Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by mrpg on Monday April 03 2017, @11:15AM   Printer-friendly
from the pronounced-nucular dept.

Scientists at the MIT Nuclear Reactor Laboratory have devised an unconventional plan for accelerating the development of a small, safe, cheap nuclear reactor: they want to build a prototype that piggybacks on their existing facility.

Since the planned one-megawatt demonstration reactor would be incapable of sustaining a fission reaction on its own, the researchers believe they could avoid building a standalone experimental prototype, which the Nuclear Regulatory Commission generally requires. That site selection and licensing process can take a decade or longer, so the hope is that this approach could cost hundreds of millions of dollars less and take half as much time to build.

[...] The researchers specifically want to test designs for a small, transportable molten-salt-cooled reactor, intended for off-grid purposes such as generating electricity for remote villages or worksites. Molten-salt reactors, first researched in the 1950s, are a subject of growing interest in the field because of the potential they offer for greater safety and lower costs compared with traditional nuclear power plants.

http://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/03/mit-wants-to-build-add-on-1-mw-sub.html

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603963/mits-nuclear-lab-has-an-unusual-plan-to-jump-start-advanced-reactor-research/


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 03 2017, @04:23PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday April 03 2017, @04:23PM (#488250)

    So MIT thinks they can rules-lawyer around regulation. Is that a good thing? Regulations are created for a reason.

    Imagine the article instead said:

    Since the toxic waste has no special color, the researchers believe they could avoid building a waste treatment plant prior to dumping it into the river, which the Environmental Protection Agency generally requires.

    I'm sure we would all lambast and rightly fear what they were doing. So the question I have is what rules are they bypassing and why. If it is legal-red-tape for no good reason just to stop all nuclear work, then good on them for bypassing it. If it is a legitimate security risk and we wonder how we could have let a rogue nuclear installation happen when a meltdown/whatever happens in a few year, then shame on them.

    Can anybody who knows more comment?

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1