1. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) are working together on a small modular reactor – at TVA’s Clinch River site near Oak Ridge, Tennessee.
TVA has yet to decide whether to actually construct such reactors at the site and, if so, what technology it would use. Should TVA decide to build SMRs at Clinch River, it would need to apply separately for an NRC license to build and operate them.
2. Finland has today announced the launch of a project to develop a small modular reactor for district heating. Most of the country’s district heating is currently produced by burning coal, natural gas, wood fuels and peat, but it aims to phase out its use of coal in energy production by 2029.
A report in September 2017 evaluated completely decarbonizing the Helsinki metropolitan area energy sector through the use of advanced nuclear reactors.
The model used in the Helsinki case study anticipates future annual energy use in district heating at 8 TWh, electricity at 12 TWh and 4 TWh of hydrogen for transportation fuels. Although several advanced SMRs are in development and coming to market by 2030 that could meet the specifications, the study selected models to consider: the HTR-PM pebble-bed reactor currently being constructed in China and Terrestrial Energy’s Integral Molten Salt Reactor.
SOURCES: World Nuclear News
Written By Brian Wang, Nextbigfuture.com
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
You don’t want to know my pessimistic predictions although one is coming thru right now.
I’ve seen posts by Robert Hargraves on LinkedIn where he insists Thorcon will break ground in Indonesia in 2020-2021. Nobody gets upset with him for telling such bold lies – there is no money – the government of Indonesia isn’t enamored with the Thorcon concept – it is all fantasy. Nobody gets upset with Thorcon, but they consider me to be a mean-spirited, evil troll for calling out that Thorcon, in particular, is not going to be built. None of the MSRs are likely to be built. I was happy to see a Russian author 7 timezones away agrees, independently, with my conviction. The russian is much more polite about it because he doesn’t care about making converts – for some reason, I do feel a need to be right, at least on NBF.
Vários homens hoje escondem que tem esse problema em casa, muitos não buscam e até às vezes negam ajuda para combater a impotência sexual. Esse comportamento que é de certa forma o “orgulho” que existe sobre essa dificuldade, o Duragel preçoé a fórmula de escape nesse casos.
Até os jovens hoje podem sofrer com a impotência sexual, devido ao uso de álcool e drogas, colesterol alto, enfim, pode ser casos mais raros disso não são muito alertados, porém o Duragel preço também se aplica nessa faixa de idade.
Where’s Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTR) in all this? Seems to me to have remarkable advantages over U reactors.
Homens com diabete não tem risco nenhum em fazer uso do Duragel é bom, quando a mesma não é controlada ela dificulta a circulação de sangue, assim dificultando a ereção do indivíduo.
Por sua vez o Duragel é bom pode ser usado até quando a restrição a circulação de sangue é o colesterol elevado. Este pode levar à presença de gordura nas artérias, que pode reduzir a circulação de sangue pelo corpo, incluindo para o pénis.
Outra dúvida que existe sobre o Duragel é sobre a sua composição, ele é composto de catuaba, muito conhecida por favorecer o apetite sexual, além de ser um potente afrodisíaco, Ginseng é importante por atacar a impotência sexual e também por combater o estresse, Marapuama, tem forte ação afrodisíaca, e também melhora a circulação do sangue, e por último o Ginkgo Biloba, ajuda no fluxo sanguíneo e na oxigenação das células.
Duragel não é só recomendado pra quem tem disfunção erétil, quem sente que está insatisfeito com a performance pode fazer uso do produto sem nenhum problema.
Até os jovens hoje podem sofrer com a impotência sexual, devido ao uso de álcool e drogas, colesterol alto, enfim, pode ser casos mais raros disso não são muito alertados, porém o Duragel como tomar também se aplica nessa faixa de idade.
Homens com diabete não tem risco nenhum em fazer uso do Duragel como tomar, quando a mesma não é controlada ela dificulta a circulação de sangue, assim dificultando a ereção do indivíduo.
Dessa maneira, vemos o Duragel preço ser vendido para praticamente todas as idades, pois tem muito a agregar na vida das pessoas.
Contudo isso, Duragel preço virou sucesso de vendas por vários aspectos, por ser natural, não precisar de receita médica e atender praticamente todas as idades
Por ser uma medicamento natural, Duragel para que serve não apresenta nenhum efeito colateral, isso já gera uma dispensa de receita médica para uso do produto.
Mas calma, Duragel para que serve não faz milagres, é sempre seguir na risca o tratamento para obter resultados, e não espere que num período de uma semana já obtenha grande resultados.
Segundo uma pesquisa do IUN, o Duragel funciona apresentou um aumento de 113% na vida sexual dos participantes, tanto homens quanto mulheres.
Assim, é recomendado o uso de 2 cápsulas de Duragel funciona por dia, durante um período O Sucesso do Duragel funciona é grande que no ano passado houve um recorde de vendas, totalizando 624 mil vendas segundo a Scielo, a revista brasileira de educação médica.
Eu mesmo já fiz o uso do DuraGel onde comprar durante alguns meses e confirmo grandes melhoras na minha vida.
de 30 dias, caso não tenha obtidos resultados durante esse período, existe uma garantia sobre o mesmo, assim você irá receber o dinheiro de volta.
Por isso,muitos desses casos acabam falando mal do produto e fazendo avaliações negativas sobre os mesmo, mas não fique desconfiado, DuraGel onde comprar é comprovado pela Anvisa com todos os registros.
Alguns medicamento são recomendados para o tratamento da disfunção erétil, principalmente o Duragel o que é , por contar com uma fórmula totalmente natural e sem riscos para a saúde.
Como muitos pensam Duragel o que é não serve apenas para os homens, há vários benefícios voltados às mulheres também como o aumento de desejo sexual, melhora no humor, diminuição de sintomas relacionados à menopausa.
The cake is a lie.
It’s always a lie.
Forever the cheerful optimist, aren’t you?
Yes, I had one, but the wheels fell off.
No. Highview Power with its liquid air storage (70% roundtrip efficiency) and Siemens Gamesa “hot rock” thermal storage (more like 40%* round trip efficiency) have the long term covered.
*50% short term but with thermal losses over weeks 40%
EDIT: flow batteries have the 8-24 hour storage covered
Actually the last 7 Candu’s were all built in 4 years and less at $2.7B/GW $2020 3 cents a kWh for public power – shows you what a supply line can do for you.
Carbon Capture to date is to date a very expensive pipe dream with no solution in sight – vaporware?
Methane leakage from production to delivery would eliminate any carbon capture savings in any case.
The entire US fracking industry hasn’t made a nickel in 10 years much less the usual expected Big Oil 20% rate of return. They are starting to run out suckers for the ponzi scam. When they do gas is headed back to the $20 MMBTU range.
Yes but don’t the advances in battery tech have to be several orders of magnitude better than today’s batteries to cope with seasonal variation in renewable energy supply? The modern world does like vast amounts of despatchable power and as electric vehicles start to take over, we’re going to need more and more overnight reliable power as well.
So, undead then?
CAP1400 is totally stalled. Been 85% done since 2017.
This is Ed’s comment to me in the Atomic Australia facebook group when I asked him what reactor design he would bulk build for Australia. Keep in mind I asked him to dumb it down for me as I’m a humanities boffin not a technical geek. Also remember $3B each = $3B for 1400 MW.
Yeah, RCP having teething problems. Prolly gonna work out. May build 100 of this type yet. That prediction isn’t any more out to lunch than thinking Tesla will come to dominate automotive segment. Big dumb PWRs… just put the fuel in the hole. As long as the sealed pumps aren’t imploding, as long as the steam generator tubes aren’t perforated, etc., etc., they make money. Ahhhhh. BWR better, but not if clad perforated.
China is making their (legal) IP derived AP-1000 derivative reactor the CAP-1400.
So AP1000 is both dead and very much alive in China.
AP series is dead. Fatally flawed “sealed for life” pump issue.
“The AP1000 is dead in China, and it may very well be dead all over the world,’’ Chris Gadomski, lead nuclear analyst for BloombergNEF, said in an interview. “I don’t know who would place an order for a new AP1000.’’
China cancelled their modular pebble bed reactor after building a pair; too expensive
Ed Pheil doesn’t know what hes talking about then. The steam turbine in a combined cycle natural gas plant is $1.80 per watt by itself.
A quick google shows he’s part of Elyisum that is pitching a molten chloride fast reactor. Molten chloride cannot work in a reactor it is far too corrosive.
MOAR
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
perhaps in china thats possible
I don’t know
Duragel, eh? I’ll have to try that. Not too expensive, I presume?
I see they pressure tested a CAP 1400 pressure vessel a few years ago, and poured the foundations for the non-nuclear island, but still don’t seem to have the go-ahead. Where did you see Pheil’s comment ?
Allam cycle with carbon capture is vastly cheaper than new nuclear.
You can be a supporter of existing nuclear power but not building new and still be really serious about GHG.
I am a big fan of nuclear energy. Not the crappy gen 1 and 2 stuff but the modern 3rd and 4th gen designs.
I believe now nuclear energy is in its twilight. With the rapid advancements in mass producing graphene we’ll soon have graphene based batteries and solar panels. Since these can be made small and scaled up the huge power plants of the past will be history.
More small reactors, more dirty bombs.
LFTR’s are great, but MCSFR’s seem even better! My (completely lay-person’s) summary after getting Ed Pheil to break it down into English for me! 😉
https://eclipsenow.wordpress.com/molten-salt-reactors/
Or you nationalise energy and standardise not only the design but the production methods and supply chain. Costs all along the line crash as the reactors are built as modular pieces in climate controlled sterile clean factories. A reactor comes off the line every week, and the pieces are trucked to site and installed like clipping together so much large lego. Reactor engineer Ed Pheil says he estimates the CAP1400 to come down to about $2.3 bn / GW with a speed build out at scale.
Just build it already. Stop talking about it and build it.
Where is my LFTR?! 🙁
Я тролль ? Это неправда – ‘фейк нюзь !’
The article doesn’t have any technical arguments against MSRs, only regulatory inertia. Terrestrial Energy has pretty much the same design as Thorcon, and seem to have a bit more money – they just announced a contract with a German company to design their pumps. https://www.terrestrialenergy.com/2020/03/ksb-and-terrestrial-energy-partner-to-supply-primary-salt-pump-for-imsr-advanced-nuclear-power-plant/
Thorcon is a rather unfortunate name, I think.
A paper reactor?
I have visions of an incinerator.
Well, when it comes to environmentalists, it seems ignorance and malice are intricately intertwined.
That IS a nice reference.
I didn’t realize that part of the driving motivation was that Indonesia has huge Thorium reserves.
And yes, I do feel that the quality of a web page to some extent brings to mind the old saying that
Given they were starting from a model of trying to displace coal use, they probably WERE calculating fuel mass.
Start from CO2 output, get coal mass used, from there you get to “future annual energy use”
OR… you just don’t understand what you are talking about.
Ignorance is different from malice.
Though both should be ignored.
The Vogtle project happened.
You start building and plan on spending $10B for 2 AP1000, 4 years later you cancel because it’s too expensive.
“Analysts estimated the total bill for both Summer units could rise to between $14 billion to as much as $23 billion, depending on whether they included financing and transmission costs.”
If you don’t support nuclear power you’re not really serious about carbon dioxide pollution.
A major advantage of NGAF about pretty web pages is that the reader doesn’t get annoying video ads taking up bandwidth & screen space, like on this website.
I have now bookmarked the homepage of that website.
Anything in units other than GWe is hard to understand unless you’re trying to calculate fuel mass (coal/methane/uranium).
GWe is basically 83.3% of my preferred unit of power, the AP1000. For instance, New Jersey needs about 8 AP1000 online to meet peak demand (that’s a S.W.A.G.)
A good, recent editorial about the likelyhood of ThorCon being built in Indonesia is linked below. You must use your browser to translate from Russian, assuming you are not, as some would accuse, a colluding Russian Troll.
TLDR: ThorCon = no chance
http://atominfo.ru/newsz01/a0112.htm
I read Russian nuclear news because they know what they are talking about. No fluff. No adds. Looks like Netscape Navigator ’98 because real engineers DGAF about pretty web-page design. You actually have to check the date to make sure it wasn’t written years ago… Many of the NBF reactor companies have beautiful web-pages.
More paper reactors. Anything that’s radically different than PWR or BWR and will be built in the US will need a prototype reactor first. That will probably push any new plant design to be as costly as a standard AP1000 considering time and money. Might as well go with an AP1000.
Why use “future annual energy use” instead of power? Bigger number, or harder to understand?