"Toshiba Builds 100x Smaller Micro Nuclear Reactor"
 

How much, and where do I sign up?

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1198091942.jpg

Toshiba has developed a new class of micro size Nuclear Reactors that is designed to power individual apartment buildings or city blocks. The new reactor, which is only 20 feet by 6 feet, could change everything for small remote communities, small businesses or even a group of neighbors who are fed up with the power companies and want more control over their energy needs.

The 200 kilowatt Toshiba designed reactor is engineered to be fail-safe and totally automatic and will not overheat. Unlike traditional nuclear reactors the new micro reactor uses no control rods to initiate the reaction. The new revolutionary technology uses reservoirs of liquid lithium-6, an isotope that is effective at absorbing neutrons. The Lithium-6 reservoirs are connected to a vertical tube that fits into the reactor core. The whole whole process is self sustaining and can last for up to 40 years, producing electricity for only 5 cents per kilowatt hour, about half the cost of grid energy.

Toshiba expects to install the first reactor in Japan in 2008 and to begin marketing the new system in Europe and America in 2009.

Source: http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/next-energy-news-toshiba-micro-nuclear-12.17b.html

how long til somebody builds a motorcycle around it?

I'll be the first to say it: (in the spirit of Tom Watson, IBM chairman, who said: "I think there is a world market for about five computers.")

"There's no way we'll need nuclear reactors for every block." - Chris Streit 2007

Eh....what about using them to produce weapons-grade plutonium?

or a deLorean

http://www.bttfmovie.com/modules/ima...delorean_c.jpg

My non-educated guess is that it uses a low grade "enriched" uranium.

The Toshiba "4S" mini-reactor uses uranium enriched to 20%.

FWIW.

Best,

Kurt

That's rather cool, there are a few little grey areas though..... Does it come with a life times supply of 100x smaller than usual Plutonium rods, built in? Is it safe to keep them under the stairs? Or will I have to purchase new ones on the black market occasionally? Every time I go for a new rod or two will I have to out bid dodgy characters from North Korea or Iran?

My gererator will still kick your reactor's ass in a fight.

"has Toshiba guts, you buy!"

Economy of scale. Several large nuke generators are much more efficient (and safe) than a whole bunch of individual reactors.
Don't know why they would bother, the enviro-lawyers would never let that be sold.

I want one.

I started to say, "Can I put it in a Prius?" but I just thought of a much better use.


Depending upon weight and shape constraints:

Imagine trains that use 200kw reactor to power the electric motors, rather than the diesel engines that they currently run. How much fuel does that save, and how much cheaper does rail transit become?

Imagine ships that would use them. We imagined this once before with the N.S. Savannah, but the world was not ready. (Also, the Savannah reactor put out 74MW, so I don't know how big of a ship the Toshiba unit would power.)

And finally, semi trucks. A truck is much smaller than a train or a ship, so shape and weight would be much more of an issue - but imagine how much fuel would be saved by moving trucks off diesel.


And obviously, I'm assuming the Toshiba design is a fail-safe design that could be put in place and would run autonomously. Can't have Jim-Bob tinkering with the atom smasher in his Peterbuilt.

200kw = 265 HP.

so, 100 x = 20 MW, which is Tiny for a Nuclear Power plant. Crap, it's small for an Industrial Power Gen Gas Turbine. The smallest Commercial Nuclear plant I've heard about was 600 MW. Usually, they are 1000-2000 MW. Using 600MW, we are really talking about a plant 3000 times smaller. The 40 yr claim on fuel rod change out seems too short. Critical Mass of a big nuke is the same for a small nuke. You just use it up more slowly.

Power Generation is all about installed cost/kw. Somehow I think this will be more expensive than wind.

The biggest issue is some stipid rigging up a bomb to one, and spreading radioactivity around.

to quote woot:

DO NOT WANT!

From the article: "Unlike traditional nuclear reactors the new micro reactor uses no control rods to initiate the reaction. "

Heard about it last year... Interesting.

It uses Lithium like the lithium in my battery?

"uses reservoirs of liquid lithium-6, an isotope that is effective at absorbing neutrons. The Lithium-6 reservoirs are connected to a vertical tube that fits into the reactor core. The whole whole process is self sustaining and can last for up to 40 years"

Wasn't that once said about houses having their own natural gas and diesel generators? I think some of that "inefficiency" is utility company spin for various reasons, one of which is they wouldn't want people making their own power, particularly in lieu of how unreliable DWP and other power company infrastructures have become.

A GE 7FA gas turbine in a combined cycle plant at full power is better than 50% thermally efficient. A Diesel or Gasoline engine is no where near that effcient. If you can recover the exhaust heat and cooling water heat, and use it for heating something else, you could approach those effciencies. But there is only so much you need to heat when your electric demands are very high. There is also an issue of cost. 2 GE 7FA Gas Turbines in a Combined Cycle plant will produce about 500-550 mW. Cost is $120M-$150M. Installed cost is about $200-300/kW. Power producetion wheeled to my house is $0.10/kwh. My Generator has an 8 gallon tank, will produce 5kw for 6 hours. @$3.00/gallon, this is $0.80/kwh, just for fuel. If I were to switch that to Natural Gas, the cost would be about 1/3rd, or $0.25-$0.30/kwh.

Buying electricity doesn't sound so bad!

Lister 6kw generator (heavy bastard) uses about .5 gallon/hr diesel fuel. At $3.25/gallon, we're looking at $0.25-.30/kwh. Bump up to 8-10kw, and the cost/kwh goes down a bit.

Not sure I'd want one in a 4 wheeled vehicle... What happens in the event of a crash?

Makes sense for ships though...

Not sure where to sign up, but here's a SWAG at cost based solely on the article.
Given the parameters described in the article:

0.05 $/kwh cost per electricity generated
200kw power output
40 year lifespan (of course they said "up to". I guess that means it works until it breaks?)

It should cost in the neighborhood of 3.5 million. I'd be happy to take one and use it for all my power needs and sell the extra back to the power company. I pay more than 0.05 per kwh already. Of course you'd have to convince me that it was safe and actually met all the claims.

The problem with something like this is just exactly the same as a flying car: It introduces more problems than it solves.

For example, the flying car: Neat idea, but what happens when an amateur aviator encounters fog? And what happens if he encounters fog with one of his instruments broken? And what makes you think that he's going to know how to use those instruments anyway? As it is right now, ground-based vehicles are usually operated by people with little training, terrible vehicle control skills, little "captaincy", and they are usually either drunk or on their cellphone or both.

Same situation is true with a micro nuclear reactor. This device needs to be carefully operated and maintained if it is to remain safe. It isn't dangerous- it is simply very unforgiving of any carelessness or neglect, and the very nature of a device such as this scaled to this size lends itself to these last. When you make something small and easily obtainable, human beings have a tendency to "disregard" it or in simpler terms...not take it seriously. Along this vein, the average American tends to view their car and their microwave in the same way. It's operation isn't important- just do it and go about your business, per se. This poor attitude would certainly lead to a terrible nuclear accident eventually, and the result would be a large section of territory uninhabitable for upwards of 200,000 years.

Hmm...