Do 2 Kilowatt Nuclear Reactor Still Exist

In summary: There are plenty of other ways to get 2kW(e).In summary, the conversation discusses the possibility of building a 2 kW nuclear power plant that takes up about half a city block. The participants question the feasibility and practicality of such a small power plant, and mention examples of existing reactors with similar or larger power outputs. They also mention the potential for using nuclear reactions to produce heat for other purposes, such as driving a generator or powering a light. The conversation concludes with the idea that while it may be possible to build a 2 kW nuclear power plant, there are more efficient and practical ways to generate 2 kW of power.
  • #36
average guy said:
jim
this happened to be on front page of
website i was looking for for other post.
'Energy Department Takes First Step to Spur U.S. Manufacturing of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors'

Have A Nice Day!

www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&oppId=138813 (The DOE is proposing a 50% cost share with industry)
www.ne.doe.gov/newsroom/2012PRs/nePR012012_print.htmlCached


http://www.ne.doe.gov/pdfFiles/factSheets/2012_SMR_Factsheet_final.pdf

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/commission/slides/2010/20100406/black-20100406.pdf

etudiant said:
These are fairly chunky units afaik, minimally 50 megawatts.
But they are small compared to gigawatt beasts such as the AP 1000.
SMRs have a range of small capcities per module, but the point is to build several modules on one plant site. For example, 12 50MWe modules would provide 600 MW, or 5 125 MWe modules would provide a 625 MWe plant. With one module down, the others continue to operate, so the plant can conceivably achieve a high capacity factor (CF).
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #37
astro nuke
you just shot down what i was going to say:smile:
oh. they mean THAT kind of modular.
i thought it was one big unit where as things progress
they yank out a section and update with a new one.
'never mind'
note: astro nuke i hit report button by mistake on your post.
they need to move that button further away from 'reply'

Have A Nice Day!
 
  • #38
As others have noted, you could make a tabletop nuclear power plant in the kilowatt thermal range. The licensing, though, is just as crazy as for a 4 GW plant that takes up a square mile with all its support.

Bare-sphere nickel plated Pu (Jezebel) is about 12.6 cm diameter to sustain k=1; if you have a reflector you can bring close for a bit, you can bring k>1, if you put an absorber next to it, you go k<1.

Harvesting tiny amounts of power is an interesting problem, but a thermocouple or a sterling engine can do it.
 
  • #39
jim hardy said:
the Army built one that goes on a flatbed trailer truck. its intent was to make power for mobile communications centers back in the vacuum tube days..

That was the ML-1; it was designed for 350kW
http://www.atomicengines.com/ML1.html

The Antarctica unit was a PM-3A
 
  • #40
russ_watters said:
I suppose you could take a thousand megawatt reactor, pull 2 kW off it and dump the other 999,998 kW as waste heat...

Or you can take Hanford's Cs and Sr canisters from their pool (see attached photo), put them into a RPV, let them heat up to ~300 C and run a turbine off their steam.

Granted, they generate only about 300 kilowatts, but the upside is that they need no stinking refueling for the next 50 years or so...
 

Attachments

  • nuclear-waste-encapsulation-and-storage-facility.jpg
    nuclear-waste-encapsulation-and-storage-facility.jpg
    35.4 KB · Views: 454

Similar threads

  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
2
Replies
45
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
789
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
12
Views
2K
Back
Top