Currently there are generation III reactors online commercially. gen III+ currently under construction, with generation IV predicted to come on line as early as 2020
You aren’t anti-science are you?
From the previously linked article.
Researchers around the world have been working frantically to develop an array of materials and fibers able to economically extract uranium from seawater. They have succeeded, as discussed at a conference devoted to the topic.
What about being anti-science?
I just know that scientific papers usually don’t translate to industrial scale. That comes from experience.
It’s still twice as expensive to extract from seawater which is why it isn’t currently being done, but A) the price should come down and B) if we chose to do it that way it would only add a very small increase to the price of electricity produced by nuclear plants, like a small fraction of a cent per KwH produced.
It’s not just a scientific paper, they have done it.
Same article, did you not bother to read it?
Gary Gill, deputy director of PNNL’s Coastal Sciences Division who coordinated the marine testing, noted, “Understanding how the adsorbents perform under natural seawater conditions is critical to reliably assessing how well the uranium adsorbent materials work.” In addition to marine testing, PNNL assessed how well the adsorbent attracted uranium versus other elements, how durable the adsorbent was, how buildup of marine organisms might impact performance, and which adsorbent materials are not toxic.
This marine testing shows that these new fibers had the capacity to hold 6 grams of uranium per kilogram of adsorbent in only about 50 days in natural seawater. A nice video of U extraction from seawater can be seen on the University of Tennessee Knoxville website.
It’s thought to be twice as expensive. It’s not anything until it actually gets to scale and we can see what the cost is.
Media loves to jump on these sorts of stories with a lot of promises and estimates. Few actually pan out the way they’re promised.
Again, yes, it’s twice as expensive, but it’s not a big deal because the price of fuel is a tiny fraction of the cost of nuclear power. It has been demonstrated to work in the real world and the current cost is known, there is no reason to believe it couldn’t be scaled up to meet demand.
It’s thought to be twice as expensive. The actual cost at scale is not known.
There is a big difference between the cost reported in the paper and media and the actual cost at scale.
Even if it’s ten times the predicted cost it would only add a less than a penny per KwH to the price of nuclear energy. And I can’t see any reason their cost estimates would be that far out of line.
How much do you know about the process to produce and deploy these? I suspect very little so I’m not terribly concerned if you can’t see any reason give your (and mine) lack of knowledgeable in the area. Im just going off trends.
Sorta like the promised cost of these nuclear power plants which always seems to balloon out of control. Which is why there are so few of them.
Right, the left drives up the cost of nuclear and and then argues, they’re too expensive.
you mean the next generation of evolved monkeys ?
We are closer to chimps than monkeys.
Doesn’t mean that monkeys won’t be next.
Nope. The diversion started when you took issue with me saying that “improvement” is a human construct. The China thing was just you acting out with your dander up.
This an open discussion. It is not possible to insert oneself between two other posters. We are all in this together, equally, with just as much right to voice an opinion on any matter posted as any other member … even you.
The problem at Fukushima was not the design of the nuclear plant, the problem was not anticipating a 15 meter tsunami inundating their emergency power generators and the lack of a plan B when they failed.
Yep. Remember how much more expensive photovoltaic power was when that technology first became viable?
No, it was an outdated design, a modern reactor could have survived it, they are walk away designs now. As in the power can go off line and they won’t melt down.
How exactly does that work?
I was under the impression that during a SCRAM you have to keep the coolant pumps running by any means necessary otherwise the core temp will rise beyond design limits due to decay heat in the core. That’s why they are connected to mains and have backup diesel or gas turbine generators on site so that the pumps will continue working.
The energy to run the pumps has to come from somewhere.