A small Reactor Problem or Solution?

DIVFONT face=GeorgiaFONT color=#ff0000FONT color=#000000STRONGFONT color=#ff0000These are just a short answer to a three decade problem – Not a solution/FONT/STRONG.nbsp;/FONTSTRONGFONT color=#0000ffWhile Keithnbsp;puts a good summary on small scale benefits – the waste, cost and regulatory burden just spreads the liability, risk andEM answers why the NRC is hesitant on this./EM/FONTEMnbsp;/EM/STRONG/FONT/FONTFONT face=GeorgiaSTRONGFONT color=#ff0000/FONT/STRONG/FONT/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaSTRONGFONT color=#ff0000/FONT/STRONG/FONTnbsp;/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaSTRONGFONT color=#ff0000WSJ…nbsp;are tiny nukes the answer? /FONT/STRONG/FONT/DIV DIVFONT face=Georgianbsp;/DIV DIV style=”PADDING-RIGHT: 8px; FLOAT: left; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 8px; WIDTH: 195px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 8px”IMG style=”MARGIN: 0px; WIDTH: 195px; HEIGHT: 432px” height=432 alt=bwnuke_cs_20090611101853.jpg hspace=6 src=”http://s.wsj.net/media/bwnuke_cs_20090611101853.jpg” width=195 vspace=6 border=0/DIV/FONT DIVFONT face=GeorgiaBabcock amp; Wilcox announced a potentially big change in the energy landscape yesterday: A 125-megawatt nuclear reactor that the company says can be built faster and cheaper than bigger reactors./FONT/DIV DIVFONT face=Georgia size=2/FONTnbsp;/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaThe so-called modular reactor is about one-tenth the size of traditional nuclear plants. The reactors could be used alone?such as to power big factories or oil-field installations?or stacked together to make up a full-sized power plant./FONT/DIV DIVnbsp;/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaWhile the small reactor is a departure from decades of nuclear technology, it’s precisely the new reactor’s smaller size that adds up to potentially big advantages, say the company and plenty of nuclear-power boosters./FONT/DIV DIVFONT face=Georgia size=2/FONTnbsp;/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaIn a nutshell: The smaller reactors can be built in U.S. factories, then shipped to where they’re needed. That gets around many of the roadblocks to building big nuclear reactors, such as a bottleneck on reactor core vessels made only in Japan./FONT/DIV DIVFONT face=Georgia size=2/FONTnbsp;/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaBabcock amp; Wilcox say the new reactor, which uses existing technology, will also be as cheap or cheaper than existing plants?”less than $5,000 per megawatt.” That compares favorably to recent cost estimates for large-scale nuclear construction./FONT/DIV DIVnbsp;/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaWhat about nuclear waste? The new reactors can’t solve the riddle of Yucca Mountain?but are equipped to store their spent fuel on site and underground for the entire 60-year operating life. Babcock amp; Wilcox also says the new reactors, which use light-water technology, could use a variety of fuel if advances are made in thorium-powered nuclear reactors, for instance./FONT/DIV DIVnbsp;/DIV DIVFONT face=GeorgiaOne potentially big hurdle: Government certification. No small nuclear reactors have been certified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Bamp;W said they expect certification by 2011, on track to build the first plant by 2018. But the NRC?squeezed by budget cuts and staff shortages?is pessimistic it will be able to review the new design./FONT/DIV DIVFONT face=Georgia/FONTnbsp;/DIV DIVA href=”http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/06/11/honey-i-shrunk-the-reactor-small-nukes-arrive/”FONT face=GeorgiaRead more by Keith Johnson (HT) Wall Street Journal – EnviroBlog/FONT/A/DIV