Skip to main content

What Else to Do with Nuclear Energy

phoenix logoNews from Wisconsin:

Phoenix Nuclear Labs (PNL), the Monona startup that has developed a particle accelerator-based neutron generator, announced a two-year, $1 million grant from the U.S. Energy Department to design and build a “high current negative hydrogen ion source.”

That description at the end sounds a lot like fusion.

The project has applications for physics research, medical cyclotrons, semiconductor manufacturing, and—over the long term—trying to achieve “abundant, clean, nuclear fusion energy,” PNL said.

So fusion is a misty dream of the future while more achievable goals come first.

I have no particular brief on Phoenix or its prospects, but sometimes we forget that what we call nuclear energy has applications that have nothing whatever to do with making electricity. Of course, there are medical applications (a field Phoenix also wants to be in), but I’d say an understanding of its potential and actual use beyond electricity and medicine is, for many people, not much broader. And that potential is immense – as Phoenix, founded in 2005, would like you to know.

It has put together a list right on its home page of what it wants to do with nuclear technology:

  • Domestic production of critical medical isotopes used in health care for the diagnosis and treatment of cancers, Parkinson’s disease, Alzheimer’s disease, Coronary Artery Disease, and other ailments. 
  • Neutron radiography for non-destructive testing of critical components. PNL provides neutron generator technology to the US Army. PNL’s ultra-high flux generators allow for extremely sensitive and rapid imaging of components used in air and spacecraft, munitions, power generation, and many other industrial and defense applications.
  • Detection of nuclear and explosive devices to prevent terrorist attacks domestically and abroad. PNL’s core technology provides unprecedented neutron flux levels that can be used to detect a wide variety of explosive devices in order to protect our ports and borders.
  • High voltage power supplies. Through the development of our core accelerator technology, we have partnered with Rockwell Automation to design and build high voltage power supplies that offer power levels and a suite of features that cannot be found elsewhere.

For some reason, that last one made me think of a nuclear robot – I mean a Robbie the Robot-type of animated being – because Robbie would need a potent power supply, right? I believe the the third is what motivated the formation of the company, but the first is proving to have more currency. See this interview with founder Greg Piefer for more.

Piefer plans to use his Madison company's nuclear fusion technology to make molybdenum-99. The substance, known as Mo-99, produces technetium-99m, an isotope that's critical for certain medical imaging tests that diagnose, monitor and treat some cancers, as well as heart and brain diseases.

This press release from February suggests where Phoenix is in commercializing its work.

To date, PNL has been funded primarily by government grants and private investment. This sale to Ultra Electronics [for a thermal neutron generation  system]  represents the first large -scale commercial contract for PNL. “We are thrilled to have the opportunity to provide a state-of-the-art technology solution to an internationally respected company like Ultra Electronics,” said Evan Sengbusch, VP of Business Development at PNL.

In other words, fairly early days.  Who knows, if Phoenix has some kind of a breakthrough with fusion energy, it might rise, so to speak, to our sphere. In the meantime, good luck to them.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The most efficient way to produce moly-99 is bombarding high-enrichment uranium targets with a neutron flux from a research (production or test) reactor. Compared to that method, all others are tremendously inefficient. But no one has the guts to say that because HEU targets are supposed to be "bad". I call bullshite on that.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…