backtop


Print 55 comment(s) - last by Jedi2155.. on Apr 25 at 1:08 AM

Not quite a two-seater hybrid electric, but ORNL's new nuclear fuel promises to boost efficiency by as much as 900%.

U.S. Nuclear reactors are not known for their fuel efficiency. At a mere three to four percent burn-up, much of the uranium fuel is wasted and current reactors produce large amounts of unsightly nuclear waste. Advanced gas reactors may offer a better choice for the aging U.S. nuclear power posse.

Working together with the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) and the Babcock & Wilcox Company, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), with funding from the Department of Energy's Office of Nuclear Science, has produced a new fuel for the high temperatures of advanced gas reactors. In tests conducted at the Advanced Test Reactor at INL, the fuel reached a nine percent burn-up, a near three-fold efficiency gain from traditional water-cooled nuclear plant fuel and halfway to the targeted 16 to 18 percent.

The fuel, produced in the ORNL Materials Science and Technology Division, is made up of thousands of tiny carbon and silicon carbide coated spheres of uranium, which are compressed into fuel sticks and loaded into a graphite form.

With growing concerns about nuclear reactor waste products, skeptical outlooks for the future of nuclear power and foreign companies selling mini-plants to U.S. customers, a new, more efficient fuel made in America is a ray of hope for U.S. nuclear power advocates. Though it will possibly never be without its own pollution problems, further refinement and research into fission reactors may yield a very efficient and comparatively clean energy generation model.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Clarification please ?
By mindless1 on 4/16/2008 5:42:19 AM , Rating: 2
You are mistaken with your idea that if someone expresses a fact, or opinion, that differs with your own, that it is then THEIR burden to prove something you didn't bother to yourself. You are the one making the claim this is incorrect and as such it is you who has the initial contradictory burden if anyone does.


RE: Clarification please ?
By Reclaimer77 on 4/16/2008 4:39:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You are mistaken with your idea that if someone expresses a fact, or opinion, that differs with your own, that it is then THEIR burden to prove something you didn't bother to yourself. You are the one making the claim this is incorrect and as such it is you who has the initial contradictory burden if anyone does.


Who, what, when, where, why. The five W's of good journalism. If this simple rule every fifth grader is taught is always used, then there would be be no burden of proof.

Until I see some numbers, I'm going to assume our reactors rock your face :P


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki