Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TexasTowelie

(112,453 posts)
Sat Apr 11, 2020, 12:25 AM Apr 2020

U.S military wants to build mobile microreactor in Idaho

BOISE, Idaho (AP) — The U.S. Department of Defense wants to build a prototype advanced mobile nuclear microreactor at the Idaho National Laboratory in eastern Idaho, saying they are needed to ensure the military’s energy supply.

The microreactor would be capable of producing one to 10 megawatts. A megawatt can power from about 400 to 900 homes, depending on energy consumption that is dependent on such things as air conditioning.

The department says it wants to reduce reliance on local electric grids, which are highly vulnerable to prolonged outages from a variety of threats.

The department is considering building the microreactor at the U.S. Department of Energy's Idaho National Laboratory. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory in eastern Tennessee would also take part.

Read more: https://www.idahostatejournal.com/news/state/u-s-military-wants-to-build-mobile-microreactor-in-idaho/article_742acba5-9a31-5518-a09f-b1b19419e489.html

3 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
U.S military wants to build mobile microreactor in Idaho (Original Post) TexasTowelie Apr 2020 OP
Sorry, but I'm not bothered Vogon_Glory Apr 2020 #1
Agreed. As NNadir posts often on this site, people on this planet use approximately 600 exojoules c-rational Apr 2020 #2
My math skills are shaky but I agree with you Vogon_Glory Apr 2020 #3

Vogon_Glory

(9,132 posts)
1. Sorry, but I'm not bothered
Sat Apr 11, 2020, 12:40 AM
Apr 2020

In the face of climate denialism and Republican/Conservative intransigence for the last two decades, I have become convinced that nuclear is the best option for most of this planet’s energy production. I’m not hostile to solar or wind, but I don’t believe that they can do it alone. have been

c-rational

(2,596 posts)
2. Agreed. As NNadir posts often on this site, people on this planet use approximately 600 exojoules
Sat Apr 11, 2020, 11:52 AM
Apr 2020

of energy per year and only about 12 come from renewables. Honest discussions are not being had.

Vogon_Glory

(9,132 posts)
3. My math skills are shaky but I agree with you
Sat Apr 11, 2020, 06:36 PM
Apr 2020

Last edited Sat Apr 11, 2020, 09:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Most environmentalists’ knee-jerk opposition to nuclear came through the environmentalist movement being infiltrated decades ago by types like Helen Caldicott and nuclear disarmament types. While I concur that abolishing nuclear weapons is a very good thing and I oppose distribution of weapons-grade plutonium, I fear that the anti-nukes crowd’s only “victory” has been the construction of dozens of fossil-fuel plans, strip-mining (coal), drilling (oil and natural gas) and millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Not to mention the hundreds of thousands of deaths caused by particulate pollution.

Some “victory.”

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»Idaho»U.S military wants to bui...