Deep Ocean to Deep Space

Maybe there is an answer to nuclear power. June 6, 2015

Re-reading an old Popular Science from July 2011 yesterday which focused was The Future of Energy. It covers all forms and there is a very reveling chart that shows all of our sources of energy, for the US, where it goes to, and how much is lost. More than half of what is produce is lost!

The article explains the various ways nuclear power is generated; light-water, molten salt, and fusion. The first is what we use world wide now, the second has been proven 50 years ago, but not done commercially, and the third is pie in the sky, but being developed.

The first is very dirty, and wasteful, only 4% of the fuel is used, leaving us with 96% around to store for ever, and is inherently dangerous. They have to have humans there to keep them from blowing up.

The second can work with lower grade fuel and uses up 95% it, leaving on faction of the waste that the first does. And it can use the “spent” fuel from the first. And it is inherently safe. Yes there is radioactive material but if the humans were to disappear on all power be lost, it will  self-decommission into a pool of solidified salts.

Then I read a story in the current issue of Popular Science on two young scientist at MIT who are hard at work launching a company to create commercial versions of the second. There are challenges, but they are more of implementation, rather that how it works. They have two issues, lack of funding, the US is pouring money into very dirty oil and gas and has no interest in nuclear, and regulation, the NRC is just keeping the status quo. not interested, or funded to do anything new. But on the other hand, the Chinese are all over it. They are planning to build 70 new nuclear power plants. Now how has it come to the point that the US no longer even cares about being the leader in science or industry? Health and safety?