10 Comments

  1. The water quotas between Canada and US are going thru rough negotiations. In Beijing a barrel of water goes for 437$. The US only pays Canada 28$ per barrel. Next wars will be fought over water. Mark my words.

  2. Water, the blue gold and the provinces of Canada have more than 20 percent of drinking water supplies on the planet.

  3. Excuse me while I yawn. This group has been all smoke and no fire for years now. As well they are not in a position to compete with Toshiba or Babcock & Wilcox in this field; the pockets of the later two are just too deep.

    While I do support the notion that small enterprise should be able to enter the nuclear reactor market, the fact is that the regulatory atmosphere makes it almost impossible to make headway. Large corporations can afford to wait it out while they work the system, smaller entities cannot.

  4. Probably because the export rules wont allow them to take the tech outside the US. The HPM is based on a Los Alamos concept.

  5. How much electricity would be required from such a reactors to make water and how much electricity would then be leftover to sell on the market?

  6. Daniel:

    If done correctly you wouldn’t need any of the reactors electricity except for pumping maybe. The waste heat from the reactor would be more than sufficient to drive a desalination system.

  7. Well, Rod was looking for excitement in liaison with nuclear. The world is very thirsty (some are actually dying) and the US is in a net deficit of drinking water and must import enormous quantities.

    I sincerely think that there is a niche market for SMRs: energy and drinking water. This is how I would position this technology.

    Developed countries and the third world should line up and get the frigging message.

  8. The key is for people to realize that the nuclear energy systems will have an exceedingly low chance of actually contaminating the water (which is obvious to people who actually know about nuclear power).

  9. Perhaps the technology originated at Los Alamos National Labs and regulations won’t allow it to be taken out of the country

Comments are closed.

Similar Posts

  • Terrestrial Energy Announces Plans To License Their Integral Molten Reactor In The U.S.

    Yesterday, Terrestrial Energy USA (TEUSA) informed the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) that they planned to begin pre-license application discussions with a goal of being ready to file a design certification application no later than Oct 2019. Here is a brief video that provides an overview of Terrestrial Energy‘s Integral Molten Salt Reactor (IMSRTM TEUSA…

  • A Path from Coal to Nuclear is Being Blazed in Wyoming

    Many of those who care about finding solutions to the physical distress that our climate is experiencing, as reported on this week in a landmark 1,300 page report by the IPCC‘s Sixth Assessment Working Group 1 (Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis), are not looking at Wyoming. But based upon the announcement made in…

  • Merchants of Doubt about nuclear energy

    The vast majority of technical specialists in the field of energy production favor the use of nuclear energy and recognize that it is a safe source of power that produces no direct greenhouse gases. Even when measured on a complete lifecycle basis, CO2 emissions from nuclear energy are roughly equal to the emissions from wind…