Nuclear power for desalinization not power?

In summary, desalinization using nuclear energy is an option for California in light of their drought and vulnerabilities to fresh water shortages, but there are several concerns that need to be addressed first.
  • #1
Arthur R.
4
0
In 2005 the American Nuclear Society endorsed the use of nuclear energy for desalinisation -- see http://www.ans.org/pi/ps/docs/ps62.pdf

Would there be any advantages in terms of safety and / or cost to using nuclear fission to desalinate seawater (or perform some other non-electricity-generation process) rather than as a source of power for the electricity grid ? I ask this in light of California's current drought and fresh water vulnerabilities world-wide.

Here are some topics for comment or exploration relating to the use of nuclear energy for desalinisation excluding power generation for the grid.

1) Seawater will likely have to be pumped some distance to the plant, given concerns about nuclear plants being located in flooding zones. Such concerns are not as great for desalinization plants using fossil or renewable energy sources.

2) Plant will _not_ have to operate in a way that supports the needs of the electrical grid -- this might be an advantage in method, safety, and cost of operation.

2) The most obvious desalinisation method would be using heat of fission to distill fresh water from seawater. Other methods might include the generation of steam to produce mechanical energy that is the motive force for vacuum distillation equipment; the generation of electricity to support an electrochemical method of removing salt from seawater; the use of radioactivity to drive or facilitate a chemical process with fresh water as the end product (I don't know whether these last two are physically possible or not).

Many thanks.
Cheers,
Arthur R.
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
  • #2
The idea is to use heat directly, without converting it to mechanical or electrical energy first, since such conversions are below 40% efficiency.
 
  • #3
Arthur R. said:
In 2005 the American Nuclear Society endorsed the use of nuclear energy for desalinisation -- see http://www.ans.org/pi/ps/docs/ps62.pdf

Would there be any advantages in terms of safety and / or cost to using nuclear fission to desalinate seawater (or perform some other non-electricity-generation process) rather than as a source of power for the electricity grid ? I ask this in light of California's current drought and fresh water vulnerabilities world-wide.

Here are some topics for comment or exploration relating to the use of nuclear energy for desalinisation excluding power generation for the grid.

1) Seawater will likely have to be pumped some distance to the plant, given concerns about nuclear plants being located in flooding zones. Such concerns are not as great for desalinization plants using fossil or renewable energy sources.

2) Plant will _not_ have to operate in a way that supports the needs of the electrical grid -- this might be an advantage in method, safety, and cost of operation.

3) The most obvious desalinisation method would be using heat of fission to distill fresh water from seawater. Other methods might include the generation of steam to produce mechanical energy that is the motive force for vacuum distillation equipment; the generation of electricity to support an electrochemical method of removing salt from seawater; the use of radioactivity to drive or facilitate a chemical process with fresh water as the end product (I don't know whether these last two are physically possible or not).

Many thanks.
Cheers,
Arthur R.
1) Many nuclear plants are located along coast lines, and they use the ocean as a heat sink. Obviously there are concerns about tsunami or hurricances depending on the location.

2) Such a plant might produce electricity as well as process heat for desalination.

3) One would not design a plant to use radioactivity to facilitate a chemical process. The radiation in the core consists of neutrons as well as gamma and beta particles. The neutrons are absorbed by nuclei and 'activate' them, i.e., increase the number of neutrons in the nuclide, which then decays by beta decay (or isomeric transition).
 
  • #4
Thank you, Nikkom and Astronuc, for your comments and insights.

Perhaps my question is more in the realm of economics than engineering, but I think that engineering is a component in answering the economic question. Some further pros and cons in addition to neccesity of pumping seawater farther than would be necessary for a a fossil / renewable desalinisation plant, and possible operational advantages to not having to use plant to meet the needs of the electric grid:

1) Pro: Plant does not require turbines, generators, staff, and equipment necessary to generate electricity and feed it into the grid.

2) Pro: Security measures - staff, equipment, and operations - might be less expensive because of the lesser security consequences of halting operations or damaging plant. Interrupting the production of freshwater seems to have far lower risks for the economy and safety of society than interruption / damage to grid electricity supply.

3) Con: Plant takes in seawater, rather than freshwater, so the corrosive properties of seawater are a concern in the design.

Since safety and cost are obstacles to the use of nuclear power, if a nuclear desalinisation plant could be demontrably safer and/or cheaper than a nuclear electricity-generating plant, this might overcome an obstacle to the deployment of nuclear energy in our economy. Note, I'm not against using nuclear energy for generating electricity, I'm just interested in increasing the possibilities for use of nuclear technology if they make engineering and economic sense.
 
Last edited:
  • #5
A nuclear reactor/core requires cooling, and the cooling would be high purity water (low electrical conductivity), or perhaps gas or liquid metal (probably Pb-Bi, rather than Na or NaK which have rather nasty reactions with water). Cooling requires pumps and an electrical supply (from the grid). The need for cooling increases with power density and burnup.

Since the plant contains special nuclear material, there would be a need for security.

We already have seawater desalination plants, so the corrosion issues are understood. There are special alloys that have good corrosion resistance in seawater, as well as carbon, plastic and ceramics.
 
  • #6
There is the obvious question: What about the risk of producing radioactive water?
 
  • #7
Algr said:
There is the obvious question: What about the risk of producing radioactive water?
There would be different circuits for cooling and desalination, which would imply one or more heat exchangers. Leaking tubes would be a concern.
 
  • #8
Arthur R. said:
1) Pro: Plant does not require turbines, generators, staff, and equipment necessary to generate electricity and feed it into the grid.

You're always going to need some staff to monitor the operation of the reactor, perform maintenance, etc. It's dangerous to have nukes operating on auto-pilot.

2) Pro: Security measures - staff, equipment, and operations - might be less expensive because of the lesser security consequences of halting operations or damaging plant. Interrupting the production of freshwater seems to have far lower risks for the economy and safety of society than interruption / damage to grid electricity supply.

You can only live without fresh water for a matter of days, without electricity a lot longer, although not comfortably. Just ask the folks in California how they're doing with a greatly reduced supply of fresh water. Even more worrisome, fresh water can be contaminated with biological or radiological impurities which are not apparent to consumers without testing.

Since safety and cost are obstacles to the use of nuclear power, if a nuclear desalinisation plant could be demontrably safer and/or cheaper than a nuclear electricity-generating plant, this might overcome an obstacle to the deployment of nuclear energy in our economy. Note, I'm not against using nuclear energy for generating electricity, I'm just interested in increasing the possibilities for use of nuclear technology if they make engineering and economic sense.

A very large percentage of the cost of a nuclear plant is the nuclear bits. Turbines and generators can be constructed without the regulatory oversight which obtaining a nuclear operating license entails. The reactor components and the plant buildings are quite costly themselves to construct. You still have to consider the additional nuclear waste creation of non-generating nukes, as well.
 

1. What is nuclear power for desalinization?

Nuclear power for desalinization is the use of nuclear energy to power the process of turning saltwater into freshwater. This is done through a process called nuclear desalination, where the energy from a nuclear reactor is used to heat and evaporate seawater, leaving behind the salt and other impurities.

2. How does nuclear power for desalinization differ from using nuclear power for electricity?

Nuclear power for desalinization differs from using nuclear power for electricity in the way the energy is used. While nuclear power plants for electricity generation use the energy to produce electricity, nuclear desalination plants use the energy to power the process of desalination.

3. Is it safe to use nuclear power for desalinization?

With proper safety measures and regulations in place, nuclear power for desalinization can be safe. However, as with any use of nuclear energy, there are potential risks and safety concerns that must be taken into consideration and properly managed.

4. What are the benefits of using nuclear power for desalinization?

Using nuclear power for desalinization can have several benefits, including a more efficient and cost-effective desalination process, reduced dependence on fossil fuels, and the ability to provide a stable source of freshwater in areas where water scarcity is a major issue.

5. Are there any alternatives to using nuclear power for desalinization?

Yes, there are alternative methods for desalination, such as solar-powered and wind-powered desalination plants. However, nuclear power for desalinization is currently one of the most efficient and cost-effective methods available.

Similar threads

  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
0
Views
473
Replies
25
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
52
Views
7K
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • Nuclear Engineering
Replies
3
Views
3K
Back
Top