Skip to main content

Friday Follow-Ups

mpower_in_containment On Babcock and Wilcox’s announcement of new, smaller nuclear reactors:

Our friends at the Heritage Foundation like what they see:

One of the most interesting things about B&W’s entrance into the reactor market is that unlike most other designers, they have the industrial infrastructure to start building these things right now. And what’s more, this is a company that builds reactors today, multiple reactors each year, that the U.S. government uses for national security purposes. No one else has that on their resume.

True enough, though not necessarily determinative in any significant sense. Let’s call it a point in their favor.

The exciting thing about nuclear power is not what it gives us today, but what its potential is for the future.

Also true. This being Heritage, let’s let them have their moment:

It is a perfect example of why government can’t pick winners and losers among energy sources. Government subsidization of some technologies inevitably crowds out investment and innovation for others.

Or it spurs investment and innovation, depending. But Heritage will be Heritage.

---

On the Republican’s American Energy Plan:

The U.K. newspaper the Guardian, much like Heritage, can be relied upon for certain go-to attitudes. For example:

America's nuclear industry and its supporters in Congress have moved to hijack Barack Obama's agenda for greening the economy by producing a rival plan to build 100 new reactors in 20 years, and staking a claim for the money to come from a proposed clean energy development bank.

Really? Hijack? Nuclear’s been puttering around the greens for over 50 years. Maybe it shouldn’t be put in a position where it can be described as hijacking an agenda? Especially since it’s so responsive to that agenda.

Ellen Vancko, of the Union of Concerned Scientists, said: "The nuclear industry would like to be able to finance the next generation of nuclear reactors using the faith and credit of the US taxpayer to underwrite the expansion. They don't want to be responsible for any risk of financing these plants and neither do their lenders."

If the UCS thinks every other segment of the energy business doesn’t have much the same in mind, we’ve got a windmill we’d like to sell it – cheap. And in defense of every energy industry, including nuclear, this is a public-private partnership; government does have some ideas on how it wants energy deployed. No industry stands utterly alone. (You could say the Guardian, UCS and Heritage approach the role  of government in the energy sector in surprisingly similar ways.)

---

And on our mention of Microsoft’s new Bing search engine, we thought we’d be remiss not to point you to Wolfram Alpha, described as a computational knowledge engine. It’s doesn’t so much provide you  with links to other sites as pull together a ton of information about your search term, derived from other sites. For, um, nuclear scientists and engineers, there’s a lot of potential here. Here’s a couple of examples, from a rank amateur:

Uranium 235

stopping power air, 0.5MeV electron

Consider playing with Alpha as your Friday Fun project. You can even download your results as a pdf or a Mathematica notebook. (You can get a free notebook viewer from Wolfram’s site. It’s worth the download - lots of great content for it apart from Alpha.)

The containment chamber of the Babcock & Wilcox reactor.

Comments

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…

Nuclear Is a Long-Term Investment for Ohio that Will Pay Big

With 50 different state legislative calendars, more than half of them adjourn by June, and those still in session throughout the year usually take a recess in the summer. So springtime is prime time for state legislative activity. In the next few weeks, legislatures are hosting hearings and calling for votes on bills that have been battered back and forth in the capital halls.

On Tuesday, The Ohio Public Utilities Committee hosted its third round of hearings on the Zero Emissions Nuclear Resources Program, House Bill 178, and NEI’s Maria Korsnick testified before a jam-packed room of legislators.


Washingtonians parachuting into state debates can be a tricky platform, but in this case, Maria’s remarks provided national perspective that put the Ohio conundrum into context. At the heart of this debate is the impact nuclear plants have on local jobs and the local economy, and that nuclear assets should be viewed as “long-term investments” for the state. Of course, clean air and electrons …