[p2p-research] "Nuclear decline set to continue, says report, " by Nuclear Engineering International

[Paul D. Fernhout]

Part of the issue with any media report is that there is a belief (often 
true) that positive publicity about momentum will generate momentum. So, 
people hire PR groups for "astroturf" "grass roots" campaigns to show 
momentum. The same has been happening in the US health care debate. So, it 
makes it hard to believe media reports about "momentum" in the absence of 
any sort of numbers about growth.

With that said, on nuclear, nuclear batteries (both small and large) seem to 
be enjoying some interest.
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_battery

These things are sometime found in space probes, but are also in use by the 
military in situations where they want to place an unobtrusive device that 
will sit unattended doing something for decades.

I remember thinking how absurd the idea of a nuclear battery that, say, 
would power a home washing machine sounded to me when I read about it in 
Isaac Asimov's "Foundation" series. When the batter wore out, you would get 
a new washing machine -- that was how an advanced priesthood maintained 
control of a large population in one society in that book.

One example from today about how prescient Isaac Asimov was:
"Personal Nuclear Power: New Battery Lasts 12 Years"
http://www.livescience.com/technology/050513_new_battery.html
"""
A new type of battery based on the radioactive decay of nuclear material is 
10 times more powerful than similar prototypes and should last a decade or 
more without a charge, scientists announced this week.
   The longevity would make the battery ideal for use in pacemakers or other 
surgically implanted devices, developers say, or it might power spacecraft 
or deep-sea probes.
   You might also find these nuclear batteries running sensors and other 
small devices in your home in a few years. Such devices "don't consume much 
power," said University of Rochester electrical engineer Philippe Fauchet, 
"and yet having to replace the battery every so often is a real pain in the 
neck."
   Fauchet told LiveScience the batteries could last a dozen years. They're 
being refined at Rochester. The technology was developed with the help 
financial support from the National Science Foundation and has been patented 
by BetaBatt Inc.
   The technology is called betavoltaics. It uses a silicon wafer to capture 
electrons emitted by a radioactive gas, such as tritium. It is similar to 
the mechanics of converting sunlight into electricity in a solar panel.
"""

That company:
  http://www.betabatt.com/
"The company's first commercial product, a quarter size battery with a 12-20 
year lifespan and mission critical reliability, has performance 
characteristics that address current problems faced by medical implant, oil 
and gas, and remote sensing industries, as well as military and space 
organizations"

I don't know how well they work or what they cost.

For better or worse, nuclear materials are already widespread in smoke 
detectors. They are extensively used in medical imaging. So, there already 
is something of an infrastructure for producing and dealing with low-level 
radioactive items. In our society, we are already surrounded by nuclear 
materials use -- we just tend not to notice it or think about it. And when 
there are problems with that infrastructure, it is considered a crisis:
   "Isotope shortage means a healthcare crisis"
http://www.latimes.com/features/health/la-sci-isotope9-2009aug09,0,6453741.story
"The abrupt shutdown of two aging nuclear reactors that produce a 
radioisotope widely used in medical imaging has forced physicians in the 
U.S. and abroad into a crisis, requiring them to postpone or cancel 
necessary scans for heart disease and cancer, or turn to alternative tests 
that are not as accurate, take longer and expose patients to higher doses of 
radiation."

Here is one town sized version of a nuclear battery, but there are others:
http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2230198/nuclear-batteries-provide
"According to the company, they will produce 25MW of power when their heat 
is converted to electricity using a turbine, or 70MW if direct thermal 
energy is used. ... The company already has $2bn in orders for the products, 
she said, and is now chasing about $20m in Series B funding."

The company:
http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/
"Conventional reactors cost billions of dollars to build and are designed to 
serve large regions. The hyperion reactor is designed for applications in 
remote areas where cost, safety and security is of concern."

I don't know if they actually work though. But, contrast that -- two billion 
dollars in orders (claimed), versus the comments in that report about a 
widening gap about perceptions of a nuclear renaissance.

So, even within the nuclear industry there is fragmentation and infighting. 
Groups that support large nuclear power plants are probably loathe to admit 
all the innovation going on in relation to personal, home, and town-sized 
nuclear power generation. (I saw one proposal for disposing of nuclear waste 
by giving it to people in an encapsulated form to use to heat their homes. :-)

Of course, I'm more pro-solar myself. :-) I am pro-solar over nuclear in 
part because solar is an easier technology right now for individuals to 
produce and use safely, and solar is less subject to various forms of abuse 
and coverup and socializing risk than nuclear (Silkwood, TMI, dirty bombs, 
etc.). More that solar, nuclear industries lend themselves to privatizing 
profits and socializing costs (you can't see radiation pollution either), 
so, unless we have a very functional society, nuclear technologies will tend 
more towards corruption than solar at the point-of-use (there may be 
coverups in solar production, of course same as in the semiconductor 
industry in general, mainly with employees harmed). So, I feel that handling 
nuclear materials requires a higher level of trust than our society 
currently has proven itself worthy of day-to-day. Solar technologies require 
less trust by citizens of government -- even if solar require more trust by 
government of citizens (who are literally "empowered"), which is one reason 
why government resists small-scale solar. :-)

But, the same sort of trends that are driving improvements in solar (better 
design tools using computers, better understandings of materials, better 
simulations, people looking for alternatives) are also at play in the 
nuclear industry. And, as in the power industry in general, the big players 
are likely either in denial about the smaller alternatives or are actively 
spinning stories against small scale systems which otherwise are more 
amenable to private or local use and which can be built for less money and 
thus produce less centralization of political power. So, one might see this 
report as another attack against peer-level nuclear technologies, through a 
sin of omission.

--Paul Fernhout
http://www.pdfernhout.net/

Michel Bauwens wrote:
> yes it is surprising as there is indeed a perception of a come back ... but
> all recent attempts of the last dozen years seem to be failing quite
> systematically ... seems Amory Lovins got it right about it being
> uneconomical,
> 
> Michel
> 
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:11 PM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> What you include below surprises me.  I would have predicted the opposite.
>> One needs to make special note of futurism projections that come out flat
>> wrong.  In this case, I am certainly so.
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>>   On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Michel Bauwens <
>> michelsub2004 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>   From the news release, "Nuclear decline set to continue, says report<http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectioncode=132&storyCode=2053966>,"
>>> by Nuclear Engineering International:
>>>
>>> Nuclear will continue to decline according to a new report. At this point
>>> there is no obvious sign that the international nuclear industry could turn
>>> the decline into a promising future, it says. ...
>>>
>>> The report says that there seems to be a “widening gap” between the
>>> industrial reality with its current trends and the "perception of some sort
>>> of nuclear renaissance”.
>>>
>>> From the report:
>>>
>>> The flagship EPR project at Olkiluoto in Finland, managed by the largest
>>> nuclear builder in the world, AREVA NP, has turned into a financial fiasco.
>>> The project is more than three years behind schedule and at least 55% over
>>> budget, reaching a total cost estimate of €5 billion ($7 billion) or close
>>> to €3,100 ($4,400) per kilowatt.
>>>
>>> There are numerous ways by which governments have organized or tolerated
>>> subsidies to nuclear power. They range from direct or guaranteed government
>>> loans to publicly funded research and development (R&D). Direct ownership of
>>> subsidized nuclear fuel chain facilities, government funded nuclear
>>> decommissioning and waste management, generous limited liability for
>>> accidents and the transfer of capital costs to ratepayers via stranded cost
>>> rules or special rate-basing allowances are all common in many countries.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Work: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhurakij_Pundit_University - Research:
>>> http://www.dpu.ac.th/dpuic/info/Research.html - Think thank:
>>> http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>>>
>>> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>>>
>>> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
>>> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens