Farmers using food as fuel.

[arrie]

That's true, but isn't a pebble bed reactor a completely sealed of unit, and for all practical purposed, once done out, you can take the thing and go bury it somewhere in the ground.

 

[killivolt]

That's true, but isn't a pebble bed reactor a completely sealed of unit, and for all practical purposed, once done out, you can take the thing and go bury it somewhere in the ground.

Yep it now is it's own disposal site. I think ?

Maybe you could experiment on building a holding tank above it like how they build city's on top of one another. Ounce you have reached that point then just put rods on it and let it overheat creating another Chernobyl. I understand that the mice have adapted to it as well as smaller organisms. A black mold has be observed that lives on it or something**broken link removed**

 

[3v0]

You are ignoring the need to sheild the reactor. You can get by with a light unit in an unmaned spacecraft. They tried and failed to make one small enough to power a bomber.

 

[arrie]

How long does a pebble bed reactor last?
Except for the Koeberg power station in the Cape, which seems to be off just as much as it's on, there is Pelindaba, which used to be the old atomic research etc. place back in the appartheid years. I'm sure they still have a reactor there, but doubt whether it's used.
It's literally 20 to 25 km from where we stay, just other side the mountain.
It just made me wonder.
I suppose if one could make nuclear batteries, it would be disposed of in the same way as the larger reactors, but having everybody running around on the street with nuke batteries, now there is an even scarier thought, otherwise it could have been a great idea.

 

[Mikebits]

The fuel rods for a sub last about 4 years. The spent rods remain radioactive for about 240,000 years. Since science has not yet learned how to convert an aluminum atom into gold, I doubt they can change plutonium atoms into lead or carbon. But who knows, the art of alchemy may once again be reborn.

 

[3v0]

How long does a pebble bed reactor last?
Except for the Koeberg power station in the Cape, which seems to be off just as much as it's on, there is Pelindaba, which used to be the old atomic research etc. place back in the appartheid years. I'm sure they still have a reactor there, but doubt whether it's used.
It's literally 20 to 25 km from where we stay, just other side the mountain.
It just made me wonder.
I suppose if one could make nuclear batteries, it would be disposed of in the same way as the larger reactors, but having everybody running around on the street with nuke batteries, now there is an even scarier thought, otherwise it could have been a great idea.

Only if you want a lot of 3 headed children!
How can you talk about "nuk batteries" without considering the radiation.

 

[k7elp60]

The fuel rods for a sub last about 4 years. The spent rods remain radioactive for about 240,000 years. Since science has not yet learned how to convert an aluminum atom into gold, I doubt they can change plutonium atoms into lead or carbon. But who knows, the art of alchemy may once again be reborn.

I was reading an article about this very thing. I think the process is called transmutation. According to the article there was a nuclear physicist that had developed a way to transmute the waste so the 1/2 life was very short.
The article also claimed nobody was going to support the idea as their minds were made up to support the US government in completing the waste disposal sites already started.
I think the same process(transmutation) can convert lead to gold but it takes a great amout of electrical power. The way gold is increasing in might be economical soon.

 

[k7elp60]

With all the hubbub about fuel and usage I know that you have nuclear Subs Air Craft Carrier. Low Cost. Why not nuclear batteries.

Does the means justify the end ?

On a similar note: When I was in college I remember my physics professor talking about the power of nuclear energy and told the class a kilogram of the stuff would run an automobile for a lifetime. He went on to say if the engine was a two cylinder steam engine it would outrun anything on the road.
Boy this would sure put the oil companies on their ear.

 

[killivolt]

Only if you want a lot of 3 headed children!
How can you talk about "nuk batteries" without considering the radiation.

But remember what they say three heads are better than one.

Shut up ? No, you shut up. Both of you can just go and kick your self's. I'm the smart one anyway.

 

[arrie]

Someone mentioned the nuclear batteries, I was just wondering.....
The problem with a steam engine is that it would be quite a big system, putting your car possibly back on rails, otherwise we would have been able to drive them already. Plus how do you get your steam back?.... coal.
Then there is the matter of the compressed air unit.
I still think getting your compressed air back at whatever (obviously quite high pressure) is where you'll lose out to energy requirements, and something like Stirling on that small scale would be totally useless.
Maybe fuel cells will be the way for the future, clean and rather efficient, yip, that addictive V8 rumble might well disappear.