Nuclear power plants smaller than a garden shed and able to power 20,000 homes will be on sale within five years, say scientists at Los Alamos, the US government laboratory which developed the first atomic bomb.
The miniature reactors will be factory-sealed, contain no weapons-grade material, have no moving parts and will be nearly impossible to steal because they will be encased in concrete and buried underground.
The US government has licensed the technology to Hyperion, a New Mexico-based company which said last week that it has taken its first firm orders and plans to start mass production within five years. ‘Our goal is to generate electricity for 10 cents a watt anywhere in the world,’ said John Deal, chief executive of Hyperion. ‘They will cost approximately $25m [£13m] each. For a community with 10,000 households, that is a very affordable $250 per home.’
Perfectly safe, absolutely nothing to worry about.
Hmmm. I’m thinking zoning restrictions out the whazoo on this one. Here in Maine we shut our nuclear plant down because of the fears of the granola crowd. I can’t imagine what they will do with this. But I bet free thinkers in Montana or Texas will make use of this.
Fission for everyone coming up? I don’t know. This is not really something for the domestic market – who is going to make sure that the things do not overheat, refuel them and the dispose of the spent fuel and where and how?
Yet, somehow France manages to generate 80% of its electric power from nuclear power plants. How is it liberals (who are not widely known for their science/engineering intellectual credentials – mostly liberal arts types – liberal, get it) find so very much of the French way to be emulated, but can’t get on board with nuclear electrical power generation.
We have nuclear power for warships. Why not for homes? No sailors I know have complained. I think we need to try this kind of innovation and soon. I believe it can be made safe. It might be more like a battery – albeit a sophisticated one – that runs out in time. I’m not able to design it but I can imagine it. Just think how much we would not have it imagination didn’t try. Light bulbs, for instance. I say, wow! Keep after it.
#4 The French are superb engineers and scientists but I don’t believe that they would seal a reactor, bury it in concrete in the ground and go away and leave it. These things are not swimming pools or transformers – they should be carefully monitored hour by hour. I’m not saying don’t have nuclear power; I am saying that like the sea, don’t take it for granted and think it is just a safe toy – it is not.
#5 COLUMCIL “No sailors I know have complained”
I admit I have heard no complaints from the sailors of the Kursk.
I will listen to someone opposed to nuclear power if they are credentialed and qualified. If not, I usually suggest they go and get an education and then come back.
Stefano, where do you expect opponents of nuclear power to “get an education”? An American university??? Ha, ha, ha! Why do you think we’re dumber than the French? Our ivory tower pinheads have filled their graduates with such crap that real thinking is just too difficult. Now we have one of them ready to sit in the Oval Office.
munus semper bardus est
mundus semper bardus est
The world is always stupid
It remains to be seen how this will play out, but they are welcome to put one in my back yard. I won’t even charge rent. Once again, the invisible hand comes through while government is busy mandating solutions, none of which pass the sanity test.
Bring it on, man. I hope the five year horizon is accurate, because the US is headed for a capacity problem in ten, if not sooner.
#6. Pageantmaster,
I would not look to Russia to do our nuclear engineering. HOWEVER, to bring up the Kursk is a red herring. (If you will forgive the pun.) It was exploding ordinance that took down that sub — not the reactor.
#10. APB,
Sign me up for one too. HOWEVER, please give the Government credit for developing the technology.
#6 Pageantmaster: And what do you think of the US space program? Things happen. Bad things. But many more good things, too, don’t you think? Wisdom comes from carefully recovering when bad things happen; sometimes even death means resurrection. I’m not advocating racing to oblivion. We need Hyperion and others like them who can imagine and create.
I consider myself a passionate environmentalist. We recycle way more than we throw away. I got the church to start recycling – about time! Frequently preach on this theme.
Having said that… I think nuclear power (of the safe variety which Americans are very good at Three Mile Island notwithstanding) is one of the best ways to go. This sounds interesting and maybe not a bad er um stock investment opportunity.
Not so sure about 1 plant per 20,000 homes. Why not a larger unit that handles a town or small city? Why so many little plants and not a fewer large plants?
I’d have to have a reliable engineering report on this. Possibly the unit is too small to contain enough to generate a meltdown even if things go terribly wrong? At the moment we have, buried next to our home, a tank containing 500 gallons of LPG (liquid propane gas). That stuff could explode if something goes wrong, although of course the debris wouldn’t be radioactive. I’ve been hoping for a fuel cell, but a mini-reactor would suit me fine. We’ll put a solar collector on the roof, too.
Would the power to service 20,000 homes be very different from the power used by a nuclear submarine? We live in an uncertain world; I have seen reinforced concrete crack, earthquakes etc. I think it is foolhardy to have unmonitored units such as this which cannot be shut down in the event of emergency particularly if they are intended for use all over the world.
Pageantmaster, I’ll agree that I would rather see regional nuclear power plants operated under strict technical watch and security.
#13 COLUMCIL
“Pageantmaster: And what do you think of the US space program?”
I think it is wonderful. I watched man land on the moon as a youngster and thought it the most inspiring and incredible things I had ever seen.
And yet 17 people DIED in the US Space Program since the 1960’s. Surely that proves that the Space Program isn’t safe and should be cancelled at once?
{/sarcasm}
I am astonished that people who will hawkishly defend their liberties, watch what they eat and regularly go to the doctor and the dentist are yet prepared to give a free pass to mad scientists, whoever they work for and their commercial backers. Such is the respect we apparently have for technology. I also find it surprising that if someone wishes to dig a hole in their backyard, by a church or school, set a nuclear reaction going, cover it in concrete and wander off for 7-10 years they are completely comfortable.
What people may not realise is that the Chernobyl radiation spread across Europe even to Cumbria in England. It poisoned the uplands and meant that we could not eat the lamb. The long term effects have yet to be seen. I have met some of the children from the Chernobyl region – poor little things.
The destruction coming out of Chernobyl has been greatly overblown and hyped. The most dangerous thing affecting the people there was not radiation but fear of radiation.
Count me with Pageantmaster – I think it would be the height of folly to be selling and setting up backyard nuclear reactors. More nuclear power plants are needed – but not in the hands of private individuals in our neighborhoods. I can’t help being reminded of those little films we were shown in grade school – if a Cuban missile hits your community, just take shelter under your desk…..
#22 Chris Hathaway – thanks for your video link.
I agree that information should not be exaggerated. However I don’t think that worry had caused the kids’ hair to fall out.
We probably won’t really see what the effect of Chernobyl is until we are a lot older and can compare the statistical trends.
I’m not an engineer of any kind. I have read what seem to be reliable reports to the effect that the Chernobyl design was not a good one, and that the reactors in other parts of the world, and newer designs, are far, far safer. Perhaps Russian designs are poor — like their submarines, for instance.