November 11th 2008
A Mini-Nuke In Your Backyard?
O
ur home electric bill last month was $1,000. That’s what two central AC units (even high-efficiency ones), laundry, hot water, flat-screen TVs and computers will do to you. (Not to mention the old refrigerator in the garage!) So I liked the sound of this energy solution – even if Mr. As Long As It’s Clean and Safe may not be too dazzled with it:
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. …
The reactors, only a few metres in diameter, will be delivered on the back of a lorry to be buried underground. They must be refuelled every 7 to 10 years. Because the reactor is based on a 50-year-old design that has proved safe for students to use, few countries are expected to object to plants on their territory. An application to build the plants will be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission next year.(The Guardian)
Hyperion claims to have 100 “firm” orders and says the $25 million mini-reactors should be able to produce power for as little as 10 cents a kilowatt.
Of course, it would take about 150 of them to power up OC, so there are obvious drawbacks. But in rural areas they could offer an interesting alternative, and in developing countries, they offer a cleaner alternative than coal. But doing the math, they cost $2,500 per household served; even if amortized over the planned 50-year life of the units, that $50/year would be a prohibitive cost in many economies – but nothing a little foreign assistance couldn’t achieve.
Standing in the way of emerging, hopeful technologies like this is one Barack H. Obama, who pandered to the green vote and stated his opposition to any nuclear reactor unless it can be shown to be safe (Hyperion says they’re safe, but Obama no doubt knows better.) and clean (Safe disposal deep under mountains doesn’t count).
Posted in Energy Policy, Nuclear Power, Uncategorized | 3 Comments » | |
Trackbacks/Pings
Leave a Reply
[The "Comment Box" is WYSIWYG except that you have to double space between paragraphs!
Type it the way you want it to look -- Just remember to double up those line spaces.]
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Comments
November 11th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
In terms of numbers, I’m not sure 150 power plants would be an impossibility for Orange County. In Los Angeles, there are at least 133 power distribution stations scattered throughout the city. If each one housed a mini power plant, that would supply 1.33 million households. That would make a serious dent in the power needs of the city.
In addition, the stated goal of supplying electricity for 10¢ per watt compares very favorably with the $1 per watt goal for solar power. Assuming a 50 year lifetime, or some 438,000 hours, we’d be looking at 0.22¢ per kilowatt hour. That’s pretty cheap power.
November 11th, 2008 at 6:29 pm
If they can pull it off. I remember when nuke-generated power was going to be so cheap there’d be no reason to have a meter!
November 11th, 2008 at 11:27 pm
If they are earthquake proof, sign me up.