possible Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates and Toshiba have opened
dialogue to create a next-generation nuclear reactor able to
run up to 100 years before it needs to be refueled, according
to Japanese media reports.Gates' TerraPower and Toshiba's
Westinghouse reactor design company plan to develop the uranium-based
Traveling-Wave Reactor (TWR) with 100,000 Kilowatts up to 1 million
KW support. Until something is official between the two
sides, and Toshiba will continue development on a reactor that needs
to be refueled once every 30 years. The Super-Safe, Small and
Simple (4S) reactor is an ultra compact reactor that will likely have
U.S. approval before the end of the year.If there are no
major hiccups, the reactor will be available before 2014.Today's
units need to be refueled every few years – using fuel based from
depleted uranium can last significantly longer. There is
special need for these mini-reactors in developing nations, analysts
say, with the price tag expected to lower in the future.Since
leaving his day-to-day role in Microsoft, Gates has become more
involved in numerous other projects, including running his own
charity along with overseeing TerraPower. He is expected to
invest millions of his own personal money into TWR development, which
will help bring additional attention to the technology.Gates
aims to reach zero carbon emissions by 2050, with TerraPower and
other companies looking for the next major breakthrough.
quote: /a little sarcasm but the BSOD jokes are just too lame and tired out at this point.
quote: By Souka on 3/23/2010 7:34:13 PM , Rating: 2Speaking of BSOD s, I gotta wonder what a BSOD on a nuclear reactor would mean?
quote: makes me wonder... why are all these environmentalists against global warming then? The supposed floods or other problems can lessen the human population.
quote: Why is Zimbabwe poor?Could it be that it's a nation of 12 million illiterates who don't know any better
quote: Which part of giving them wells will only create more problems don't you understand?
quote: Haven't 40 or however many years of giving them primarily materialistic aid with pretty much zero effect taught you people any-fucking-thing?
quote: The Super-Safe, Small and Simple (4S) reactor is an ultra compact reactor that will likely have U.S. approval before the end of the year.
quote: According to Mark, as the fissionable material is being compressed so that it becomes critical, a neutron injected at the worst possible time would cause the earliest model of implosion weapon to have an explosive yield between 1 and 2 kilotons.In contrast, in 1972 the U.S. Government officially revealed that the U.S. possessed more advanced nuclear weapons whose yield would not be diminished by the injection of a neutron at no matter what instant of time . With this type of design, the spontaneous neutrons from R-Pu would in no way diminish the reliability or the expected yield
quote: "The difficulties of developing an effective design of the most straightforward type are not appreciably greater with reactor-grade plutonium than those that have to be met for the use of weapons-grade plutonium."
quote: Such a device would be much too large to deliver via missile,
quote: and nearly 1 million times more radioactive than one built from Supergrade Pu, making it impossible to smuggle to a target.
quote: So where's the risk? A nation that can only pull off a 1 KT fizzle isn't going to scare its neighbors. The device can't be delivered on target anywhere. It consumes far too much Pu to build a large number of devices around. It's an expensive toy... A weapon built from reactor-grade Pu can go popIt's still useless for the purposes for which nuclear weapons are generally used. If a nation wanted simply to kill people, it could do a far better job, for far less money, by buying a KT of real TNT or other high explosive, rather than basing a multi-billion dollar program around reactor grade Pu.
quote: Pu-240's spontaneous fission rate is something like 1,600,000 neutrons per gram. Pu-239's is more like 40.
quote: When you factor in the higher neutron flux needed due to 240's lower cross section, the result is a difference of roughly seven orders of magnitude higher for spontaneous fission. Fizzles, in other words.
quote: There is no room for debate on this. A fizzle has no minimum or maximum output. A worst case fizzle can involve zero fission at all -- just the output of the chemical explosives within the device itself. The best case is an explosion nearly as powerful as the design parameters.
quote: Reading an offhand comment in one link does not make you an expert on this.
quote: I did hold CNDWI (Critical Nuclear Weapons Design Information) and AFWL (Air Force Weapons Lab) clearances and worked for a company doing nuclear weapons research
quote: The modular and scalable design of the B&W mPower reactor allows B&W to match the generation needs of our customers with the proven performance of existing light water reactor technology. Several reactor modules can be installed to support the customer requirements and infrastructure constraints.