Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rick Perry's vision of hot tub-sized nuclear power plants isn't so far-fetched
washingtonexaminer.com ^ | John Siciliano

Posted on 10/09/2017 5:38:11 AM PDT by RoosterRedux

Energy Secretary Rick Perry has a vision for developing fully mobile, hot tub-sized nuclear power plants that could become the latest piece in the Energy Department's innovation and grid resiliency push.

Perry brought up the idea while addressing a National Clean Energy Week conference late last month. He used it as an example of what the Trump administration means when it talks about energy "innovation" as part of its energy dominance agenda.

Perry called them "small modular reactors." But the version of the technology he described would function more like a nuclear battery than a conventional, water-cooled nuclear power plant.

He envisioned them being used for hurricane relief in Puerto Rico. The nuclear batteries would be piled into the cargo hold of a C-130 military transport plane, the kind Perry used to fly in the Air Force, and flown to the disaster zone to re-energize the island's wiped-out grid, he explained.

The situation in Puerto Rico is "maybe one of the most tragic events in history," Perry said. "We are trying to get micro-generators down there," but if small modular reactors were available, they "could serve tens of thousands" and even more "very quickly."

When he delivered the speech, nearly all 1.6 million electricity customers in Puerto Rico were without electricity. Perry's agency is working with the Federal Emergency Management Agency on power restoration.

The idea of portable, small nuclear power plants is not new. It's an idea that came from the lobbying and consulting playbook of William C. Anderson, former President George W. Bush's assistant secretary of the Air Force for installations.

Anderson was a big proponent of making military bases self-sustaining, while looking for advanced power plant technology that would reduce the need for tactically vulnerable diesel supply chains in places such as Iraq.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: energy; nuclear; nuclearpower; rickperry; third100days; trumpcabinet; trumpenergy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

1 posted on 10/09/2017 5:38:11 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


2 posted on 10/09/2017 5:38:49 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Nice to see it could happen on a smaller scale.


3 posted on 10/09/2017 5:42:57 AM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Using Pu239 and Submarine technology, you can probably do this.
Not sure Congress or the public would ever go for it.


4 posted on 10/09/2017 5:43:52 AM PDT by Zathras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

“Hot” tubs, indeed.


5 posted on 10/09/2017 5:43:59 AM PDT by Pearls Before Swine (White is the new Black.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

there is a compay in Texas pioneering small reactors. Underground power, can power a small city for up to 20 years. For peanuts. Replace and Remove every 20 years. Great technology and would remove the grid from being a national issue.


6 posted on 10/09/2017 5:44:54 AM PDT by Chickensoup (Leftists today are speaking as if they plan to commence to commit genocide against conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

There’s one for the nattering nabobs of negativity to sink their maws into.


7 posted on 10/09/2017 5:45:05 AM PDT by Fester Chugabrew (Lock. Her. Up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

We used small SNAP reactors for power during the moon landing missions.


8 posted on 10/09/2017 5:48:00 AM PDT by Renegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
Just keep the Chinese out of these.

9 posted on 10/09/2017 5:49:10 AM PDT by Right Wing Assault (Kill: NFL, NBA, BLM, CAIR, Hollywood, Antifa, SPLC, CNN, ESPN, NPR, TWITTER, FACEBOOK)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble-bed_reactor


10 posted on 10/09/2017 6:00:03 AM PDT by Red Badger (Road Rage lasts 5 minutes. Road Rash lasts 5 months!.....................)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morpheus2009

11 posted on 10/09/2017 6:01:28 AM PDT by Paladin2 (No spelchk nor wrong word auto substition on mobile dev. Please be intelligent and deal with it....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Just for reference, an average home uses about 1 kW continuously, excluding air conditioning and electric heating, which can easily triple that number in hot/cold climates. But for other stuff, reefers, plasmas, lighting, etc., figure 1 kW average.

So a 25 MW unit can power 25,000 homes (with the above exception). One of them huge nuke reactors is close to 1 GW, so about 40 times these little dudes (and nuke power plants typically have 2 to 4 of the big reactors). Large conventional power plants also total several GW.

Still, to fly-in 25 MW of capability in a transport plane is pretty darn good, considering the decade or so it takes to build a conventional power plant, and the multiple decades it takes to build a nuke.


12 posted on 10/09/2017 6:01:37 AM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Renegade
"After ten years, a SNAP-27 still produced more than 90% of its initial output of 70 watts."


13 posted on 10/09/2017 6:05:08 AM PDT by Paladin2 (No spelchk nor wrong word auto substition on mobile dev. Please be intelligent and deal with it....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Yes, now time to get the Delorean and complete the set!!!


14 posted on 10/09/2017 6:12:28 AM PDT by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Finally, finally, finally someone is making sense about nuclear energy. You have to envision this as a new revolution as the power plants can be small to run planes, cruise ships, even cars and trucks. Used in rockets.

Finally, someone is talking about that makes sense instead of this stupid, and I mean stupid wind and solar BS.


15 posted on 10/09/2017 6:21:59 AM PDT by nikos1121 (Let's get Newt in there to help...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

There are several devices that could be used but the people behind the government could not be in control. There was a traveling wave design that could consume depleted uranium. The green people fight these development.


16 posted on 10/09/2017 6:26:35 AM PDT by mountainlion (Live well for those that did not make it back.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux
The idea of portable, small nuclear power plants is not new.

The Navy has been using nuke power for generations, since the 60's.

Nukes can power an aircraft carrier, with hundreds of planes, and thousands of people, why not use the same kind of approach for emergency electrical power?

17 posted on 10/09/2017 6:27:14 AM PDT by USS Alaska (Kill all mooselimb, terrorist savages, with extreme prejudice! Deus Vult!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup

Thorium-fueled Molten Salt reactors can be made MUCH smaller than Uranium-fueled Light Water reactors. And there is one HUGE advantage to the thorium MS reactors - they are not fissile, so there is no such thing as “runaway” core meltdown. But the thorium fuel is fertile, meaning that once reaction is started (by mixing in a small amount of “spent” uranium fuel rod material) to initiate the chain reaction, the thorium continues to produce power until depleted, at which time there are far fewer long-lived radioactive isotopes, than there are with “spent” uranium fuel rods.

The thorium fuel cycle has several potential advantages over a uranium fuel cycle, including thorium’s greater abundance, superior physical and nuclear properties, reduced plutonium and actinide production, and better resistance to nuclear weapons proliferation (very little plutonium is produced, most of which is “burned” in the breeder cycle).


18 posted on 10/09/2017 6:31:10 AM PDT by alloysteel (Guilty until proven innocent, while denying defense, justice, mercy or any appeal. No pardon, ever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

Are any of these based on Thorium? I’ve watched a few promos on it.

Very interesting. No high pressure water cooling. No thermal runaway. Very cheap, highly efficient fuel.

5:05 video (very powerful): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uK367T7h6ZY

36:02 video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bbyr7jZOllI


19 posted on 10/09/2017 6:31:57 AM PDT by JohnnyP (Thinking is hard work (I stole that from Rush).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RoosterRedux

The only thing preventing us (US) today from having nuclear powered locomotives, ships, and possibly even Semis is irrational fear of radiation hazards. I can remember in the 50s when one of the first US nuclear power plants was being built in Elk River, Minnesota, people feared having that “nuclear electricity” pumped into their houses. It’s almost as bad today when discussing technology such as this that Perry is showcasing.


20 posted on 10/09/2017 6:39:23 AM PDT by norwaypinesavage (The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-48 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson