Comments on: MIT Improves Nuclear Power http://www.crunchgear.com/2006/10/02/mit-improves-nuclear-power/ Gadgets, gear and computer hardware. Wed, 09 Jul 2008 15:12:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: James Aach http://www.crunchgear.com/2006/10/02/mit-improves-nuclear-power/#comment-6125 James Aach Mon, 02 Oct 2006 17:12:29 +0000 http://crunchgear.com/2006/10/02/mit-improves-nuclear-power/#comment-6125 Such an advance has economic implications because it allows plants t be more efficient, but it does not actually increase power input to the grid. It's like a car that goes from 30 miles per gallon to 40 - it still has to drive the speed limit. Large power plants (coal, nuclear, etc.) have their electrical generating equipment installed with final power output in mind, and this output can't be raised a large amount without risking the equipment. (The alternative is buying and installing new generationg equipment, which is very expensive. You can sometimes raise power a little depending on how the equipment is designed, which some nuclear plants have recently been doing.) What the proposed advance would do is allow nuclear reactors to get more energy out of the same fuel load. The reactor could run longer on the same fuel load (at the same old power level). Less shutdowns for refueling - and less fuel to purchase - increases the unit's efficiency. Regarding the safety implications, assuming the new fuel melts at the same temperature as the old fuel, the lower operating temperature could have significant safety benefits. I'm not sure how the lower temperature would effect the rate of the heat transfer in the reactor - which ultimately leads to steam and then to electric generation. I'm a twenty year veteran of the US nuclear industry - and I've written a layman's guide to the real world of atomic energy, which is far different that what is commonly portrayed. To make it more entertaining, "Rad Decision" is a novel. It is also available free to readers at my website - and they seem to like it, judging frm their comments. "I'd like to see Rad Decision widely read." - Stewart Brand, internet pioneer and founder of "The Whole Earth Catalog". http://RadDecision.blogspot.com Such an advance has economic implications because it allows plants t be more efficient, but it does not actually increase power input to the grid. It’s like a car that goes from 30 miles per gallon to 40 - it still has to drive the speed limit. Large power plants (coal, nuclear, etc.) have their electrical generating equipment installed with final power output in mind, and this output can’t be raised a large amount without risking the equipment. (The alternative is buying and installing new generationg equipment, which is very expensive. You can sometimes raise power a little depending on how the equipment is designed, which some nuclear plants have recently been doing.) What the proposed advance would do is allow nuclear reactors to get more energy out of the same fuel load. The reactor could run longer on the same fuel load (at the same old power level). Less shutdowns for refueling - and less fuel to purchase - increases the unit’s efficiency.

Regarding the safety implications, assuming the new fuel melts at the same temperature as the old fuel, the lower operating temperature could have significant safety benefits. I’m not sure how the lower temperature would effect the rate of the heat transfer in the reactor - which ultimately leads to steam and then to electric generation.

I’m a twenty year veteran of the US nuclear industry - and I’ve written a layman’s guide to the real world of atomic energy, which is far different that what is commonly portrayed. To make it more entertaining, “Rad Decision” is a novel. It is also available free to readers at my website - and they seem to like it, judging frm their comments.

“I’d like to see Rad Decision widely read.” - Stewart Brand, internet pioneer and founder of “The Whole Earth Catalog”.

http://RadDecision.blogspot.com

]]>