Going Nuclear
Glenn Reynolds has an article up over at TCS Daily that argues that it might just be time to seriously look at nuclear energy if you are serious about global warming and American dependence on foreign oil. He describes the "Pebble Bed" reactor and the changes it might entail. (Full disclosure here, I used to work for a company that was very interested in this technology. However, we parted on bad terms, so I'm not biased in their favor).
What's more, we're fortunate that the choice isn't between continuing to burn fossil fuels or shifting to nuclear power as we've known it over the past several decades. Although nuclear power plants to date have been safer and more economical than is generally appreciated, the current generation of operational nuclear plants is obsolescent and results have been, in many ways, disappointing.
Fortunately, the technology hasn't been standing still. Partly as a result of recent Congressional efforts to fund reactor research, and partly as a result of ongoing work in national laboratories and the nuclear power industry, things in the field are looking up. As a recent survey article in Popular Mechanics magazine makes clear, there are new approaches to nuclear power in the offing that promise cleaner and more efficient power production with far less risk of "all-out" (or even minor) nuclear war in the process. Of these, perhaps the most promising technology is the pebble bed reactor:
"A typical pebble-bed reactor would function somewhat like a giant gumball machine. The design calls for a core filled with about 360,000 of these fuel pebbles — "kernels" of uranium oxide wrapped in two layers of silicon carbide and one layer of pyrolytic carbon, and embedded in a graphite shell. Each day about 3000 pebbles are removed from the bottom as fuel becomes spent. Fresh pebbles are added to the top, eliminating the need to shut down the reactor for refueling. Helium gas flows through the spaces between the spheres, carrying away the heat of the reacting fuel. This hot gas — which is inert, so a leak wouldn't be radioactive — can then be used to spin a turbine to generate electricity, or serve more exotic uses such as produce hydrogen, refine shale oil or desalinate water.
"The pebbles are fireproof and almost impossible to use for weapons production. The spent fuel is easy to transport and store, though there still remains the long-term problem of where to store it. And the design of the nuclear reactor is inherently meltdown-proof. If the fuel gets too hot, it begins absorbing neutrons, shutting down the chain reaction. In 2004, the cooling gas and secondary safety controls were shut off at an experimental pebble-bed reactor in China — and no calamity followed, says MIT professor Andrew Kadak, who witnessed the test."
China, with a booming economy, a huge population, and air pollution problems that are already absolutely dreadful, is very interested in pebble bed reactors. And they would seem to promise a lot for the United States, too — plus a way to promote nuclear power in the Third World without the kinds of nuclear-weapons proliferation threats we face today.
This kind of reactor would be much less likely to be misused for weapons production and would be a major plus for the reduction of greenhouse gases. It is well worth going ahead on projects like this.
UPDATE: Request from the comments section: more information on the pebble bed reactor concept. Here's the Wikipedia entry, here's the MIT information about the project and here's the South African information.
By Donna, Thursday, 28 September , 2006 @ 4:47 am
very intriguing and hopeful. This is the first I have heard of the pebble bed idea.
By Mary, Thursday, 28 September , 2006 @ 9:56 am
Even better, one of my most liberal friends spoke favorably of nuclear energy recently. Am always happy for any point of agreement from him! Easy to pass around ideas, and not trying to be a pessimist, but what about the next hurdle, the infamous NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard)? Let’s hear more about pebble beds.
By Gaius, Thursday, 28 September , 2006 @ 10:04 am
Update has links to several good sources on the concept and the project status.
By James Aach, Thursday, 28 September , 2006 @ 11:12 am
As mentioned recently in another comment, if you’d like an insider’s entertaining overview of current nuclear power in the US, see http://RadDecision.blogspot.com It’s free.