Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV on Telegram or Facebook! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Energy: Why nuclear energy is very limited?
  • Global power consumption today is about 15 terawatts (TW). Currently, the global nuclear power supply capacity is only 375 gigawatts (GW). In order to examine the large-scale limits of nuclear power, to supply 15 TW with nuclear only, we would need about 15,000 nuclear reactors.

    Land and and location: One nuclear reactor plant requires about 20.5 km2 (7.9 mi2) of land to accommodate the nuclear power station itself, its exclusion zone, its enrichment plant, ore processing, and supporting infrastructure. Secondly, nuclear reactors need to be located near a massive body of coolant water, but away from dense population zones and natural disaster zones. Simply finding 15,000 locations on Earth that fulfill these requirements is extremely challenging.

    Lifetime: Every nuclear power station needs to be decommissioned after 40-60 years of operation due to neutron embrittlement - cracks that develop on the metal surfaces due to radiation. If nuclear stations need to be replaced every 50 years on average, then with 15,000 nuclear power stations, one station would need to be built and another decommissioned somewhere in the world every day. Currently, it takes 6-12 years to build a nuclear station, and up to 20 years to decommission one, making this rate of replacement unrealistic.

    Accident rate: To date, there have been 11 nuclear accidents at the level of a full or partial core-melt. These accidents are not the minor accidents that can be avoided with improved safety technology; they are rare events that are not even possible to model in a system as complex as a nuclear station, and arise from unforeseen pathways and unpredictable circumstances (such as the Fukushima accident). Considering that these 11 accidents occurred during a cumulated total of 14,000 reactor-years of nuclear operations, scaling up to 15,000 reactors would mean we would have a major accident somewhere in the world every month.

    Uranium abundance: At the current rate of uranium consumption with conventional reactors, the world supply of viable uranium, which is the most common nuclear fuel, will last for 80 years. Scaling consumption up to 15 TW, the viable uranium supply will last for less than 5 years. Viable uranium is the uranium that exists in a high enough ore concentration so that extracting the ore is economically justified.

    Uranium extraction from seawater: Uranium is most often mined from the Earth’s crust, but it can also be extracted from seawater, which contains large quantities of uranium (3.3 ppb, or 4.6 trillion kg). Theoretically, that amount would last for 5,700 years using conventional reactors to supply 15 TW of power. (In fast breeder reactors, which extend the use of uranium by a factor of 60, the uranium could last for 300,000 years. However, these reactors’ complexity and cost makes them uncompetitive.) Moreover, as uranium is extracted, the uranium concentration of seawater decreases, so that greater and greater quantities of water are needed to be processed in order to extract the same amount of uranium. The volume of seawater that would need to be processed would become economically impractical in much less than 30 years.

    Exotic metals: The nuclear containment vessel is made of a variety of exotic rare metals that control and contain the nuclear reaction: hafnium as a neutron absorber, beryllium as a neutron reflector, zirconium for cladding, and niobium to alloy steel and make it last 40-60 years against neutron embrittlement. Extracting these metals raises issues involving cost, sustainability, and environmental impact. In addition, these metals have many competing industrial uses; for example, hafnium is used in microchips and beryllium by the semiconductor industry. If a nuclear reactor is built every day, the global supply of these exotic metals needed to build nuclear containment vessels would quickly run down and create a mineral resource crisis. This is a new argument that Abbott puts on the table, which places resource limits on all future-generation nuclear reactors, whether they are fueled by thorium or uranium.

    https://phys.org/news/2011-05-nuclear-power-world-energy.html?ref=vc.ru

  • 4 Replies sorted by
  • Great breakdown.

    A question arrises, whose are the possibilities to go past current energy limits?

    We could assume we still have 50% of resources/year blocked by class issues. So they could be freed by revolution. But revolution has it's own cost and inertia in the disruption/reorganization process, so it has not instantaneous effect, not to say it will not be uncontested so it's lot of resources going to conflict itself. At same time we reached peak-everything and are now going downcurve.

    It's revolutionary process capable of reversing degeneration of society by now?

  • China plans to build lots of nuclear plants. Yeah uranium spot price… let’s see how high it goes.

  • SMR may be built in every major cities in the future.

  • The cooling systems of aging nuclear power plants make me worry. They probably have cast iron trunk pipes that are 4 or 5 feet wide and constantly require additives to inhibit corrosion and gumming. After working in an industrial plant with a similar system for a few years, I would encourage decommissioning of all the old reactors because it might be only a matter of time before the next disaster occurs, IMO. Another worry is management. The generational shift as elders retire could mean that a culture of negligence emerges. Points of failure could yield system failures. I would expect new designs for nuclear plants to have better fail-safes and safety improvements anyway