Revolutionary New Type of Nuclear Reactor Being Built in China

Let a Thousand Reactors Bloom [wired.com]: "... a new nuclear power facility that promises to be a better way to harness the atom. A reactor small enough to be assembled from mass-produced parts and cheap enough for customers without billion-dollar bank accounts. A reactor whose safety is a matter of physics, not operator skill or reinforced concrete."

Nuclear energy in the US and much of the industrialized West is very much a pariah among energy sources. Accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl, not to mention many a Hollywood movie plot, have cast nuclear energy as an inherently dangerous method of generating energy: an operator misstep away from turning the entire planet into a glowing ball of radiation.

It turns out that it didn't have to be that way. From the very beginning of atomic research, there have existed ways to harness power from atoms without the danger of meltdown and radiation release. But historical decisions and inertia, not physics or science, are what have made all nuclear power plants in the US as dangerous as they are.

Traditional water-cooled designs have fuel rods which are essentially time bombs, prevented from going critical through the use of cooling water and control rods. If you fail to manage the controls rods properly, or let the cooling water drop to expose the fuel rods, you have a major problem.

Essentially, the new reactor design places great emphasis on the design and creation of the fuel elements themselves. The fuel elements are designed and arranged in such a way such that they physically cannot go critical, no matter what. From a safety design perspective, this should be a no-brainer. But for various reasons, this design was not adopted for nuclear power generation.

One beneficial side effect of this design is that it can also be harnessed to generate hydrogen from water. Think of it: an inherently safe, non fossil-fuel, non-greenhouse gas emitting energy source that can also be a catalyst to drive the adoption of non-fossil fuel energy for automobiles and fuel cells.

Yes, there is still the matter of nuclear waste disposal. And it's no small matter. The public also will need to be acclimated to the fact that nuclear energy can be much, much safer than it currently is. But with so many potential positives, I think it's definitely worth pursuing.

Even pre-eminent British environmentalist James Lovelock agrees: "We have no time to experiment with visionary energy sources; civilization is in imminent danger and has to use nuclear, the one safe, available energy source, now, or suffer the pain soon to be inflicted by our outraged planet."