Air Cooling Reactor: Max Wattage for Sensible Heatsink

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the maximum wattage that a nuclear reactor could achieve when utilizing a sensible air-cooled heatsink. Participants explore theoretical and practical applications, particularly in scenarios with limited water access, such as mobile reactors.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants mention that air-cooled condensers can be quite large, referencing the Kendal power station's capacity of 6 x 690 MW.
  • There is a proposal for designing a smaller unit to condense steam relief flow for auxiliary feedwater pump use, potentially allowing for indefinite operation during a blackout.
  • One participant raises the question of mobile applications for reactors in areas without water access, suggesting that air-cooled systems could be viable.
  • Another participant notes that Palo Verde units, located in a desert, utilize air-cooled condensers, rejecting significant thermal energy directly to the environment.
  • A claim is made that a modular reactor of 40 MW would require a heat exchanger capable of sinking 26.4 MW thermal, which may be impractical for transport on a semi-truck.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the size and mobility of reactors, comparing them to gas turbines and diesel electric locomotives, suggesting that the power output may be significantly lower than expected.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express various viewpoints on the feasibility and design of air-cooled nuclear reactors, particularly in mobile applications. There is no consensus on the maximum wattage or practicality of such systems, indicating ongoing debate and uncertainty.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the implications of reactor size, shielding, and containment, as well as the specific operational conditions of existing facilities like Palo Verde. There are unresolved questions regarding the efficiency and practicality of air-cooled systems in different environments.

aquitaine
Messages
30
Reaction score
9
For a sensible air cooled heatsink, what is the maximum wattage a nuclear reactor could be?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Apparently they can be quite large. Google 'air cooled condenser'. One hit shows "World's largest natural draft dry cooling system, 6 x 690 MW kendal power station, south africa"

Seems to me a smaller unit could be designed to condense the steam relief flow and send it back to the (turbine driven) auxiliary feedwater pump for post-trip decay heat removal. If they're really natural draft this could even work indefinitely during a station blackout, without sending river or ocean water into your SGs.
 
Interesting, so what about for a mobile application on land, where access to water is nonexistent?
 
aquitaine said:
Interesting, so what about for a mobile application on land, where access to water is nonexistent?
I believe the Palo Verde units use air cooled condensers. They are in the middle of the desert in Arizona, west of Phoenix. Each unit is 3800 MWt, and they have to reject ~ 0.66 of the thermal energy directly to the environment.
 
So for example a modular reactor of, say, 40 MW needs a heat exchanger capable of sinking 26.4 MW thermal? In an air cooled solution that would seem to be too large to fit on a large semi truck or something.

EDIT: Is is possible to use an air cooled modular reactor to power something like a piece of heavy earthmoving equipment?
 
Last edited:
There is the shielding and containment as well.

Consider the size of a 40 MW gas turbine, and whether or not that would be mobile. Or consider the size of a 4400 HP (3.3 MW) diesel electric locomotive.
 
Astronuc said:
I believe the Palo Verde units use air cooled condensers. They are in the middle of the desert in Arizona, west of Phoenix...

Palo Verde has 'regular' condensers rejecting heat via wet (forced draft) cooling towers. The make-up to the towers is waste water from Phoenix, piped out to the site.
 
There is the shielding and containment as well.

Consider the size of a 40 MW gas turbine, and whether or not that would be mobile. Or consider the size of a 4400 HP (3.3 MW) diesel electric locomotive.


Well clearly the power output wouldn't be 40 MW, more like 1/10th of that at best.
 

Similar threads

New Salt Cooled Nuclear Reactor Approved by NRC
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
Another SMR on the Horizon
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Hybrid/variable spectrum reactor
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Cylindrical and Symmetrical Nuclear Fusion Reactor
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Can Small Modular Reactors Revitalize Nuclear-Powered Surface Combatants?
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
Safe zero base reactivity level nuclear fission reactor?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Helium Scarcity and Gas Cooled Reactors
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Taishan nuclear reactor Xenon problem
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Size Limitation of fuel Bundle in a nuclear reactor
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Reactor fail-safe shutdown at any power density?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K