Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
world-nuclear-news.org
Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
1–10 of 52 posts
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#2This seems interesting, but what technology are they planning on using, and how does it compare with other projects around the world? This comes up every now and again it seems, and then dies away again (eg PBMR - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble_bed_modular_reactor).
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#3This is highly interesting, and long overdue.
Canada has a lot of "oil sands" that would benefit greatly from atomic process heat, reducing carbon footprint, turning feedstock losses into salable product, and increasing production rates. Canadas mineral resources, engineering capabilities, and regulatory mindset are highly favorable to becoming a technological leader in an important sector.
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#4This is highly interesting, and long overdue. Canada has a lot of "oil sands" that would benefit greatly from atomic process heat, reducing carbon footprint, turning feedstock losses into salable product, and increasing production rates. Canadas mineral resources, engineering capabilities, and regulatory mindset are highly favorable to becoming a technological leader in an important sector.
Not to mention a lot of empty land where there is nobody to complain about radiation, accidents or nuclear waste.
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#5At least with the current technology there are too many downsides to nuclear power. The nuclear waste issue still hasn't been solved, and nuclear accidents do happen, apparently despite all the security measures.
Small reactors, maybe even mobile, can only make this worse.
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#6At least with the current technology there are too many downsides to nuclear power. The nuclear waste issue still hasn't been solved, and nuclear accidents do happen, apparently despite all the security measures. Small reactors, maybe even mobile, can only make this worse.
So you do prefer a big reactor blowing up, instead of a small one?
No I know, you fear, that this increases the number of reactors dramatically and therefore the likely hood and number of accidents.. but don't you think nuclear is a better alternative to coal etc. while we are switching to regenerative energy's?
Because we still need at least backup power plants for a while, due to the non constant nature of wind and sun.
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#7At least with the current technology there are too many downsides to nuclear power. The nuclear waste issue still hasn't been solved, and nuclear accidents do happen, apparently despite all the security measures. Small reactors, maybe even mobile, can only make this worse.
I'll readily admit I'm no nuclear physicist, but even I'm not so ignorant as to smear negative broadbrush appraisals reactionarily simply because I read 'teh nukular' in an article.
In fact, small format nuclear offers a decent chance at bridging the (frankly archaic in my opinion) second and third generation reactors with fourth generation and beyond.
Small format allows for quicker iteration and greater distribution of development due to lower costs (witness start-ups across North America, Europe and China making progress that might make ITER or the EDF blush in a few years).
Small format encourages systems that actually use waste of previous generations reactors, thereby alleviating the single-biggest worry about 'nukular' beyond proliferation.. which in itself is physically and technically stymied by advanced techs.
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#8At least with the current technology there are too many downsides to nuclear power. The nuclear waste issue still hasn't been solved, and nuclear accidents do happen, apparently despite all the security measures. Small reactors, maybe even mobile, can only make this worse.
So you do prefer a big reactor blowing up, instead of a small one? No I know, you fear, that this increases the number of reactors dramatically and therefore the likely hood and number of accidents.. but don't you think nuclear is a better alternative to coal etc. while we are switching to regenerative energy's? Because we still need at least backup power plants for a while, due to the non constant nature of wind and…
Yes, I actually prefer to keep the nuclear stuff in a limited number of places. That makes supervision a lot easier, and stealing nuclear material a lot harder. Much more, I prefer not adding to the nuclear waste we already don't know how to deal with.
Fossil energy is preferable to nuclear, and the volatility of wind or solar energy is much less of a problem than people think. Especially with newer technologies to even out the supply.
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#9At least with the current technology there are too many downsides to nuclear power. The nuclear waste issue still hasn't been solved, and nuclear accidents do happen, apparently despite all the security measures. Small reactors, maybe even mobile, can only make this worse.
Nuclear accidents happen, yes... at power plants with designs which were outlawed on safety grounds 40 years ago.
If you want to prevent nuclear accidents, you should be supporting attempts to build new reactors, because that's the fastest route to getting the old ones decommissioned.
Re: Canada begins Small Modular Reactor strategy roadmap
#10At least with the current technology there are too many downsides to nuclear power. The nuclear waste issue still hasn't been solved, and nuclear accidents do happen, apparently despite all the security measures. Small reactors, maybe even mobile, can only make this worse.
I'll readily admit I'm no nuclear physicist, but even I'm not so ignorant as to smear negative broadbrush appraisals reactionarily simply because I read 'teh nukular' in an article. In fact, small format nuclear offers a decent chance at bridging the (frankly archaic in my opinion) second and third generation reactors with fourth generation and beyond. Small format allows for quicker iteration and greater distributio…
As I said, new technologies might change that assessment, but these technologies are not even on the horizon yet.
The problem with nuclear waste, however, very much exists already.
And there is no mention that these SMR create less nuclear waste or that they can't be turned into weapons grade material. Certainly even the fissile material in an SMR would be enough for a dirty bomb out of hell. Let alone the material you can steal from a dozen reactors in a sparsely populated area, none of which will have significant security.