7 ms·
White House Accelerates Development of Mini Nuclear Reactors
- kk58 6y agoWhat's with the sudden activity ins space related defence initiatives. What's the angle here? Colonization of space aka the expanse?
- robnado 6y agoPeople want to start mining asteroids for their precious metal content.
- Valgrim 6y agoYou can also mine large amount of non-precious metals and keep it in space as construction material for large orbital structures.
- londons_explore 6y agoI could see mini nuclear reactors working out cheaper for power generation than factory scale ones. Sure, nuclear is far more efficient at scale from a physics and engineering perspective, but this is probably outweighed by the political costs of spending billions of dollars to relearn how to build nuclear facilities. If on the other hand we can make container scale reactors and just truck them into places, we can deploy power anywhere with very little political cost.
- m463 6y agoI think of Elon Musk's emphasis on the machine that makes the machine is probably what we want to make nuclear plentiful and affordable. I like the idea of being able to move the parts of a reactor from the factory to a site for assembly. But honestly, the idea of a container-scale / portable reactor gives me the heebie jeebies. An operational reactor that can be easily moved is something that will go wrong, someday, somehow.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Beached 6y agodissolving relations with Russia, china increasing space capabilities, and few if any western friendly country capable of preserving western allies space interests means US investment and ramp up. the only other capable space program to fill the void and protect western allies interests is the EU, except they are farther behind and are showing no interest, and instead are insistent that there is little need and that china and Russia will never even dream of restricting access or hindering space activities.
- tmccrary55 6y agoDirected energy weapons? Rail gun?
- mchusma 6y agoIt's been an exciting year or so for nuclear in the US. (1) the democratic party switched stances to support nuclear energy (2) the US allowed several small nuclear reactor designs to move forward (3) fusion research got extra funding (4) pushing some work from government to private sector (5) encouraging NASA and the DOD to cooperate on small reactor work. It's reasonably likely that in 10 years we have nuclear energy that is near the cost of other energy sources, which has always been it's blocker.
- DataWorker 6y agoThat assumes the incentives and policies do not shift. Is that a good assumption? I hear very antinuclear sentiments all the time.
- baybal2 6y ago> It's reasonably likely that in 10 years we have nuclear energy that is near the cost of other energy sources, which has always been it's blocker. You will not get nuclear energy that is near the cost of other energy sources in 10 years because they route they chose to achieve it is incorrect. They can't get the cost of nuclear power down by making reactors smaller, because doing so increases its cost, not reduces. I can't fathom how anybody with above high school education can come with an idea easily provable wrong in 10 minutes of work on handheld calculator. When you see somebody obviously aware of such mistakes pretending that there aren't, don't assume goodwill.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- m463 6y agoI'm not saying you're wrong, but making fewer bigger reactors doesn't seem right either.
- baybal2 6y agoNo, it is right, because the alternative is not more smaller reactors, but more smaller hydrocarbon fueled power stations. You need multi-gigawatt reactors to compete with fossil fuel boilers.
- luxuryballs 6y agoThis makes me want to go binge Space Engineers.
- ncmncm 6y agoAnother, better title would be "Taxes Subsidize Nukes. Again." The amounts are small compared to what has been flushed down the Magnetic- and Inertial-confinement Fusion drains, but galls when the costs of renewables are still in free-fall. There is no scenario, on this planet, where fission or fusion will be preferred on a rational basis of cost per unit output. If these things were commercially viable, they would already be in service, but they get less viable with each passing day. This must be the last stop to jump on the nuke gravy train before the tracks start being pulled up behind it to use building wind-turbine towers.