From sodium-cooled fission to advanced fusion, a fresh generation of projects hopes to rekindle trust in nuclear energy.
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/612940/the-new-safer-nuclear-reactors-that-might-help-stop-climate-change/
BP might not be the first source you go to for environmental news, but its annual energy review is highly regarded by climate watchers. And its 2018 message was stark: despite the angst over global warming, coal was responsible for 38% of the world’s power in 2017—precisely the same level as when the first global climate treaty was signed 20 years ago. Worse still, greenhouse-gas emissions rose by 2.7% last year, the largest increase in seven years.
Such stagnation has led many policymakers and environmental groups to conclude that we need more nuclear energy. Even United Nations researchers, not enthusiastic in the past, now say every plan to keep the planet’s temperature rise under 1.5 °C will rely on a substantial jump in nuclear energy. But we’re headed in the other direction. Germany is scheduled to shut down all its nuclear plants by 2022; Italy voted by referendum to block any future projects back in 2011. And even if nuclear had broad public support (which it doesn’t), it’s expensive: several nuclear plants in the US closed recently because they can’t compete with cheap shale gas.
“If the current situation continues, more nuclear power plants will likely close and be replaced primarily by natural gas, causing emissions to rise,” argued the Union of Concerned Scientists—historically nuclear skeptics—in 2018. If all those plants shut down, estimates suggest, carbon emissions would increase by 6%. At this point, the critical debate is not whether to support existing systems, says Edwin Lyman, acting director of the UCS’s nuclear safety project. “A more practical question is whether it is realistic that new nuclear plants can be deployed over the next several decades at the pace needed.”
As of early 2018 there were 75 separate advanced fission projects trying to answer that question in North America alone, according to the think tank Third Way. These projects employ the same type of reaction used in the conventional nuclear reactors that have been used for decades—fission, or splitting atoms.
snip
Thorium could power the next generation of nuclear reactors
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2145535-thorium-could-power-the-next-generation-of-nuclear-reactors/
A Dutch nuclear research institute has just fired up the first experiment in nearly half a century on next-generation molten-salt nuclear reactors based on thorium.
Thorium has long held promise for “safer” nuclear power. A slightly radioactive element, it transforms into fissionable U-233 when hit by high-energy neutrons. But after use, U-233 creates fewer long-lived radioactive waste products than the conventional U-235 now used in nuclear power plants.
But because nuclear power was traditionally tied up with nuclear weapons research into uranium and plutonium, thorium was mostly abandoned. Except for one test reactor that has been under construction at Kalpakkam since 2004, thorium reactor research has been moribund.
But now, NRG, a nuclear research facility in Petten, on the North Sea coast of the Netherlands, has launched the Salt Irradiation Experiment (SALIENT) in collaboration with the EU Commission. The researchers want to use thorium as a fuel for a molten salt reactor, one of the next-generation designs for nuclear power in which both the reactor coolant, and the fuel itself, are a mixture of hot, molten salt.
Many believe that molten salt reactors are well suited for using thorium as a fuel. Their unique working fluid can achieve very high temperatures, significantly boosting the efficiency of the power generation process.
snip
Nuclear power and global climate change
https://thebulletin.org/2019/06/nuclear-power-and-global-climate-change/
As young professionals beginning our careers in the United States and Russia, we believe strongly that nuclear energy must play a key role in mitigating climate change. We are the first generation that is experiencing the dramatic effects of global climate change and likely the last that can do something about it. To avoid catastrophic consequences for the Earth and its people, we have to develop and implement a solution in the shortest period of time possible because the planet is at a point of no return.
The climate crisis is a challenging problem that has no boundaries, with effects felt across the globe; as such, it will require a global effort to mitigate. We, the authors, are from Russia and the United States—two countries with different cultures, histories, governments, and approaches to addressing international problems. Yet by working together, our different perspectives can help to find a path forward—and can help us understand each other better, in the bargain.
With current global temperatures exceeding the 1880–to-1920 pre-industrial era mean by 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), carbon dioxide levels being the highest in nearly one million years, and sea levels rising at an ever-increasing rate of 3.4 millimeters per year, it is undeniable that Earth is experiencing climate change. Many scientific investigations have proven that anthropogenic causes are to blame for the rapid change in climate. Industrialization has caused an increase in the release of gases, including nitrous oxide, methane, carbon dioxide, and water vapor. These gases contribute to the overall global temperature increase through the greenhouse effect.
During the last two decades, several international agreements—such as the Kyoto Protocol, and the Paris Agreement—were established to prevent the continuation and acceleration of climate change. The Paris Agreement states that the levels of carbon dioxide, currently at 410 parts per million (ppm), should be reduced to below 350 ppm, a goal that is moderately stricter than that of the 1.5 degree Celsius drop in temperatures that is more widely cited as a goal of the agreement. Current carbon dioxide emissions worldwide are 35 billion metric tons, or gigatonnes, per year, which will continue to raise the global temperature. To slow the effects of climate change, we must reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 6 percent, or by 2.1 gigatonnes, per year. This will likely prove difficult, given that by 2050, the economies of emerging countries are projected to increase the global energy demand by 80 percent (and carbon dioxide emissions by 70 percent). Most nations with emerging economies plan to provide energy with new coal-burning power plants—between 800 and 1,600 by 2040.
With these statistics in mind, it seems clear that of all the possible pathways for reducing emissions, the most promising would lie in the generation of energy with low-carbon technologies—including nuclear. If low-carbon nuclear and renewable energy sources could be substituted for coal plants, then the energy demands of these nations could be met without increasing carbon emissions.
snip
Congratulations to our presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden!
= new reply since forum marked as read
