Timeline for How can I build a Nuclear Reactor in my backyard?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
13 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 18, 2019 at 12:38 | comment | added | Tejas Shetty | It seems India has done some work on LFTRS | |
| Apr 8, 2017 at 12:27 | comment | added | aroth | Simpler, safer, long-lasting, and reasonably sized at the power levels required (~16kg of Pu-238 for 8kW; just don't put it all in one big chunk!): radioisotope thermoelectric generators | |
| Apr 7, 2017 at 19:07 | comment | added | wnnmaw | An interesting point on proliferation risk of U-233; it is usually considered lower risk than traditional U-235/238 reactors. U-233 will always contain some small amount U-232. This is key because U-232 has a very high energy gamma decay path. The result it it is very dangerous to work with be cause it is very difficult to shield against such a high energy gamma. Note that this will also challenge backyard construction due to the need for lots of concrete or lead shielding for clean fuel as it is dangerous to handle and ship. | |
| Apr 7, 2017 at 6:17 | comment | added | jwenting | @Alpha3031 yes, I was thinking of pebble bed reactors when seeing this question. They were at one point proposed for mounting in trucks, trains, and aircraft, so I guess they could at least be constructed small enough to fit into your garden shed. | |
| Apr 7, 2017 at 5:22 | comment | added | timuzhti | Pebble bed reactors are another Gen IV design that is also more practical on a small scale compared to current reactors. I don't think either PBRs or MSRs can be miniaturized to the ~10 kWe range though (~500 kWe could be doable). Fusion seems a even worse option. Lockheed Martin's (prototype) design is expected to output ~100 MWe IIRC, and that's on the extreme small side of things. | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 17:56 | comment | added | KeithS | Besides the salt toxicity and radioactivity, there's another potential issue, and that's the term "molten" in "molten salt reactor". MSRs typically require extremely high operating temperatures, which makes the technology better suited for large-scale installations to pass a breakeven point against heat loss. All in all, nuclear installations are large, centralized facilities serving multiple municipal areas for economies of scale reasons as well as security/safety reasons. | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 15:24 | vote | accept | Ashwani Tanwar | ||
| Apr 6, 2017 at 13:17 | comment | added | Reed | it seems the Chinese Government is looking into this and hope to bring a commercial version to market by 2030 businessinsider.com/… technologyreview.com/s/542526/… | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 12:22 | comment | added | pjc50 | The "some unsolved technical issues" are why they're not made outside of the lab; the molten salt tends to corrode the plumbing, as well as the usual neutron embrittlement problems of reactors. The molten salt requires reprocessing on an ongoing basis, but is chemically toxic as well as being radioactive. | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 3:28 | comment | added | Ashwani Tanwar | It would be perfect if you could include 'how to get them' part, but I understand if you cannot. :) | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 3:24 | comment | added | Ashwani Tanwar | Wow! Thanks, that's really helpful. I wonder if somehow I could make others notice this answer. Most probably I will accept your answer. | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 2:38 | review | First posts | |||
| Apr 6, 2017 at 2:44 | |||||
| Apr 6, 2017 at 2:31 | history | answered | CJ314 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |