[Moontanman]

Is nuclear power the key to the energy needs of the future? New nuclear power plant designs with less shorter lived waste and small sizes may revolutionize the nuclear power idea. Hydrogen production needs intense power sources to supply the hydrogen necessary for a hydrogen economy and electricity for every one needs to be reliable and not Dependant on the weather or on manufacturing that leaks huge amounts of chemical pollution into the environment and depends of cheap labor from foreign countries where people are used up to profit their country. Nuclear can be the answer. Here two examples of the new face of nuclear energy.

Sustainable Nuclear Energy Moves A Step Closer

Toshiba Builds 100x Smaller Micro Nuclear Reactor

[Overdog]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

Is nuclear power the key to the energy needs of the future? New nuclear power plant designs with less shorter lived waste and small sizes may revolutionize the nuclear power idea. Hydrogen production needs intense power sources to supply the hydrogen necessary for a hydrogen economy and electricity for every one needs to be reliable and not Dependant on the weather or on manufacturing that leaks huge amounts of chemical pollution into the environment and depends of cheap labor from foreign countries where people are used up to profit their country. Nuclear can be the answer. Here two examples of the new face of nuclear energy.

Interesting!

I think is should definitely be one of the major ones, given the current state of affairs. Too bad we dropped the ball on this 30 years ago...

[LaurieAG]

Originally Posted by Overdog

Too bad we dropped the ball on this 30 years ago...

Hi Overdog,

Didn't the Russians build the first nuclear power reactor in 1954?

[jab2]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

Toshiba Builds 100x Smaller Micro Nuclear Reactor

Could someone give my some references to verify this, as most pages, even the Wikipedia one on the 4S reactor somehow trails back to a very small group of sources. It is suppose to be a joint venture between Toshiba and CRIEPI, but if you search CRIEPI's site for Toshiba, nothing along the line of nuclear reactors pop up. It is also said to be a sodium cooled reactor, but neither that trigger a hit on the CRIEPI site. There is also no reference that I could find on the Toshiba nuclear site.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by jab2

Could someone give my some references to verify this, as most pages, even the Wikipedia one on the 4S reactor somehow trails back to a very small group of sources. It is suppose to be a joint venture between Toshiba and CRIEPI, but if you search CRIEPI's site for Toshiba, nothing along the line of nuclear reactors pop up. It is also said to be a sodium cooled reactor, but neither that trigger a hit on the CRIEPI site. There is also no reference that I could find on the Toshiba nuclear site.

I found it on the New Scientist site ( I think) I'll check my sources.

[Moontanman]

search for the mini reactor


Blingo: Toshiba Builds 100x Smaller Micro...

Evidently you are not the only one having problems connecting the dots on this. Not sure why, if it was a fake then i' sure Toshiba would be all over it with denial but then maybe they are getting so much negative press on this they want it to die. Not sure, I hope it's not being killed.

New nuke stuff

Nuclear Power: Most Successful Fuel Performance Ever For US Advanced Gas Reactor Fuel

Project Aims To Make Sodium-cooled Nuclear Reactors Safe, Efficient

[jab2]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

search for the mini reactor


Blingo: Toshiba Builds 100x Smaller Micro...

Most of the links given for that search on blingo.com can be traced back to NextEnergyNews.com. One however is of interest and I quote from a letter, suppose to be from Toshiba's Corporate Communications Office:

Dear Mr. Allan,

Thank you for contacting Toshiba's Corporate Communications Office and for inviting us to your radio show interview program.

First of all, we came to know that there are a great number of references of "micro nuclear reactor" on google search, many of the which use Toshiba logo and 4S system image with unfamiliar name "micro nuclear", unfamiliar mark and unfamiliar information.

Toshiba have tried to trace where the confusing information comes from, but we have not been successful so far. (Actually, Toshiba is not the source of the information.)

In replying to your invitation for your radio program, we are afraid that we must cordially decline the opportunity this time.

Just for your reference, I hereby attach below the outline of the 4S syste, OUR next-generation, super-small nuclear reactor system, jointly developed by Toshiba and CRIEPI.

As you will see, Unfortunately, it is premature and we are not able to provide detail information about the 4S system at this stage since the expected date of commercialization of the systems is after the mid-2010s.

The 4S (Super-safe, Small, and Simple), jointly developed by Toshiba and the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI), a Japanese electric power industry R&D institute, is a new-type of highly compact nuclear power generation system with a power output of about 10-megawatt (MWe). Due to its innovative design and concept, the 4S can operate without refueling for as long as 30 years, greatly alleviating operating and maintenance costs and enhancing operational safety. This feature positions 4S as a promising alternative power solution for distributed, relatively small-scale power requirements, in regions with limited or no transmission capacity.

In 2007, Toshiba initiated the process for preliminary review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission of the 4S system, a next-generation, super-small nuclear reactor system, with a view to securing commercialization of the system.

The targeted date of commercialization of the 4S system is after the mid-2010s.

Thank you very much again for your invitation and understanding.

Sincerely,
Hiroko Mochida
Toshiba CCO

So it looks like the info for a 200Kw reactor is not correct.

If anyone would like to check with Toshiba personally, Me Mochida's contact details are:
Hiroko Mochida
Toshiba Corporation
Corporate Communications Office
International Media Relations Group
TOSHIBA CORPORATION 1-1
Shibaura 1-chome
Minato-ku
Tokyo 105-8001
Japan
Tel: +81-(3)3457-2105

[Overdog]

Originally Posted by LaurieAG

Hi Overdog,

Didn't the Russians build the first nuclear power reactor in 1954?

Nuclear reactor technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[REASON]

I hate to be a thorn, but I recently listened to an interview on Democracy Now! with Amory Lovins, who:

has been described as “one of the Western world’s most influential energy thinkers.” He’s also a leading opponent of nuclear power. Amory Lovins is co-founder, chair and chief scientist of Rocky Mountain Institute in Colorado. He is a consultant physicist, MacArthur Fellow, and recipient of numerous awards, including the Right Livelihood Award. Lovins advised the energy and other industries in countries around the world, including here in the US. He invented the hybrid Hypercar in ’91 and has written twenty-nine books, including Soft Energy Paths, Natural Capitalism, Small Is Profitable, and Winning the Oil Endgame.

Here is what he had to say on the Program.

Democracy Now! | Amory Lovins: Expanding Nuclear Power Makes Climate Change Worse

AMY GOODMAN: It’s good to have you with us. Well, talk about nuclear power. Why do you feel it’s not an option, given the oil crisis?

AMORY LOVINS: Well, first of all, electricity and oil have essentially nothing to do with each other, and anybody who thinks the contrary is really ignorant about energy. Less than two percent of our electricity is made from oil. Less than two percent of our oil makes electricity. Those numbers are falling. And essentially, all the oil involved is actually the heavy, gooey bottom of the barrel you can’t even make mobility fuels out of anyway.

What nuclear would do is displace coal, our most abundant domestic fuel. And this sounds good for climate, but actually, expanding nuclear makes climate change worse, for a very simple reason. Nuclear is incredibly expensive. The costs have just stood up on end lately. Wall Street Journal recently reported that they’re about two to four times the cost that the industry was talking about just a year ago. And the result of that is that if you buy more nuclear plants, you’re going to get about two to ten times less climate solution per dollar, and you’ll get it about twenty to forty times slower, than if you buy instead the cheaper, faster stuff that is walloping nuclear and coal and gas, all kinds of central plans, in the marketplace. And those competitors are efficient use of electricity and what’s called micropower, which is both renewables, except big hydro, and making electricity and heat together, in fact, recent buildings, which takes about half of the money, fuel and carbon of making them separately, as we normally do.

So, nuclear cannot actually deliver the climate or the security benefits claimed for it. It’s unrelated to oil. And it’s grossly uneconomic, which means the nuclear revival that we often hear about is not actually happening. It’s a very carefully fabricated illusion. And the reason it isn’t happening is there are no buyers. That is, Wall Street is not putting a penny of private capital into the industry, despite 100-plus percent subsidies.....

I am not very knowledgeable on this subject, but I think his concerns should be addressed in this thread.

[Turtle]

Originally Posted by REASON

I hate to be a thorn, but I recently listened to an interview on Democracy Now! with Amory Lovins, ...

I listened to him on Charlie Rose last week; I think he makes good points against nuclear power. Here's some of that:

Originally Posted by Amory Lovins

AMORY LOVINS: Again, it’s renewables, other than big hydro, plus co-generating electricity and heat together, usually in industry.

In 2006, micropower, for the first time, produced more electricity worldwide than nuclear did. A sixth of the world’s electricity is now micropower, a third of the new electricity. In a dozen industrial countries, micropower makes anywhere from a sixth to over half of all the electricity elsewhere. This is not a fringe activity anymore.

China, which has the world’s most ambitious nuclear program, by the end of 2006 had seven times that much capacity in distributed renewables, and they were growing it seven times faster. Take a look at 2007, in which the US or Spain or China added more wind capacity than the world added nuclear capacity. The US added more wind capacity last year than we’ve added coal capacity in the past five years put together.

And renewables, other than big hydro, got last year $71 billion of private capital; nuclear, as usual, got zero. It is only bought by central planners with a draw on the public purse. What does this tell you? I mean, what part of the story does anybody who take markets seriously not get?

Democracy Now! | Amory Lovins: Expanding Nuclear Power Makes Climate Change Worse


Good call Reasonator.