Reactor Simulation

Back in January, I wrote a little something about nuclear energy.

While nuclear power is still highly controversial in the United States, others see it has an option for clean, affordable alternative energy. Here’s a news item about China’s efforts to follow the footsteps of France and Japan in adopting nuclear power as a formidable source of energy.

From DailyTech:

The nation, which currently relies heavily on coal power, is including nuclear development in a diverse program which also includes massive solar and wind power growth.

Concrete was just poured at the site of a new reactor in Sanmen, China, built by the Westinghouse Electric Company, The Shaw Group Inc., China’s State Nuclear Power Technology Corporation, and the Sanmen Nuclear Power Company of China National Nuclear Corporation.  The reactor will be the first of four 1,100 MWe reactors built.

The new reactor, the Westinghouse AP1000, is an extremely advanced design which focuses on modularity and automation, as well as safety and optimum fuel use.  It is classed as a Generation III+ reactor and is the only such reactor to receive Design Certification from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

In total, the four reactor project will cost the nation approximately $8B USD.  However, it will put them in a position of nuclear leadership, with no other nation currently employing this reactor design, the latest from Westinghouse.  Westinghouse President and CEO Aris Candris states, “Completion of concrete pour is a major milestone that visibly moves the Sanmen project from the design and discussion stage to the construction stage.  More importantly, by getting this project underway on schedule, we are further helping to ensure that baseload electricity generation will begin at this plant as intended in 2013.”

While I don’t want to express my opinion on the matter (one nuclear disaster is far more devestating than all the wind farm accidents put together), I find that it’s still interesting to consider this comparison. Because of the severity and the huge impact of nuclear accidents, all the safety and accountability measures put in place at nuclear sites have proven successful and have largely allowed us to experience nuclear energy relatively incident-free.

What do you think?

Nuclear Plant in Michigan

This is Part 4 of our series on “Intro to Power”. If you haven’t checked out Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3 already, I recommend that you do. I talked about the fundamentals to electricity generation, steam turbine power plants, and efficiency.

Now that you have a better understand of how most of today’s power plants work, let’s go back to the big picture. Let’s look at the problems we face today with global warming and the need for new sources of energy.

Greenhouse gases have only recently entered the public’s eye. Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is by far the most well known of these, and for good reason. According to Energy Information Administration of the US, CO₂ makes up about 80% of these gases. Methane (CH₄), the bulk of natural gas, makes up about 10%. Other gases make up the other 10%.

Please understand that carbon dioxide isn’t, and has never been, considered a pollutant. If it were, then every living person and animal on this earth is a polluter, and we would be bad for our own health (though we are, in a way). It just doesn’t work like that. Environmental and air pollution is the cause of smog, bad air, and black lungs. Carbon dioxide is none of these things. Our very lungs produce CO₂.

In order to save ourselves from ourselves, we set a new fundamental goal: Release less carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Yes, this much we all already know. But how do we accomplish this?

The first idea is to turn to renewable energy, like solar and wind. Renewable energy has come a long way, but without a revolutionary way to integrate the world’s electric grid, it is far too unreliable. For the most part, power plants are needed to produce energy instantly, whenever it is demanded (where “instantly” requires a 5-6 hours lead time). The electricity that produced is not stored by any means. Many people tend to overlook this fact. All the same, solar and wind energy is not stored. They produce when there is sun light or wind, and they sit idle when there isn’t. However novel of an idea, it is far too unreliable as a source of energy without an integrated smart electric grid which can draw energy when the solar and wind farms fall quiet.

Don’t forget the vast amount of space required to support solar and wind farms, too. Isn’t it funny that most of the electric power goes to big cities and metropolises and the electricity comes from small, remote towns? Unfortunately the amount of energy generated on even a good, sunny day by solar cells cannot match the robustness of a plain, old steam turbine power plant. And the latter takes up far, far, far less room to function. These renewable energy sources are good when they work. Unfortunately, most of the time, they are inadequate to meet people’s ever-growing demand for more.

Another idea we have is to build upon what we have today. Let’s try sticking with the steam turbine power plant template for a while longer. After all, it is the most efficient and cost-effective means of energy today. Consider that greenhouse gases are merely the by-product of the heat we need to convert water to steam. It comes from only the fire we build in the boiler. We have two options: A) get a heat source that is free of carbon dioxide in the first place; or B) capture the carbon dioxide before it hits the atmosphere.

Today, Option A gives us nuclear power. It produces no greenhouse gases and no pollutants. It is robust and its operating schedule is not determined by the weather (the style we’re used to today with our fossil plants). There’s just this little problem of radioactive waste and the possibility of a meltdown. To this day, this nuclear waste waits in high-security containers in the ground, until we figure out what we’re going to do with it “later”. This doesn’t sit well with many people. Geothermal is another clean type of energy that follows the steam turbine model.

Let’s look at Option B. Today, we have a process called carbon sequestering or carbon capture. Basically, it’s the capturing of carbon dioxide through chemical or physical means. The problem is what to do with this stored carbon. Some have proposed to store it underground. My question is this, why should we be okay to stick carbon dioxide in the ground when we are weary of putting nuclear waste in the ground? they both do not belong there, and they both pose problems to the environment should they leak.

Other people say we are already too far gone, that any measure to reduce greenhouse gases is futile. They say we needed to stop emitting over 10 years ago. Unfortunately, and of course, no one wants accept this fact.

As President Carter said in a speech, “Conservation is the quickest, cheapest, most practical source of energy.”

This ends our really long series on “Intro to Power”. There remains a lot of unanswered questions and a lot of missing details. I intend to address them in future posts, in more bite-sized bits.

Feel free to leave a message below if you have any questions or comments.

(Nuclear plant image from Flickr.)