PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

A NEW GENERATION OF REACTORS??
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
teky



Joined: 11 Oct 2007
Posts: 8

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 1:50 pm    Post subject: A NEW GENERATION OF REACTORS?? Reply with quote

According to Guardian Peak Oil- the point at which half of global oil production has been consumed, and beyond which extraction goes into irreversible decline, and prices rise accordingly - is almost upon us. Many industry experts predict that Peak Oil will happen by 2020. Hence, should the UK consider a new generation of reactors as alternative energy sources?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13970
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:17 pm    Post subject: Re: A NEW GENERATION OF REACTORS?? Reply with quote

teky wrote:
According to Guardian Peak Oil- the point at which half of global oil production has been consumed, and beyond which extraction goes into irreversible decline, and prices rise accordingly - is almost upon us. Many industry experts predict that Peak Oil will happen by 2020. Hence, should the UK consider a new generation of reactors as alternative energy sources?
What will they use to extract, process and transport the uranium, I wonder? And to build these reactors?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7632

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Most of the energy needed for mining and processing fuel can be electrical - from nuclear reactors!
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RenewableCandy



Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Posts: 12469
Location: York

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peak Uranium (point at which all ore left is so impure/distant that you get a -ve EROEI), anybody?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7632

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 4:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RenewableCandy wrote:
Peak Uranium (point at which all ore left is so impure/distant that you get a -ve EROEI), anybody?

The jury's is out as far as I can tell - anything from a few decades to a few centauries to a few millenniums depending on what data you use and what assumptions are used.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13970
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Thu Nov 01, 2007 5:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
RenewableCandy wrote:
Peak Uranium (point at which all ore left is so impure/distant that you get a -ve EROEI), anybody?

The jury's is out as far as I can tell - anything from a few decades to a few centauries to a few millenniums depending on what data you use and what assumptions are used.
Depending upon how much your salary relies upon your data, doncha mean? <cynical grimace>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shaun Chamberlin



Joined: 04 Feb 2007
Posts: 115
Location: London

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
RenewableCandy wrote:
Peak Uranium (point at which all ore left is so impure/distant that you get a -ve EROEI), anybody?

The jury's is out as far as I can tell - anything from a few decades to a few centauries to a few millenniums depending on what data you use and what assumptions are used.


Apologies that this is a bit of a teaser, but our new Lean Guide to Nuclear Energy will help to shed some light on this, having looked at exactly why those data and assumptions are so varied. It will be available for free download once it is launched in a week's time (19th November).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7632

PostPosted: Sun Nov 11, 2007 5:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Thanks Shaun, really looking forward to it!
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
STG



Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 89

PostPosted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:40 pm    Post subject: Re: A NEW GENERATION OF REACTORS?? Reply with quote

emordnilap wrote:
teky wrote:
According to Guardian Peak Oil- the point at which half of global oil production has been consumed, and beyond which extraction goes into irreversible decline, and prices rise accordingly - is almost upon us. Many industry experts predict that Peak Oil will happen by 2020. Hence, should the UK consider a new generation of reactors as alternative energy sources?
What will they use to extract, process and transport the uranium, I wonder? And to build these reactors?


At the moment this is indeed oil. But it can be otherwise: plans exist to generate fuel (hydrogen, methanal, bio-crude,...) with very high temperature nuclear reactors. Therefor in the long run, nuclear will fuel those vehicles.

And If you wanna talk about enrichment: most enrichment facilities have some nuclear reactors close to them to generate the necessary electricity. Furthermore the depletion of depleted uranium can be higher due to new technologies such as ultra-centrifuge or AVLIS, where for AVLIS it even isn't necessary to convert to hex. So a lot of resources can be saved by doing more research...and the future is promising along that path
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mobbsey



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2243
Location: Banbury

PostPosted: Thu Feb 02, 2012 10:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

emordnilap wrote:
Interesting how many trolls on this board are appearing lately.

Some of us Malthusian trolls have been here since the beginning Wink

Edit by adam2, the troll/spam post refered to has now been deleted.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
RenewableCandy



Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Posts: 12469
Location: York

PostPosted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mobbsey you are not a troll you're a fecking Penguin with an identity crisis Very Happy Keep up the good work!
_________________
Soyez réaliste. Demandez l'impossible.
The Price of Time
BLOG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13970
Location: Houǝsʇlʎ' ᴉʇ,s ɹǝɐllʎ uoʇ ʍoɹʇɥ ʇɥǝ ǝɟɟoɹʇ' pou,ʇ ǝʌǝu qoʇɥǝɹ˙

PostPosted: Fri Feb 03, 2012 3:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RenewableCandy wrote:
Mobbsey you are not a troll you're a fecking Penguin with an identity crisis Very Happy Keep up the good work!


I've never quite worked out what mobbsey's avatar has around it - it might be a bandolier of some sort but at first glance it looks like a soprano saxophone, which is by far preferable.
_________________
"Buddhists say we come back as animals and they refer to them as lesser beings. Well, animals aren’t lesser beings, they’re just like us. So I say fụck the Buddhists" - Bjork
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mobbsey



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 2243
Location: Banbury

PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2012 10:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

teky wrote:
According to Guardian Peak Oil- the point at which half of global oil production has been consumed, and beyond which extraction goes into irreversible decline, and prices rise accordingly - is almost upon us. Many industry experts predict that Peak Oil will happen by 2020. Hence, should the UK consider a new generation of reactors as alternative energy sources?

The issue here is that the technologies which utilise oil are practically incompatible with electricity as an energy source. Yes, via intermediate fuels like hydrogen you could create liquid/gaseous fuels, but the inherent conversion losses are going to significantly inflate energy demand. Saying that nuclear is a solution to oil is therefore an excellent illustration of the author's perceived ignorance/gullibility of the audience.

More importantly for the nuclear debate amongst greenies, George Monbiot's article continues to demonstrate his ignorance of the nuclear issue. This is not "nuclear waste" we're talking about. Depleted uranium is a purified metal product. In terms of nuclear "waste", fast reactors do nothing to address the problem, and in fact, due to the necessity to reprocess fuel as part of the fast reactor fuel cycle, a fast reactor programme would significantly add to the "nuclear waste" problem. The waste stream produced by a fast reactor programme is far more radioactive and toxic than the depleted uranium currently kept in storage -- so why take an existing problem and make it worse?

More importantly, let's not forget that no one has yet managed to designed a reliable and commercial design for a fast reactor. The molten sodium design featured in this article was tried, and abandoned, previously in the UK and France. The Russians have a reactor using molten lead, but that's had its problems.

It's the same material science problem that plagues fusion -- making a material that can withstand a high neutron flux without disintegrating. The kind of high-temperature designs required for hydrogen production represent an even greater challenge because of the need to use pre-fabricated ceramic components, which apart from their expense haven't stood up well in existing use (I remember reading somewhere about submarine reactors, where the use of ceramic components in the reactor core created some problem or another).


clv101 wrote:
RenewableCandy wrote:
Peak Uranium (point at which all ore left is so impure/distant that you get a -ve EROEI), anybody?

The jury's is out as far as I can tell - anything from a few decades to a few centauries to a few millenniums depending on what data you use and what assumptions are used.

When it comes to uranium supply there's a lot of space cadets in the nuclear industry -- people who are very adept with slide rules and spreadsheets but to lack the practical common sense to understand the implications of what they propose. The paper I wrote back in 2005 on this issue is still pretty much up to date, and if anything has been upheld by later research (e.g. EWG's uranium study).


emordnilap wrote:
RenewableCandy wrote:
Mobbsey you are not a troll you're a fecking Penguin with an identity crisis

I've never quite worked out what mobbsey's avatar has around it - it might be a bandolier of some sort

I might not be a troll on PowerSwitch, but I am considered so elsewhere even though I'm saying precisely the same things!

The avatar is a much scaled-down version of the logo I had when I was part of electrohippies. The bandolier contains floppy discs -- which shows you how old the image is!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
biffvernon



Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 18551
Location: Lincolnshire

PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2012 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mobbsey wrote:
When it comes to uranium supply there's a lot of space cadets in the nuclear industry -- people who are very adept with slide rules...


I have a slide rule but am a bit old to be a cadet. I think it was in 1974 when a whistleblower (before they were invented) sent me a hand-written letter (before e-mails were invented) explaining that he was a scientist working on fusion research and detailing the amount of radioactive waste that fusion power would produce. The neutron flux on the copper in the magnets soon destroyed the structural integrity so would require ongoing replacement of components. He estimated a few tons of radioactive metal per month would be generated.
_________________
http://biffvernon.blogspot.co.uk/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
RenewableCandy



Joined: 12 Sep 2007
Posts: 12469
Location: York

PostPosted: Sat Feb 04, 2012 5:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Those floppy disks are deadly things you know...sharpen the edges and they turn into killer frizbees. A bit like a stackable version of OddJob's hat...
_________________
Soyez réaliste. Demandez l'impossible.
The Price of Time
BLOG
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> Nuclear Power All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group