Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

6 Comments

  1. It is very difficult to find out the cost of this reactor. Nuclear needs to compete on COST!!!

    I also wonder if MMR could follow the same process with the NRC that Oklo did?

  2. Commercial products need to compete on costs. This is a research tool that has many uses and produces numerous non existent capabilities for the university. Initial cost is just one of several measures of effectiveness.

  3. Ya, I thought you might have overlooked the possibility which is why I was sure you needed to be reminded… (grin).

    I did notice that expensive helium was being used rather than nitrogen. I wonder what the actual efficiency difference is between the two gases?

    I really like the MMR design that separates the nuclear heat generation from the various uses of that heat. I love the use of the Molten Salt for the transition. The use of LEU that is almost HEU is fantastic giving a 20 year run time between refueling.

    I especially like that the reactor will produce industrial level outputs in various directions. Brilliant!

    The fact that the controls will be aimed at a rotating student staff gives a lot of hope that the reactors can be used in places that are marginal or have a corrupt government or lower educational level.

    The type of fuel is a perfect fit for deepisolation disposal.

  4. That’s a very fair point on cost for this research reactor. At the same time, this research reactor is great advertising for Ultra Safe Nuclear and for students who would want to implement their tech in industrial applications. Future costs will be a key factor in the ability to make sales.

    I will love to hear if they need to qualify the TRISO fuel for several years in the same way that the graphic ball style TRISO has been undergoing testing. In other words, can they deliver the fuel?

Similar Posts

  • The Atomic Show #019 (MP3 – 16.3MB – 47min)

    This week Shane and I talked about recent nuclear developments in Canada, about the Ontario energy plan, and about technical choices and opportunities in the nuclear energy business in Canada. We discuss the potential use of CANDU technology for tar sands oil production and the potential use of SLOWPOKE reactors for district heating systems. During…

  • Atomic Show # 255 – Powerful fuels can enable human freedom and prosperity

    Some people who are not well versed in human history believe that fossil fuels are inherently evil, costly and harmful to human health. They ignore the side of the accounting ledger that documents the incredibly beneficial effects concentrated fuels have provided to overall human freedom, happiness, self actualization and reduction of dependence on nature. Those…

  • Responses to BRC on America’s Nuclear Future from fast reactor experts

    I am a subscriber to a Google group of fast reactor experts and advocates who strongly believe that the Clinton Administration’s decision to eliminate funding for the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR) project was an enormous political mistake that has had long term impacts on America’s national security and economic vitality. Recently, two members of the…

  • The Atomic Show #025 – Amarillo Power plans

    The big news since Shane and I last talked is the announcement by a Texan named George Chapman of the formation of Amarillo Power and its plans to build two Advanced Boiling Water Reactors (ABWR) near Amarillo Texas. Shane questions the location based on his frequent drives through the area. Water might be an issue,…

  • Atomic Show #271 – Improving Nuclear Cost and Schedule Performance

    One of the most persistent arguments against the rapid deployment of nuclear energy is that projects are too expensive and take too long to complete. Based on the performance of the few nuclear plants that have begun construction in the West during this century, it’s hard to disagree. But there is solid evidence from projects…