The Future of Nuclear Power

Nuclear power isn't disappearing anytime soon, according to a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency. By the end of last year, nuclear accounted for about 15 percent of electricity production worldwide, and its overall capacity will continue to rise through 2030.

France gets 78 percent of its power from nuclear, and a number of Asian countries are betting on it to meet their electricity needs. China has four reactors under construction now, and intends to launch a five-fold expansion by 2020.

In the US, 103 reactors provide nearly 20 percent of our electricity, but building a new plant involves an uphill PR battle, due in part to the fact that we still haven't figured out what we're going to do with the waste.—Gregory Mone

Comments

[James Aach]

As noted before, if you'd like an inside peek at the US nuclear industry - the people, the technology, the politics - see http://RadDecision.blogspot.com . There's no cost to readers.

[Tim]

isn't there something where u make waste into gold and gold could be used as an energy source?

[Howard Johnson]

What ever happened to the IEC method to the nuclear approach: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1996321846673788606

Dr. Robert Bussard asked Google for $200M to set up a prototype about a year ago. Did he get it? This method of producing nuclear power was supposed to product very very little waste.

HJ

[Eric McErlain]

For the industry perspective on the waste issue, see the following link:

http://www.nei.org/keyissues/nuclearwastedisposal/integratedusedfuelmanagement/

[Robert Bierma]

The public really needs to get more informed when it comes to nuclear power. I am always telling people i know infomation like, the nuclear industry is the only industry that i know of the pays to claen up after itself. There is a tax on all nuclaer enery in the US that pays for the nuclear waste disposal. Or how about that fact that if we started reprocessing our spent fuel we could solve this whole what to do with all the nuclear waste issue. If you reprocessed all the fuel we have produced in the US from nuclear plants the amount of long lerm radioactive material would fit in my kitchen. This is a completely manageable amount of nuclear waste in my opinion

[Karsten]

Yeah, let's just keep doing what we have been doing: We will leave it to future generations to deal with the problem. In the meantime, the radioactive waste goes into Robert's kitchen. I wonder what his neighbors will say.

Oh boy.

Karsten
http://www.polluteless.com

[Anthony]

When will people get it through their thick heads that there IS a method of getting rid of nuclear waste... it's called a fast-breeder reactor! Combined with a traditional thermal reactor, the two would have a phenominally better efficiency than what we get out of our Uranium today. If we can get through the politics, our energy problems would be solved!!

[Mark Evans]

You know nuclear power is coming back when politicians and environmentalists start to support it. For a different look at how the nuclear business is rebounding, check out:

fourreasonswhy.com/2007/10/25/nuclear-power-is-making-a-comeback/

[Mark Evans]

You know nuclear power is coming back when politicians and environmentalists start to support it. For a different look at how the nuclear business is rebounding, check out:

fourreasonswhy.com/2007/10/25/nuclear-power-is-making-a-comeback/

[Mark Evans]

You know nuclear power is coming back when politicians and environmentalists start to support it. For a different look at how the nuclear business is rebounding, check out:

fourreasonswhy.com/2007/10/25/nuclear-power-is-making-a-comeback/

[Some Guy]

Can plasma converters be used to convert radioactive waste?

[Jeremy]

why don't we just send it along with all the other waste to the sun? it just burn up in our galaxy and if there were any "extra" gases, then they wouldn't be any worse then what the sun produces anyway. And for those thinking that where would the money come from? well if the politicians of this world were a little less concerned with war and anti-piracy laws, then there would be BILLIONS of dollars to use to put towards the longevity of the earth.

[Joe K]

Fast-breeder reactors are not a solution to the waste problem. Also, the problem with reprocessing is the fact that you get weapons grade plutonium out of the spent fuel. The US does not reprocess for this very fact. Until fusion power is a reality, and its a decade or two off, fission will be the main source of power generation for the world.

Oh yeah, I always enjoy hearing people who say that a nuclear power plant can explode like a nuclear bomb. I always get a good chuckle.

[Steven Sedlmayr]

Why not LENR (low energy nuclear reactions), which is also been called cold fusion? It is very possible to develop this energy source if the money were applied to it. It does not need a large infrastructure to work, is clean, and does not generate any bad by products that need to be disposed of.

[clint marchbanks]

there has been a lot of advances in the storage batteries for electricity generation from wind and solar, so when the contract with the utility has been exceed, the excess can be dumped into storage batteries for use during non production times, when there is little sun or wind to balance out the load demand. the nuke industry wants us to believe they have the only answer...not true

[robert Schmidt]

There was a time when the US could have been a preeminent supplier of high tech, safe nuclear power components to the rest of the world. As a result, the uninformed that possess the power of the pen, have become the national voice. The United States has become a has been in the world of safe nuclear power. It is time we countered the uninformed that have no qualifications to be anything other than irrational. Rather than listening to rational science we got caught up in the Jane Fonda syndrome. It is time that the uninformed “power of the pen” people let those that can provide for your clean future free of dirty emissions do so. Stop listening to the obstructionist’s loudest voice on issues involving extremely complex sciences and take a loud and vocal stand on science. Folks Jane Fonda did it for money. Nuclear power designs are decades ahead of the current operational designs. They are fail-safe and for uninformed, that means a failure results in condition. That “CANT HURT YOU”.