I wonder why nuclear radiation can only be harnessed indirectly through heat. Couldn't things like the photoelectric effect be used for something similar to photovoltaic cells?
UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
91–100 of 123 posts
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#92I am one of the UPower founders. The key takeaways here are that the main hindrances to novel nuclear are (1) meeting regulatory and safety necessities without huge testing costs, which also require a customer interested in purchasing, and (2) competing with the grid, (3) huge scientific/technical risks if not yet proven. UPower meets these by (1) being small enough to build a very tough, full scale emulator for test…
A couple side notes on TC article specifically for those interested: 1) NO reprocessing as somewhat indicated in article ("processing"). We use the low enriched used fuel from the reactor to make new fuel for the next deployment. We don't isolate dangerous parts as done in reprocessing which is the main concern with reprocessing. 2) True waste elimination- it's not just "less of a pain", which is definitely good: the…
> ... the reactor actually eliminates waste instead of just using it for fuel as some thermal types do (eg some startups seen in the media). Without fast neutrons, a reactor cannot burn the longest-lived parts of waste.
What's your source of fast neutrons?
Also, is it accurate to describe your product as a nuclear battery? The TechCrunch article refers to it generating heat (as opposed to electricity), so is "nuclear reactor" a more accurate description?
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#93I am one of the UPower founders. The key takeaways here are that the main hindrances to novel nuclear are (1) meeting regulatory and safety necessities without huge testing costs, which also require a customer interested in purchasing, and (2) competing with the grid, (3) huge scientific/technical risks if not yet proven. UPower meets these by (1) being small enough to build a very tough, full scale emulator for test…
[deleted]
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#94I am one of the UPower founders. The key takeaways here are that the main hindrances to novel nuclear are (1) meeting regulatory and safety necessities without huge testing costs, which also require a customer interested in purchasing, and (2) competing with the grid, (3) huge scientific/technical risks if not yet proven. UPower meets these by (1) being small enough to build a very tough, full scale emulator for test…
A couple side notes on TC article specifically for those interested: 1) NO reprocessing as somewhat indicated in article ("processing"). We use the low enriched used fuel from the reactor to make new fuel for the next deployment. We don't isolate dangerous parts as done in reprocessing which is the main concern with reprocessing. 2) True waste elimination- it's not just "less of a pain", which is definitely good: the…
Similar to the Integral Fast Reactor? (I'm a fan, and friends with Tom Blees.)
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#95I am one of the UPower founders. The key takeaways here are that the main hindrances to novel nuclear are (1) meeting regulatory and safety necessities without huge testing costs, which also require a customer interested in purchasing, and (2) competing with the grid, (3) huge scientific/technical risks if not yet proven. UPower meets these by (1) being small enough to build a very tough, full scale emulator for test…
I think the key-est takeaway is the need to persuade people not to be terrified of nuclear energy. That's likely to require an effort on a par with any technical advances you make.
I think it's very important that businesses engaged in development and application of nuclear technology pursue public education more vigorously.
Public level of understanding of nuclear technology is depressing. The past fear campaigns and decades of life in fear of nuclear annihilation during the cold war have spread the knowledge of fear-inducing properties of nuclear materials like very long half-life of the waste, but kept people largely unaware of other important facts like means to reduce half-life of the waste, natural existence of background radiation, our consequent evolutionary adaptations to it or the inverse square law. This creates the perception that even properly regulated nuclear technology is a lot more dangerous than it actually is.
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#96The idea of a start-up that does not try to re-invent Twitter/Facebook/Flappy Bird is amazing ... I would love to be involved in such an endeavor.
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#97I am one of the UPower founders. The key takeaways here are that the main hindrances to novel nuclear are (1) meeting regulatory and safety necessities without huge testing costs, which also require a customer interested in purchasing, and (2) competing with the grid, (3) huge scientific/technical risks if not yet proven. UPower meets these by (1) being small enough to build a very tough, full scale emulator for test…
A couple side notes on TC article specifically for those interested: 1) NO reprocessing as somewhat indicated in article ("processing"). We use the low enriched used fuel from the reactor to make new fuel for the next deployment. We don't isolate dangerous parts as done in reprocessing which is the main concern with reprocessing. 2) True waste elimination- it's not just "less of a pain", which is definitely good: the…
#1 sounds awesome, our senior design project was on continuous pyroprocessing of HLW SNF in order to retrieve the remaining enriched Uranium while leaving the rest as proliferation-resistant waste. I'm not sure what techniques you are using (UREX?) to extract the LE uranium for reuse -- but I assume the "main concern with reprocessing" you're hinting at is the extraction of proliferation-enabling material as well. If you're doing #2 then I am wondering how much reprocessing you are really having to do at all.
2) True waste elimination - I am very curious how you are able to do so. It seems like a very big neutron poison for fast neutrons. I'm not sure if you're using a thermal/fast reactor with gas/molten salt/water as the cooling material. I will await for the NRC filings, I suppose!
3) Best of luck!
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#98From the website: "waste products that have to be buried for hundreds of years"
Wow, that is... inaccurate. Let's have a look.
(EDIT: to clarify, format is substance (% present in used fuel): half life
U238 (~94% of used nuclear fuel): ~4.5 billion years
Pu (~1% of used nuclear fuel): 24 000 years
Sources:
http://www.techniklexikon.net/d/abgebrannte_brennelemente/ab...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonium
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Isotope/7._Periode#92...
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#99Quote from http://www.upowertech.com/p/technology.html: "carbon-free and emission-free"
You're telling me that you get enriched fuel, plant production, transport and waste management (plant and fuel) emission free?!? How do people fall for things like this? "I doesn't produce emissions if you only count the parts that don't produce emissions". Brilliant.
And don't even get me started about the super secret "nano-nuclear" tech they claim to have or the cooling using "proprietary technology".
Re: UPower (YC S14) Is Building Nuclear Batteries
#100Quote from http://www.upowertech.com/p/technology.html : "carbon-free and emission-free" You're telling me that you get enriched fuel, plant production, transport and waste management (plant and fuel) emission free?!? How do people fall for things like this? "I doesn't produce emissions if you only count the parts that don't produce emissions". Brilliant. And don't even get me started about the super secret "nano-nuc…
Generally, when people advertise about "carbon-free and emission-free", they are talking about the powerplant's operation. Likewise with cars, they are advertised based on their operation. Asking about the rest of the supply chain is generally a good thing (and having critical reading skills in general), but phrasing it the way you are ("How do people fall for things like this?") comes off in an extremely negative light and is not helping your argument.
EDIT: Moved other response to address your other post.