bu...

How many nuclear plants does it take to meet the world's energy needs?

Several weeks ago Joshua Pearce at Clarion University in Pennsylvania released a study titled “ Thermodynamic limitations to nuclear energy deployment as a greenhouse gas mitigation technology .” In the study he stated... nuclear energy production would have to increase by 10.5% per year from 2010 to 2050 to both replace fossil-fuel-energy use and meet the future energy demands. This line, of course, made the headlines and has been picked up by several outlets and blogs . When looking into his calculations for this statement, he made one assumption error that overstated the above sentence by nearly a factor of three. Page 121, Section 4.1 of the study states: Richard Smalley pointed out that in 2004, the global economy consumed the equivalent of 220 million barrels of oil per day, which converted into electricity terms is the equivalent of 14.5 TeraWatts (TW), or 14,500,000 MegaWatts (MW) (2005). … With a nuclear plant having about 1000 MW (1 GW) of capacity, we would need 14,500...

What Happens During a Refueling Outage?

You may have noticed over the past few weeks that a number of nuclear plants are shut down for refueling outages or are resuming operations after just returning from one. This type of routine outage usually occurs in the spring or fall when electricity demand is low so that nuclear reactors can replace about one-third of the spent fuel rods with new fuel and conduct other routine maintenance and repairs at the plant. To get a better sense of how refueling works at a nuclear energy facility, I spoke with Marcus Nichol, NEI’s senior project manager for used fuel storage and transportation, and asked him to explain the basics. Why does a nuclear plant need to replace one-third of its fuel? Nichol: The main purpose of a refueling outage is to replace older fuel that is depleted—meaning it can no longer efficiently produce energy from nuclear fission reactions—with new fuel. This “used fuel” has typically been used in the reactor for four-and-a-half to six years before it is pe...