It was in the sub basement. AGN designed in the fifties for students when nuclear was expected to be huge.torrid said:
What was the power output of the reactor in the Zachry garage?
Pookers said:
Thorium Salt Reactors IMO.
cecil77 said:
Brilliant. The containment vessel is essentially a thermos bottle.
Looks like no brainer encourage implementations.
If there's a downside I don't see it.
Ulysses90 said:cecil77 said:
Brilliant. The containment vessel is essentially a thermos bottle.
Looks like no brainer encourage implementations.
If there's a downside I don't see it.
The downside is that the NiScale SMR relies on High Assay Low Enriched Uradium (HALEU). HALEU as a fuel means that Russia is the only fuel source. This dependence o Russia is completely overlooked or ignored by the NRC and NuScale.
https://climatecrocks.com/2022/05/11/what-the-hell-is-haleu/
The molten salt reactor design uses Thorium which is far safer than a pressurized water reactor and requires no containment vessel. It is even more compact than the pressurized water SMRs.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2020/10/kirk-sorensen-updates-his-molten-salt-reactor-company.html
https://www.epri.com/research/products/000000003002005460
The NRC and AEC have been trying to kill the potential to ever have Thorium based MSRs by destroying US reserves of U233 that is necessary for the fuel cycle of Thorium MSRs
https://energyfromthorium.com/2022/05/01/u233-key/
Sen Tommy Tuberville has sponsored a bill to stop the funding in the federal budget for destroying U233 reserves.
https://www.tuberville.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/tuberville-marshall-introduce-bill-to-save-clean-safe-nuclear-power/
https://www-breitbart-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/07/17/tommy-tuberville-leads-push-american-energy-independence-safe-clean-thorium-reactors/amp/
light_bulb said:Ulysses90 said:cecil77 said:
Brilliant. The containment vessel is essentially a thermos bottle.
Looks like no brainer encourage implementations.
If there's a downside I don't see it.
The downside is that the NiScale SMR relies on High Assay Low Enriched Uradium (HALEU). HALEU as a fuel means that Russia is the only fuel source. This dependence o Russia is completely overlooked or ignored by the NRC and NuScale.
https://climatecrocks.com/2022/05/11/what-the-hell-is-haleu/
The molten salt reactor design uses Thorium which is far safer than a pressurized water reactor and requires no containment vessel. It is even more compact than the pressurized water SMRs.
https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2020/10/kirk-sorensen-updates-his-molten-salt-reactor-company.html
https://www.epri.com/research/products/000000003002005460
The NRC and AEC have been trying to kill the potential to ever have Thorium based MSRs by destroying US reserves of U233 that is necessary for the fuel cycle of Thorium MSRs
https://energyfromthorium.com/2022/05/01/u233-key/
Sen Tommy Tuberville has sponsored a bill to stop the funding in the federal budget for destroying U233 reserves.
https://www.tuberville.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/tuberville-marshall-introduce-bill-to-save-clean-safe-nuclear-power/
https://www-breitbart-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/07/17/tommy-tuberville-leads-push-american-energy-independence-safe-clean-thorium-reactors/amp/
Please site an article stating that NuScale requires HALEU. I would be interested in seeing that as the article you posted is discussing TerraPower.
NuScale's own website states 24 month fuel cycle at < 5% enrichment.
I have a hilarious joke about nuclear fusion. I'll tell it to you in 15 years.cecil77 said:
And of course there's fusion. 40+ years ago when I wrote my theses on fusion/fission hybrids, fusion was 50 years away. I assume it still is.
For what? For a traditional nuclear plant that could be 10-20 years or more. The one that just opened in Georgia took something like 40 years of approvals/planning, though it was 'approved' in 2012 and it took 10 full years from then to go live.B-1 83 said:
What's the time frame from when the first shovel of soil is turned until electricity flows into the grid?
It's work AT LANL on projects Lazar was involved with, and "think you have" is comical. They only have one LANL phone, and no bank cards for a reason. Been there; seen that. Many other QCL's, too.nortex97 said:
No, I don't have a level 3 job Q-clearance, nor do I work/live in Los Alamos.
Not sure what you are trying to convey in that post, other than some sort of classified insider info you think you have.
I really doubt Tokamak reactors are the future, and some folks are always dreaming about a product 10-20 years down the road, but those folks (like Zap energy) I think depend a lot on breakthroughs, and technology readiness levels that then allow for regulatory approvals which…are overly exuberant in their expectations as Greenspan would have said.
peacedude said:It's work AT LANL on projects Lazar was involved with, and "think you have" is comical. They only have one LANL phone, and no bank cards for a reason. Been there; seen that. Many other QCL's, too.nortex97 said:
No, I don't have a level 3 job Q-clearance, nor do I work/live in Los Alamos.
Not sure what you are trying to convey in that post, other than some sort of classified insider info you think you have.
I really doubt Tokamak reactors are the future, and some folks are always dreaming about a product 10-20 years down the road, but those folks (like Zap energy) I think depend a lot on breakthroughs, and technology readiness levels that then allow for regulatory approvals which…are overly exuberant in their expectations as Greenspan would have said.
The Small MR's are what will be the next 20-??? years until we figure out 115. CERN & LANL are spending $T as I type doing that R&D.
CERN was Rummy's $2.3T baby, as they were obtaining alien artifacts from Iraq as they were trying to better understand 115.
You don't have to go home, but you can't Romania.GeorgiAg said:
The first one is going to be built in Romania
https://energyindustryreview.com/power/first-small-modular-reactor-in-romania-to-be-installed-in-doicesti/
They're thinking less than 50 now, although a critical mark was hit.cecil77 said:
And of course there's fusion. 40+ years ago when I wrote my thesis on fusion/fission hybrids, fusion was 50 years away. I assume it still is.
Quote:
. . .
Scientists studying fusion energy at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California announced on Tuesday that they had crossed a long-awaited milestone in reproducing the power of the sun in a laboratory.
That sparked public excitement as scientists have for decades talked about how fusion, the nuclear reaction that makes stars shine, could provide a future source of bountiful energy.
The result announced on Tuesday is the first fusion reaction in a laboratory setting that actually produced more energy than it took to start the reaction.
. . .
Within the sun and stars, fusion continually combines hydrogen atoms into helium, producing sunlight and warmth that bathes the planets. In experimental reactors and laser labs on Earth, fusion lives up to its reputation as a very clean energy source.
There was always a nagging caveat, however. In all of the efforts by scientists to control the unruly power of fusion, their experiments consumed more energy than the fusion reactions generated.
That changed at 1:03 a.m. on Dec. 5 when 192 giant lasers at the laboratory's National Ignition Facility blasted a small cylinder about the size of a pencil eraser that contained a frozen nubbin of hydrogen encased in diamond.
The laser beams entered at the top and bottom of the cylinder, vaporizing it. That generated an inward onslaught of X-rays that compresses a BB-size fuel pellet of deuterium and tritium, the heavier forms of hydrogen.
In a brief moment lasting less than 100 trillionths of a second, 2.05 megajoules of energy roughly the equivalent of a pound of TNT bombarded the hydrogen pellet. Out flowed a flood of neutron particles the product of fusion which carried about 3 megajoules of energy, a factor of 1.5 in energy gain.
This crossed the threshold that laser fusion scientists call ignition, the dividing line where the energy generated by fusion equals the energy of the incoming lasers that start the reaction.
. . .
The successful experiment finally delivers the ignition goal that was promised when construction of the National Ignition Facility started in 1997. When operations began in 2009, however, the facility hardly generated any fusion at all, an embarrassing disappointment after a $3.5 billion investment from the federal government.
. . .
The main purpose of the National Ignition Facility is to conduct experiments to help the United States maintain its nuclear weapons. That makes the immediate implications for producing energy tentative.
Fusion would be essentially an emissions-free source of power, and it would help reduce the need for power plants burning coal and natural gas, which pumps billions of tons of planet-warming carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year.
But it will take quite a while before fusion becomes available on a widespread, practical scale, if ever.
"Probably decades," Kimberly S. Budil, the director of Lawrence Livermore, said during the Tuesday news conference. "The main purpose of the National Ignition Facility is to conduct experiments to help the United States maintain its nuclear weapons. That makes the immediate implications for producing energy tentative.
Fusion would be essentially an emissions-free source of power, and it would help reduce the need for power plants burning coal and natural gas, which pumps billions of tons of planet-warming carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year.
But it will take quite a while before fusion becomes available on a widespread, practical scale, if ever.
"Probably decades," Kimberly S. Budil, the director of Lawrence Livermore, said during the Tuesday news conference. "Not six decades, I don't think. I think not five decades, which is what we used to say. I think it's moving into the foreground and probably, with concerted effort and investment, a few decades of research on the underlying technologies could put us in a position to build a power plant."."
. . .
Quote:
Had this exact same conversation with a nuke Q-clearance holding LANL employee in 2020, and was told to look up Bob Lazar because "that's where we're headed 100%."
cecil77 said:
And of course there's fusion. 40+ years ago when I wrote my thesis on fusion/fission hybrids, fusion was 50 years away. I assume it still is.
