No new nukes for UK???

[Tim Watts]

I hope the 37% like being cold and dark.

It's the fact the rest of us will suffer if people listen to them that bothers me...

[Andy Cap]

Since when has it made a difference what the public thought about *any* issue ?

[tony sayer]

O dear!, we're well Doomed now .. to the dark and cold;-(((...

[Dave Liquorice]

Simple enough to do with the "smart meters" that we are all supposed to be getting. If you choose for an non-nuke tariff you also choose to have your power cut at zero notice, for an indeterminate period and no guaranteed "on" time. So a blustery day off for 5 mins on for

10 of again for 2 on for 3 off for 10 etc etc. Or a period of calm for a few days, no power for a few days... I bet all but the hardiest greenie would soon switch tariff.

Hopefully it's just a refelection of the knee jerk reaction and lack of real knowledge about the enrgy supply by the general public.

It would be sensible to have a review of the plans to see if any of the lessons learned from Fukushima are applicable to the UK and need to be applied. Passive shutdown core cooling is the obvious one that should be applied to any new plants.

[tony sayer]

Meanwhile the Chinese are developing a reactor -that- safe you can have one in your backyard;!...

[Dave Liquorice]

story different spin. Mejia don't you just luv'em...

[Rob]

Only for about half the year. It's not winter all the time, apparently

[John Stumbles]

to see something in a mainstream newspaper. And not a complete load of bollocks (from the little I know about the subject) which is also nice from a mainstream paper.

[Dave Liquorice]

It is an interesting article, and shows the influence of goverments and big business has on the development of new ideas or processes that don't fit in with the agendas of either.

I don't understand this bit though:

"Professor Robert Cywinksi from Huddersfield University said thorium must be bombarded with neutrons to drive the fission process. "There is no chain reaction. Fission dies the moment you switch off the photon beam. There are not enough neutrons for it continue of its own accord," he said."

Since when have photons been neutrons?

I know sod all, which is probably why I don't understand the above quote.

[Another Dave]

Protons not photons ;-) AIUI protons are produced in an accelerator, then fired at a lead target which produces the neutrons which drive the reaction.

Another Dave

[Another Dave]

Ooh! I love that idea. Maybe we could extend it so that they paid three times as much too.

Another Dave

[The Natural Philosopher]

OK, Now I am Not a Nuclear Physicist BUT what I think happens is that high energy gamma rays - photons - or maybe its electrons or protons alpha particles - bash into thorium. It is stable BUT if you smash it hard enough you get slightly more out than you put in, and a few neutrons too.

These an then be used to smash into other crap lying around - depleted uranium works I think, and when that goes pop, it fission decays into a smaller one if you hit it hard enough, with a net release of energy and the heavier it is, the easier it is, up to uranium-235 which is the heaviest naturally ocurring element. The rest we make.

Likewise in principle any element lighter than iron can be fusioned, to make a heavier one and that also gives of energy. Iron is the most nuclear stable of the lot.

Only uranium-235 as a natural element is capable of natural chain reactions. The heavier stuff has decayed..

(Ok radon which is as by product of uranium decay is also around, but only becasue teh uranim is)

BUT stuff that's nearly as heavy as uranium or uranium 238 (ordinary depleted shit) will split quite easily IF you give it enough excess energy, and then you do ALMOST get a chain reaction. Its like trying to burn anthracite on a bonfire, with a bellows it works, but mostly it goes out.

There's a lot more to it than that..moderators and coatings and stuff, but in principle it's megawatts in, gigawatts out, and if the megawatts fail the gigawatts stop almost instantly.

I'd say there would still be some decay products, just not as many.

Oddly enough, in a way its like fusion, in that you have to throw a lot of energy at it to get it going, but unlike fusion you don't need the immense pressures nor do o have the mmense temperatures sither.

here's what wiki says/ Protobns, not photons.

The energy amplifier uses a synchrotron or other appropriate accelerator (e.g. cyclotron, fixed-field alternating-gradient) to produce a beam of protons. These hit a heavy metal target such as lead, thorium or uranium and produce neutrons through the process of spallation. It might be possible to increase the neutron flux through the use of a neutron amplifier, a thin film of fissile material surrounding the spallation source; the use of neutron amplification in CANDU reactors has been proposed. While CANDU is a critical design, many of the concepts can be applied to a sub-critical system.[1][2] Thorium nuclei absorb neutrons, thus breeding fissile uranium-233, an isotope of uranium which is not found in nature. Moderated neutrons produce U-233 fission, releasing energy.

This design is entirely plausible with currently available technology, but requires more study before it can be declared both practical and economical.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Id sign up to an 'all nuclear tarriff like a shot

[Ghostrecon]

• with knobs on

[Tim Streater]

Protons. And they would be sent into e.g. a lead target to generate neutrons.

In fact the Indians are proposing to use a plutonium core in their reactors, which will produce the neutrons directly.

That should astonish the Greenies' weak nerves.

[geoff]

In message , Dave Liquorice writes

You get old, you put on a bit of weight ...

Something like that

[Dave Liquorice]

If you and Mr Streater say so but that isn't what the article said.

Dumb ass journalists, what ever happened to proof reading? Or clarifying apparent inconsistencies in quotes.

[Nightjar]

...

I saw a story today of skiers in Europe wearing face masks, because of the risk of fallout from Japan.

I think you will find that passively safe design has been a feature of new nuclear power plants for some time now.

Colin Bignell

[Peter Scott]

I think that the press must carry blame for the opposition. After the events in Japan, countries would be mad not to 'review' their reactors. Some of the media are using this word to mean 'think again' instead of its correct meaning of 'make sure we're OK'.

This really couldn't have come at a better time. We need, at the least, some new reactors, and this will force the ones ordering them to make sure the designs that they are ordering are up to it, with respect to safety.

[The Natural Philosopher]

As long is its a balanced intelligent review, I am all for it.

'balanced and intelligent' and 'environmental lobby' don't however fit in the same sentence.

Not sure where she got it from but my wife was peering at a blog and muttering 'if they had educated the kids to do basic cost benefit analysis and science, instead of climate changes studies and teaching them how to screw in a CFL...'