All US reactors worked using analog technology before the digital conversion.

Electricity affects nearly every aspect of modern life, from the food supply to health, transportation, housing and emergency services. Lives depend on reliable access to electrical power and nuclear power plants generate a fifth of all U.S. electricity. It would take decades to make up their loss… //

And in 2010, after spending $15 billion, the Yucca Mountain project was stopped over still-debatable concerns of possible radiation leakage into groundwater.

This occurred despite a nonpartisan, 1999 US Geological Survey analysis that concluded continuous monitoring would provide “enough confidence for [the] safety and stability” of the facility. An additional, independent safety evaluation of the site, sponsored by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in 2015 concluded, "DOE’s proposed [Yucca mountain] repository as designed will be capable of safely isolating used nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste for the one-million-year period.”

If the goal is finding the perfect site — a completely risk-free facility, good for millions of years — then no site is viable, not even the already-built Yucca Mountain. It’s the classic example of “better is the enemy of the good enough.” As a result, nuclear waste is still scattered at 60 different locations instead of stored safely at one.

The problem is unique to the U.S., as the vast majority of countries dispose their nuclear waste in deep geological repositories; a small minority reprocesses their waste, but this raises proliferation concerns.

The time to dispose of nuclear waste is now, and stop kicking that can down the road — either by reopening Yucca Mountain or by building other sites. Because when something does happen that compromises our current dispersed system of storing waste, then by past experience our nation will overreact and seek out a quick, ill-thought out solution. That's when a really disastrous scenario may occur. ///

Not disposing of it means it's still available for reuse. There is still a lot of energy in that "waste", which is really only partially used fuel, not waste.

Standard PWR and BWR are almost the most inefficient method of extracting the potential energy or of uranium -- they only use about 1%, as opposed to about 30% for MSR (molten salt reactor) like Thorcon.

Hydrogen to Heysham (H2H) will test an innovative use for nuclear energy, says Xavier Mamo, Director of R&D at EDF Energy. //

The Hydrogen to Heysham (H2H) project led by EDF Energy will use a different method. We want to test the potential of using electrolysers connected to the Heysham nuclear power station to split water molecules into hydrogen and oxygen. Renewables energy could be used to produce the gas in the same way, but we believe the constant supply of low carbon power from nuclear will be more cost-effective.

A first-of-its-kind project spearheaded by Exelon, the nation’s largest nuclear power generator, and Norwegian firm Nel Hydrogen could demonstrate an //

Proton exchange membrane electrolyzer //

nuclear plant hydrogen self-supply would still be a considerable achievement, Otgonbaatar noted. Hydrogen is mainly used on-site in nuclear plants in two places, he said: “Similar to fossil plants, hydrogen is used to cool the generator as a coolant gas, and second—unique to nuclear plants—is that hydrogen is used to control the chemistry of the coolant water in both pressurized water and boiling water reactors.”

One of the latest to emerge is the SLIMM – the Scalable LIquid Metal–cooled small Modular reactor. This is a fast reactor that uses liquid sodium (Na) to cool and exchange heat, and that generates 10 to 100 MW for many years, even decades, without refueling, depending on what power level is desired. It’s very smaller version, the VSLIMM, generates 1 to 10 MW. //

“Fully passive operation with no single point failure, cooled by natural circulation of sodium during operation and after shutdown, high negative temperature reactivity feedback and redundant control and safety shutdown, walk-away safe, long life without refueling, factory fabricated, assembled and sealed, shipped to the construction site by rail, truck, or barge, installed below ground to avoid direct impact by missiles or aircraft, and mounted on seismic oscillation bearings to resist earthquakes.”

Here on Earth, the ability to generate electricity is something we take for granted. We can count on the sun to illuminate solar panels, and the movement of air and water to spin turbines. //

Since 2015, NASA and the United States Department of Energy have been working on the Kilopower project, which aims to develop a small, lightweight, and extremely reliable nuclear reactor that they believe will fulfill this critical role in future off-world exploration. Following a series of highly successful test runs on the prototype hardware in 2017 and 2018, the team believes the miniaturized power plant could be ready for a test flight as early as 2022. Once fully operational, this nearly complete re-imagining of the classic thermal reactor could usher in a whole new era of space exploration. //

it’s more like an evolved version of the radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) which NASA has used to power everything from the Voyager missions to the Curiosity rover. There’s no dangerous high pressure steam, finicky turbines to spin, or coolant pumps to fail. Thermal energy is passively carried away from the reactor core using sodium-filled heat pipes, which lead to the “hot” side of a Stirling engine array. With a large deployable radiator on the other side, the Stirling engines would use the temperature differential to produce reciprocal motion that can drive a small generator.

The Kilopower has been designed as a self-regulating system where everything happens automatically and without the need for external control. There would naturally be sensors for basic diagnostics, for example checking temperatures at key points in the system, the RPMs of the Stirling engines, and the output of the generators. But outside of monitoring for these possible signs of trouble, the human crew could largely ignore the Kilopower and go about their mission.

Nuclear Energy in the 21st Century is an authoritative resource for educators, students, policy-makers and interested lay-people alike. With balanced and accessible text, it provides:

An introduction to nuclear science

A valuable account of many aspects of nuclear technology, including industry applications

Answers to public concerns about nuclear power including safety, proliferation, radiation and waste

Up-to-date data and references

Now in its fourth edition, the text of Nuclear Energy in the 21st Century builds on seven editions of Nuclear Electricity(1978-2003). Since the first edition of Nuclear Electricity, the intention has been to get behind the controversies and selective arguments, and present facts about energy demand and how it is met, in part, by nuclear power.

The establishment of an organisation responsible for the construction and operation of Ghana's first nuclear power plant has been approved by the country's cabinet, Vice President Mahamudu Bawumia said this week. //

According to World Nuclear Association, Ghana's 2016 electricity production of 13 TWh comprised fossil fuels (7 TWh) and hydro (6 TWh). The government announced in 2007 that it planned to introduce nuclear power on energy security grounds, and in 2012 the energy ministry set up the Ghana Nuclear Power Programme Organisation. This is responsible for developing legal and regulatory frameworks, and coordinating the activities of stakeholders.
 

Akademik Lomonosov, which Rosatom describes as the world's first floating nuclear power plant and the world's northernmost nuclear power installation, today set sail from Murmansk for its final destination of Pevek. //

Akademik Lomonosov is 144 metres in length, 30 metres wide and has a displacement of 21,000 tonnes. It has a twin KLT-40 reactor system.

The US Nuclear Regulatory Commission has certified the Korean-designed Advanced Power Reactor 1400. The certificate states that the NRC finds the APR-1400 design fully meets US safety requirements. //

Kepco noted the APR-1400 is the first "non-US type" reactor design to be certified by the NRC. The US regulator has already certified five other standard reactor designs: General Electric's Advanced Boiling Water Reactor (ABWR); Westinghouse's System 80+, AP600 and AP1000; and, GE's Economic Simplified Boiling Water Reactor. It is also reviewing applications to certify Mitsubishi's US Advanced Pressurised Water Reactor (US-APWR) and the NuScale small modular reactor. NRC staff are also reviewing an application to renew the ABWR certification.

In October 2017, European Utility Requirements - a technical advisory group for European utilities on nuclear power plants - approved the APR1400 reactor design.

Can an emerging generation of small-scale reactors overcome Australians' resistance to nuclear power? //

The next generation of nuclear reactors – the ones that could finally overcome Australia's resistance to power by fission – are so small they will abide by road regulations.

Rolls-Royce is designing a reactor that will be 4.5m wide to fit under the 4.95m British road height limit. They would be built in a factory and transported to customers by truck or

IDAHO FALLS — New nuclear reactor technology is being developed here in Idaho, and Idaho Falls Power wants a piece of it. NuScale Power is developing a new kind of nuclear reactor they believe will be safer, smaller and cheaper than current reactors. Idaho Falls Power is hoping to take advantage of the new reactors …

UpLateAgain • 24 minutes ago

Russians have an overall terrible record when it comes to dealing with fissionable material. The safe locks and redundancies they put into their control systems are frequently not sophisticated, poorly engineered, and often poorly maintained. Their technicians too frequently are nearly uneducated on the systems... just functionaries told to follow procedures without knowing what exactly they are doing. They have lakes where several decommissioned nuclear subs are sitting rotting away because the power plants went bad and they are now too radioactive to even take apart and secure. Nearly half of Russia's 183 decommissioned nuclear submarines have yet to be dismantled or their reactors and on-board fuel rods made safe. When the Soviet Union fell, the new Russian government contracted the US government and some private security firms to provide security on stockpiles of Russian nuclear warheads until they were settled out, because they didn't trust Russians generals wouldn't steal them to sell in international arms trade. So far, nine Russian nuclear subs have sunk or been scuttled at sea because of reactor failures. And the cancer rate among Russian nuclear submarine sailors is something like ten times normal.... and that's for the ones who survived 13 months of conscripted service in the sub fleet and then got out.

Russians just don't do high tech precision well, and you need that with something as dangerous as nuclear assets.

“It’s not every day that you see a research #nuclear reactor pulse! https://t.co/rNxhug931i” //

A sonic boom happens when a plane travels faster than the speed of sound. The #Cherenkov light is similar: the blue glow happens when particles travel faster than the speed of light in water.

Cherenkov light is the optical equivalent of a sonic boom. //

Cherenkov light appears when a charged particle travels through matter faster than light can. This effect is the optical equivalent of a sonic boom, which occurs, for example, when a jet travels faster than the speed of sound.

But how can a particle go faster than light without violating the laws of physics? The speed of light in a vacuum is the ultimate speed limit: 300,000,000 meters per second. It's thought that nothing can travel faster.

However, light slows down when it goes through water, glass and other transparent materials—in some cases by more than 25 percent. Hence a particle can slip through material faster than light does, while at the same time staying below the speed of light in a vacuum.

When this happens, a particle emits bluish Cherenkov light, which spreads out behind it in a hollow cone that is shaped like the cone of a sonic boom. This light gives the water surrounding a nuclear reactor core its distinctive blue glow.

Scientists build telescopes to gather Cherenkov light emitted by cosmic-ray and gamma-ray showers in the Earth's atmosphere. Neutrino physicists embed hundreds of light-sensitive detectors in large volumes of water and ice to record Cherenkov light from muons and electrons, which emerge when neutrinos crash into atoms. The Cherenkov light recorded with such devices helps scientists identify particles and determine their energies.

The light is as beautiful as it is eerie and there's some fascinating science behind its origins. And yes, it also looks like the birth of Godzilla. //

Cherenkov radiation

Three Mile Island turned the nation against nuclear energy. Now the notorious complex is closing just as some say it still has a role to play. //

the complex, which sits 100 miles west of Philadelphia along the Susquehanna River, the other unit is one of the region’s biggest power sources, churning out electricity for 45 years without incident. Next month, that too will come to an end. Plant owner Exelon Corp. is scheduled to shutter the entire facility, 15 years before its license is set to expire. //

Compared with the release of radiation at Chernobyl, which the United Nations estimated in 2005 may eventually kill 4,000 people, the accident at Three Mile Island was minor. Only a small amount of radioactive material was released, and it was later determined that the 2 million people in the surrounding area were exposed to less radiation than they would have received from a chest X-ray. //

Today, nuclear energy in the U.S. is at the center of a complicated debate. While cheap gas has upended the economics of operating reactors, whether to shut one down involves more than the bottom line.

U.S. President Donald Trump has taken steps to support unprofitable nuclear and coal power plants, citing national security issues because they generate electricity around the clock. Some of his efforts have been rejected by federal energy regulators.

Meanwhile, environmental groups have mixed feeling about reactors. Some are concerned about the accumulating nuclear waste that will remain deadly for thousands of years, as well as the potential for mishaps. Still, others are alarmed by the intensifying threat of climate change tied to the burning of fossil fuels—even cheap kinds such as natural gas.

Either way, Three Mile Island won’t be part of the future of American energy. Exelon will be switching off Unit 1 in a few weeks, and a decommissioning company is in talks to begin dismantling Unit 2. //

shuttering reactors for purely financial reasons ignores their ability to produce clean energy. New plants are hugely expensive to build; once shut, old plants cannot be brought back on line.

Scepticism and safety concerns persist before vessel begins 4,000-mile Arctic journey //

Russia is planning to dispatch the vessel, its first floating nuclear power station, on a 4,000-mile journey along the Northern Sea Route, in a milestone for the country’s growing use of nuclear power in its plans for Arctic expansion.

If all goes to plan, the Akademik Lomonosov will be towed to the Arctic port of Pevek this month, where it will use its twin nuclear reactors to provide heat and energy to homes and support mining and drilling operations in Russia’s mineral-rich Chukotka region.

Russia claims the project will provide clean energy to the remote region and allow authorities to retire an ageing nuclear plant and a coal-burning power station. //

“Our real concern is the reason why they’re making this floating plant – they want to sell this technology to countries like Sudan,” she said in a telephone interview.

“I’m really concerned that such nuclear technologies can be used in countries where levels of nuclear radiation safety, regulation and standards of safety are not on such a high level as in Russia. What will they do with spent nuclear fuel? How will they react in case of emergencies?”

“If this had been a very good way of providing electricity to the north coast of Siberia then we would have seen more of them under construction … I think this is going to be a one-of-a-kind project,” he said.

Rosatom officials declined to say how much the Akademik Lomonosov cost, although they did say they expected prices to fall as further plants were built. In 2016, an official connected to the project said the floating nuclear power station cost an estimated 21.5bn roubles (£274m), and the necessary infrastructure would cost an additional 7bn roubles.

The International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor is set to launch operations in 2025 //

Achieving controlled fusion reactions that net more power than they take to generate, and at commercial scale, is seen as a potential answer to climate change. Fusion energy would eliminate the need for fossil fuels and solve the intermittency and reliability concerns inherent with renewable energy sources. The energy would be generated without the dangerous amounts of radiation that raises concerns about fission nuclear energy. ///

As if the sun doesn't spew ionizing nuclear radiation? Fusion creates more, and more dangerous ionizing radiation than fission, it just doesn't leave behind all the radioactive actinides that fission creates.

This is a scientific journal, not USA Today. Don't be lazy.

Throughout my hobby and career stages as an atomic energy writer and commentator, I have been writing about the importance of applying one of the wisest mantras of responsible environmentalism to radioactive materials – Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle.

It’s almost always irresponsible to casually use any material once and then treat it in a way that makes it difficult or impossible for that material to perform any other function or serve anyone else’s needs. It’s especially irresponsible and wasteful to use rare materials with special physical properties in that selfish and careless manner.

It’s a fact that has been gradually forgotten – or perhaps purposefully submerged – over time, but radioactivity is a rare and incredibly useful property.

Its discovery was so fascinating that it dominated the field of physics for several generations. Radium, one of nature’s more intense but also long lasting sources of radioactive emanations (to use a common term from the early days) became the world’s most valuable material. In 1930 a gram of radium would cost a customer (manufacturer, hospital, university or research institution) $250,000. That’s nominal, not inflation adjusted 1930s era dollars.

Radium didn’t command such a lofty price just because it was rare and difficult to isolate. It was valuable because it could perform important functions that no other material could perform. Its price was also supported by the fact that radioactivity, the natural property that gave radium its superpowers, wasn’t easy for humans to recreate or mimic. //

Radioactive waste isn’t a solvable problem

There is no solution to radioactive waste, any more than there is a solution to feces production. Managing wastes is an ongoing enterprise that includes numerous steps, processes, equipment and inventions. It should be addressed with the same philosophies that have helped mitigate the costs and impacts of other sources of wastes.

We don’t manage feces production by starving people or animals or by preventing or eliminating their existence. Both integrated petroleum companies and meat packers have historically addressed stubborn waste problems by using science and ingenuity to turn byproducts of their processes into new products.

Gasoline was a waste stream during the early days of Standard Oil – it was burned off after the production of the more immediately valuable kerosene. //

Don’t expect final solutions. Allow progress, innovation and creativity

The nuclear waste issue will never go away. It’s not fundamentally different from any other waste issue that is a permanent part of all productive processes, both natural and man-made.

It is an issue, however, that can be addressed and handled with ever improving steps, processes and equipment. The most straightforward way to enable the issue to shrink into a routine part of a valuable industrial activity is to make modest changes in the rules that make the government the owner of the material.

It’s the government’s job to provide oversight. It should establish and enforce rules that provide a reasonable assurance of adequate protection, but it should allow multiple entities the freedom to devise useful parts of a functional enterprise.

Like all other successfully handled – but never solved – waste challenges, the used nuclear fuel enterprise should be governed by the principles of reduce, reuse and recycle.