Skip to main content

Nuclear Energy Decrepit? We’ll See About That

In a story about new nuclear technologies at Fortune, Mark Halper makes a formulation that defines what seems a, shall we say, critical mass in the nuclear energy business:

A host of startups are experimenting with different approaches including the use of liquid fuel, the use of solid fuel with different shapes (such as bricks or pebbles), and the use of alternative coolants and moderators such as salts and gases. Many of the designs draw on ideas that politics suppressed decades ago. Some, like Bill Gates-chaired TerraPower in Bellevue, Wash., are designing “fast reactors” that don’t moderate neutrons. Some envision using the element thorium instead of uranium.

Between them, they portend leaps in safety, cut way down on nuclear waste, use “waste” as fuel, minimize weapons proliferation risks, slash costs and tremendously boost efficiencies. Many fit the “small modular” form that enables mass production and affordable incremental power. (Oregon startup NuScale Power recently secured $217 million in federal funds to develop a small but comparatively conventional reactor.)

We can discuss the “politics suppressed” bit some other time – another way to see it is as “decision making” – but what Halper does is recognize that a lot is happening in the nuclear energy sphere and, by so doing, he heartily rebuts the argument that nuclear energy is a decrepit technology tottering into the grave.

Nuclear power, once the cutting edge of technological progress, is now a dinosaur, all the more anachronistic when one looks at the price of renewables, whose costs have plummeted over a decade and will, say experts, continue to decline as technology improves.

Like that. This next one is a favorite.

They emerged from the philosophy of the 20th century and waste large amounts of energy.

So 20th century, nuclear energy, as outmoded a philosophy as fascism (this was written by a German, who ought to be better aware of what constitutes bad philosophy.)

Halper, who pins the first part of his story to fusion (which means he can write the same story five years from now), does turn to  the more grounded world of fission and picks up a good quote:

There is a growing market pull for innovation in the nuclear space, so you’re beginning to see a blossoming of startup companies doing different things in nuclear,” says Simon Irish, CEO of startup Terrestrial Energy, Mississauga, Canada, which is developing a “molten salt” reactor (MSR) based on liquid fuel.

Halper wrote more about Terrestrial Energy here, so he knew where to get his quote. Molten salt reactors are not new technology, as Terrestrial is the first to admit – and does, right on its home page – but Halper covers a few other ideas, too. Still, Irish is exactly right – Terrestrial, TerraPower, NuScale, etc. are doing “different things in nuclear.” The article is well worth a look.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Halper, not Halpin?
Charles Barton said…
I was the 33rd member of the energy from Thorium discussion group, the only open discussion group devoted to nuclear power in 2007, At that time Molten salt nuclear technology was virtually unknown, even in the small nuclear community. We started out as a grass roots effort, and look at how much we have accomplished in the last 8 years. Not too long ago, thorium was even discussed in The House of Lords. In 8 more years the movement may have MSRs nearing sales in North America, while in China a Thorium Molten Salt Breeder may be nearing completion.

Popular posts from this blog

Fluor Invests in NuScale

You know, it’s kind of sad that no one is willing to invest in nuclear energy anymore. Wait, what? NuScale Power celebrated the news of its company-saving $30 million investment from Fluor Corp. Thursday morning with a press conference in Washington, D.C. Fluor is a design, engineering and construction company involved with some 20 plants in the 70s and 80s, but it has not held interest in a nuclear energy company until now. Fluor, which has deep roots in the nuclear industry, is betting big on small-scale nuclear energy with its NuScale investment. "It's become a serious contender in the last decade or so," John Hopkins, [Fluor’s group president in charge of new ventures], said. And that brings us to NuScale, which had run into some dark days – maybe not as dark as, say, Solyndra, but dire enough : Earlier this year, the Securities Exchange Commission filed an action against NuScale's lead investor, The Michael Kenwood Group. The firm "misap

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Wednesday Update

From NEI’s Japan micro-site: NRC, Industry Concur on Many Post-Fukushima Actions Industry/Regulatory/Political Issues • There is a “great deal of alignment” between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the industry on initial steps to take at America’s nuclear energy facilities in response to the nuclear accident in Japan, Charles Pardee, the chief operating officer of Exelon Generation Co., said at an agency briefing today. The briefing gave stakeholders an opportunity to discuss staff recommendations for near-term actions the agency may take at U.S. facilities. PowerPoint slides from the meeting are on the NRC website. • The International Atomic Energy Agency board has approved a plan that calls for inspectors to evaluate reactor safety at nuclear energy facilities every three years. Governments may opt out of having their country’s facilities inspected. Also approved were plans to maintain a rapid response team of experts ready to assist facility operators recoverin