The are robust arguments for nuclear energy, especially in the context
of climate change - nuclear fuel is among the most energy-dense fuels
known to humanity, and because of its limited pollution and the ample amount of
electricity it produces, nuclear energy is also the safest power source on a
per-kilowatt basis.
In the U.S., more than 100 reactors were constructed in the
1950s, providing 20 percent of the nation's electricity and 65 percent of
carbon-free generation. Opposition to new nuclear plants surged after the
accident at Pennsylvania's Three Mile
Island, and new reactor construction stalled for more than 30 years.
Now fears have faded and a new generation of nuclear
engineers and scientists is leading the charge, spurred by the need for low-carbon
energy.
In particular, third-generation designs use passive systems
to improve safety. Instead of relying on active components such as diesel
generators and pumps, they rely on the natural forces of gravity, natural
circulation and compressed gases to keep the core containment from
overheating.
Fourth-generation reactor proposals look very different from
current nuclear generators. For one thing, most avoid water altogether, instead
relying on pressurized gases, molten salt or liquid metal to keep components
cool. These coolants allow reactors to operate at higher temperatures and have
low risks of boiling off. The fuels are also different. More efficient designs
mean fourth-generation reactors can use lower-grade fuel or nuclear waste from
other nuclear power plants.
“Meanwhile, wind and solar power continue to advance in
performance and drop in price. Energy storage is also gaining traction on the
grid, and natural gas prices are scraping record lows. In this market, the
nuclear industry can't afford another hiatus from research and development if
it wants to remain competitive”. Read more at http://www.eenews.net/
