Slashdot Mirror


Setback For Small Nuclear Reactors: B&W Cuts mPower Funding

mdsolar (1045926) writes with news that funding for the mPower, a Small Modular [Nuclear] Reactor, has been cut due to the inability to find investors interested in building a prototype. From the article: "The pullback represents a major blow to the development of SMRs, which have been hailed as the next step forward for the nuclear power industry. ... All told, B&W, the DOE, and partners have spent around $400 million on the mPower program. Another $600 million was needed just to get the technology ready for application to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for licensing. ... B&W plans to continue low-level R&D on the mPower technology with a view to commercial deployment in the mid-2020s, said CEO James Ferland. But without a major shift in the business environment and in investor perceptions of the risks and rewards associated with nuclear power, that seems fanciful."

15 of 165 comments (clear)

  1. Re:I have a project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Nurse, I think he's off his meds again.

  2. Re:I have a project by macpacheco · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So you hate nuclear power and have no interest in properly learning about it, instead taking your knowledge from Hollywood sensationalization of radioactivity and nuclear power. We find those by the bucket nowadays. The difference is most don't dare speak, because the aren't sure. Those that actually think they got it right are the most dangerous.
    Here is a source for serious information on nuclear power, without any BS:
      https://class.coursera.org/nuc...

  3. That's because there's already one on the market by virtualXTC · · Score: 4, Informative

    That's because investors don't want to develop a product to compete with something that already exists (and is very well funded) but is having regulatory issues:

  4. Re:I have a project by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That rant was all emotion-fuelled fallacies.
    1) No-one was suggesting making "suitcase nukes" and sending them around, because nuclear bombs and reactors necessarily work differently. That's why the worst case scenario in a nuclear power plant is a meltdown, not a nuclear explosion.
    2) Fukishima was not a nuclear disaster, it was a huge tsunami damaging a nuclear facility, complicating the existing natural disaster due to risks of radiation exposure. The technology being researched was not featured. There were also no terrorists (or unicorns or fairies) involved.
    3) Nuclear fusion is promising and exciting but has net negative power production at the moment, as opposed to fission which has had massive net positive power production for a long time.
    4) People researching small nuclear reactions want to merge Yahoo and Myspace to make megawatt xrays for bird watching? You'll have to ask your unicorns and fairies about this one because it doesn't sound like anything on this planet.
    5) Spouting insults at people doesn't make them wrong nor you right.
    There are real risks to using nuclear power, but if you are to ever understand them you need to calm down and accept their actual nature, scale and likelihood instead of conflating everything with the word "nuclear" in it with the explosion of nuclear weapons. As an advanced course you can compare individual approaches fairly to their practical alternatives (which all have their own issues) before making a judgement.

  5. Molten Salt's coming. by jcr · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Given the work China and India are doing on molten-salt Thorium cycle reactors, I can't see why anyone would spend another dime on a pressurized water reactor again.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:Molten Salt's coming. by macpacheco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      India is decades away. Perhaps China might make it happen before 2030. A big part of China and India's effort is an academic / jobs program. I'm not saying they are incompetent, but they are not results focused. I'm hoping to seeing the first molten salt reactor circa 2025, in commercial operation. For now I'm going out on a limb, but a few years we'll know the credibility of that project with more certainty.
      I'm talking about Terrestrial Energy Inc of Canada, Dr. David LeBlanc brainchild. His molten salt presentations are the most end goal oriented ones, focusing very clearly on getting to the market instead of selling an optimal idea. Giving up many optional features for minimizing certification issues to the greatest extent possible. Focusing on the minimum design that will be usable with an order of magnitude better fuel burnup, safety, simplicity and cost than typical large water cooled reactors. The full LFTR design is a great idea, filled with design challenges and regulatory issues along the way. Dr LeBlanc design is derived from the ORNL DMSR. LFTR design as advocated by FLiBe energy is on the other end of the spectrum.

    2. Re:Molten Salt's coming. by mbkennel · · Score: 3, Insightful


      Because there are engineering designs for pressurized water reactors which work and decades of experience making them, and molten-salt cycle reactors intrinsically dissolve large amounts of high-level waste in a liquid in normal operation---(water soluble too sometimes)---and make every nuclear plant also a horrifyingly nasty radioactive reprocessing plant.

      I'm for fission (not because it's great but because coal and global warming are much worse), but I like my megacuries encased in zirconium, and very solid.

    3. Re:Molten Salt's coming. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't see why anyone would spend another dime on a pressurized water reactor again.

      Because so far no-one has managed to demonstrate a successful commercial scale thorium reactor. All the research ones have run into severe problems. There are still many technical problems to be solved, which will require a lot of money. The only people willing to take on that kind of risk are governments looking to build a nuclear industry and research base from scratch, i.e. China and India.

      Even if China or India do demonstrate a working design don't expect to see it in the US any time soon. One of the biggest problems is decommissioning a highly contaminated reactor at the end of its life, and so far it looks like they are saying they will figure that out "later". Good luck getting that past any other country's regulator.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Molten Salt's coming. by AlterEager · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I can't see why anyone would spend another dime on a pressurized water reactor again.

      Because so far no-one has managed to demonstrate a successful commercial scale thorium reactor.

      Lots of people seem to think that all thorium reactors are molten salt.

      No.

      People are planning/have already tried burning Thorium in:

      Pebble bed reactors
      CANDU
      Sodium cooled breeders
      PWR's
      BWR's
      Accelerator driven reactors...

  6. Re:I have a project by G-forze · · Score: 4, Informative

    There is no such thing as a non-radiactive tritium reactor. That is a fact and a law of physics.

    There is also no such thing as a non-radioactive sandwich, that's a fact and law of physics. (C-14 for instance.) What has that got to do with anything? That you use scare words like "unbelievably dangerous", "terrorists" and "suicidally stupid" only makes you seem less informed. You are just a greenpeace troll. Nothing to see here.

    --
    "There's someone in my head but it's not me." - Pink Floyd, Dark Side of the Moon
  7. Re:I have a project by Boronx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fukushima was a nuclear disaster. Even if you want to write off anything that happens because of Ma Nature, that doesn't matter since good management post-tsunami could have easily prevented the melt-down and massive release.

    I'm sympathetic to the nuclear industry, but industry proponents really need to get a grip. Both Chernobyl and Fukushima were operated by morons. That just can't happen. It should never happen. There are plenty of smart folk, do what it takes to make sure one of them is in charge the next time a tsunami hits. Follow the damn regulations root out corruption. Bluster and sticking your head in the sand just isn't going to cut it anymore.

  8. Re:KickStarter? by Sockatume · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I wish Slashdotters wouldn't use the word "ponzi scheme" to mean "thing I don't like". It's got a very specific, very informative meaning that's being casually eroded out of laziness.

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  9. Re:I have a project by AlterEager · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Alone the thyroid treated children in germany are already far over 10,000.

    Given that the thyroid cancer rate in the US (for example) seems to be about 13 per 100,000 people year and the population of Germany is about 81 million we'd expect about 10,530 thyroid cancer cases in Germany per year.

    So 10,000 cases in children since 1986 is pretty damn low.

  10. Too Little, Too Late by JabrTheHut · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If they think there will be any need for this by the mid-2020s, they're in for a rude awakening and a nasty financial loss.

    Solar panels have dropped in price by 65% in the last two years. They're expecting another 60% price drop by 2020, and efficiency isn't being sacrificed - it's only getting better, with 25% being achieved in the lab now. Research is also much cheaper - researchers ask for grants such as $5 million or $15 million, not the $1 billion mentioned in the article.

    Combine wind farms, hydro power, solar thermal, and the recent improvements with storing energy, both as potential energy and in batteries, and I doubt any one will want to invest in "small" nuclear reactors, either now or 10 years from now. Solar panels aren't the fix for everything, but they will make it uneconomical to put in place big, expensive nuclear reactors, which are only small and cheap by comparison to even bigger ones.

    --
    Work like no one is watching. Dance like you've never been hurt. Make love like you don't need the money.
  11. Re:I have a project by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Funny

    If you can figure out how to remove corruption and stupidity from governmental and/or corporate organizations you'd probably get Nobel Prizes in several categories.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC