skip to main |
skip to sidebar
60
years ago, on December 20, 1951, the world’s first nuclear reactor
generated electricity to power four light bulbs! This is a nice write up
about the history and the future of nuclear energy: http://energy.gov/articles/60-years-nuclear-turned-lights
"At 1:23pm on December 20, 1951, Argonne National Laboratory director
Walter Zinn scribbled into his log book, “Electricity flows from atomic
energy. Rough estimate indicates 45 kw.” At that moment, scientists from
Argonne and the National Reactor Testing Station, the forerunner to
today's Idaho National Laboratory, watched four light bulbs glow,
powered by the world’s first nuclear reactor to generate electricity.
Fifteen years later, in Arco, Idaho, President Johnson stood at this
same site and designated the reactor a national historic landmark. He
said, “We have moved far to tame for peaceful uses the mighty forces
unloosed when the atom was split. And we have only just begun. What
happened here merely raised the curtain on a very promising drama in our
long journey for a better life.”" also see http://www.inl.gov/ebr/ for more info on this first reactor EBR-1...
Aside
from using a language that seems biased against nuclear power and aside
from making it like a sensational story, this series of articles seem
to be an in-depth reporting on the issue: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Canada+nuclear+cleanup+will+cost+billions+dollars+take+decades+complete/5874209/story.html ... see also: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/atomic-wasteland/index.html
.... let us not forget that other energy sources also have hazardous
implications for thousands of years and beyond (CO2 greenhouse effect,
global warming which could be irreversible)... to stop using the
nuclear technology that is clean compared to other sources of energy as
well as its other benefits such as medical isotopes and neutron
scattering because of the waste seems to be shortsighted... Nuclear
waste has been and continues to be stored safely... quoting McCauley,
the director of the uranium and radioactive waste division at Natural
Resources Canada in the article: "My view is that we’ve got a pretty
good story ... to tell in terms of radioactive waste management. I’m not
saying that it’s not a big challenge for us, but I do think we’ve got
the framework in place that we can be successful."
Listen
to Premier Brad Wall, Government of Saskatchewan, answering the
question whether Saskatchewan will build a nuclear power plant on
December 13, 2011. Paraphrasing: 1. Saskatchewan continues to find ways
to add value to uranium mining in the province, 2. Saskatchewan is
working with private sector and UofS establishing the nuclear research
centre there, 3. Saskatchewan is working with Hitachi on developing
small reactor technology, 4. Saskatchewan will continue working on nuclear
medicine reclaiming its leadership position in that field: http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/1325532118001
See also the recent budget address: http://www.finance.gov.sk.ca/budget2011-12/BudgetAddress
"This year our government is providing Innovation Saskatchewan with
$3.5 million for research into areas with promising commercial potential
in clean energy, nuclear science and medicine and agriculture
biotechnology.
Over the next 7 years our government will invest $40
million to establish Saskatchewan as an international leader in nuclear
medicine, science, engineering and safety. "
A
must read interview with Dr. Ted Hsu, recently elected Liberal MP for
Kingston and the Islands, about science policy in Canada published in
the July-Sept. 2011 issue of Physics in Canada (http://www.cap.ca/en/article/interview-ted-hsu-liberal-mp-kingston-and-islands-conducted-june-2-2011),
well said Dr. Hsu: "I would like to see Canada build a new research
reactor. This is not something that is party policy. Personally as far
as nuclear power is concerned I would like nuclear power to compete on a
fully-costed basis and leave it at that. By fully-costed I mean making
sure we take into account the full cost of decommissioning and waste
disposal and the risk of something going wrong. But a research reactor
is a different thing. It’s easy in the physics community to say “Let’s
build a research reactor. You know it’s not the same as a power
reactor” and physicists understand that but the general public doesn’t.
There is still a certain element of fear of nuclear anything, so I
think it will require some good communication to explain that no, Canada
has a Nobel prize in neutron scattering and we had a world-leading
facility in Chalk River that brought industrial and basic researchers
from all over the world to collaborate with Canadian scientists, to
train Canadian students and bring leading-edge research to Canada. That
this reactor is very old and it’s going to break down in a few years
again and we are after all made of nuclei but people tell me the average
voter may not even know that or be able to vocalize that. So if you
want to study matter then you need a source of neutrons and if you want
to make medical isotopes you need to have a reactor and if nuclear
energy is going to be part of the energy mix in the future, then you
need to study how materials are affected by radiation. I think there is
a very good case to be made that Canada should commit to build a new
research reactor and commit to being in the lead again in research in
that area. So that’s something that I would like to see."
Do
small modular reactors hold the key to future nuclear power generation
in the US? a study released earlier this month from the Energy Policy
Institute at the University of Chicago (EPIC) concludes yes indeed: http://news.uchicago.edu/article/2011/12/13/small-reactors-could-figure-us-energy-future
"“Clearly, a robust commercial SMR industry is highly advantageous to
many sectors in the United States,” concluded the study, led by Robert
Rosner, institute director and the William Wrather Distinguished Service
Professor in Astronomy & Astrophysics.
“It would be a huge
stimulus for high-valued job growth, restore U.S. leadership in nuclear
reactor technology and, most importantly, strengthen U.S. leadership in a
post-Fukushima world, on matters of nuclear safety, nuclear security,
nonproliferation, and nuclear waste management,” the report said.
The SMR report was one of two that Rosner rolled out Thursday, Dec. 1,
at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington,
D.C. Through his work as former chief scientist and former director of
Argonne National Laboratory, Rosner became involved in a variety of
national policy issues, including nuclear and renewable energy
technology development.
The reports assessed the economic
feasibility of classical, gigawatt-scale reactors and the possible new
generation of modular reactors. The latter would have a generating
capacity of 600 megawatts or less, would be factory-built as modular
components, and then shipped to their desired location for assembly."
..., here is the link to the full report: https://epic.sites.uchicago.edu/sites/epic.uchicago.edu/files/uploads/EPICSMRWhitePaperFinalcopy.pdf
TRIUMF
continues to pursue the production of technetium-99m by medical
cyclotron technology... even if this will be viable route, let's not
forget that a new reactor replacing the aging NRU not only could produce
medical isotopes but also it could allow neutron scattering to continue
for many years more... here is a recent report by TRIUMF on their
activities: http://www.triumf.ca/headlines/workshops-conferences/triumf-global-isotopes-conversation
... "This week, Dr. Thomas J. Ruth is participating in a 3-day "Moly-99
Topical Meeting" in Santa Fe, New Mexico, organized by the U.S. DOE's
National Nuclear Security Administration. Tom is one of only three
Canadians invited to the workshop (the other being from the Government
of Canada and Nordion). The meeting features leaders from the major
U.S. laboratories and research organizations as well as nuclear-medicine
companies and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
Tom is speaking about the NISP program he leads with support from
Natural Resources Canada that is demonstrating how existing,
conventional medical cyclotrons can be modestly upgraded to become
viable suppliers of Tc-99m for locall urban regions. "
This is the link to more details on their joint program with Natural Resources Canada: http://www.triumf.ca/nrcan-nisp
Is
safe disposal of nuclear waste from new nuclear power reactors without
cost to taxpayers possible? The UK seems to have a solution: "From the
start of generation, operators of new nuclear power plants will be
required to set aside enough money to meet this expected cost. A cap has
also been set, giving operators certainty of the maximum that they
would pay, and this is set at about three times the current estimate."
... "What this boils down to is a charge per unit of electricity
generated. An operator can expect to pay £0.20 ($0.31) per MWh if the
facility is built to current cost estimates with a cap of £0.71 ($1.11)
per MWh. These compare to current prices of electricity for a large
industrial user of about £83 ($130) per MWh."... read more: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/WR_Waste_costs_for_UK_new_build_0912111.html
Ontario’s
Long Term Energy Plan (OLTEP) allocates 46 per cent of future grid
space to nuclear generation, see here for the full plan in pdf: http://www.energy.gov.on.ca/en/ltep/
... A recent report by Ontario Sustainable Energy Association (OSEA)
just released suggests there is no business case for nuclear power and
without subsidies the industry would not survive in Ontario... The
report, Nuclear Power: Where’s the Business Case can be found here: http://www.ontario-sea.org/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=3483).
It argues that nuclear power retains an unfair advantage over renewable
power generators because of federal and provincial subsidies and also
that no nuclear project has ever been delivered on time and on budget in
Ontario ... There is a must read review of this report on Renew Canada
pointing out the reports shortcomings: http://renewcanada.net/2011/osea-ontario-doesnt-need-nuclear/
: "However, the report fails to explain why a significant investment in
nuclear reactors from OPG will actually affect Hydro One’s ability to
invest in local distribution systems. The report cites the construction
of the Bruce to Milton transmission line as a $650 million subsidy to
nuclear power(because Bruce Nuclear required the transmission line to
feed power from the newly refurbished reactors at its site), but fails
to mention that this transmission line is serving a dual purpose–it also
allows major wind farms a connection point for grid access. While it is
true that the project is primarily for Bruce Nuclear, the report does
not make it clear that major renewable generators will also gain
increased transmission access.
OSEA further suggests that Ontario
does not require nuclear power for baseload supply because of the
availability of hydroelectricity and the opportunities for major
industries to adopt Combined Heat and Power (CHP) systems. Yet, the
report does not provide any numbers showing how much energy will be
required in the future. The OLTEP suggests, under its medium growth
forecast, that the province will require approximately 160 TwHs of
electricity per year. With no reference to these kinds of numbers in its
report, OSEA has a hard time proving that Ontario will not require
additional baseload power. In addition, there are no numbers showing the
potential available megawatts of power from hydroelectric and CHP
projects. This, again, makes it difficult to assert that Ontario will
not require additional baseload power." ... "While the report does
accurately describe the reasons why nuclear power is an incredibly
expensive and heavily subsidized form of energy, it does not prove that
renewable energy can replace nuclear. By failing to show how much energy
could be generated by the suggested baseload replacements, or how much
energy Ontario will require in the future, the report fails to
demonstrate that Ontario does not need nuclear power."
US
steps up efforts on producing HEU-free medical isotopes (I am not sure
whether there are any plans or efforts already on the way to convert the
HEU medical isotopes at NRU or not): "An agreement by the US Department
of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) to fund
$2.3 million in development work at NorthStar Medical Radioisotopes
could lead to creation of a domestic supply for molybdenum-99, the most
widely used medical radioisotope. The cost-shared cooperative agreement
will help the Madison, Wisconsin, company with development of its
accelerator-based process for manufacturing the isotope by bombarding
targets of the naturally occurring isotope 100Mo with gamma rays." ...
"the US is without a domestic source of 99Mo, an isotope with a 66-hour
half-life whose decay product, metastable technetium-99 (99mTc), is used
in 8 out of 10 nuclear medicine procedures—about 16 million imaging
procedures annually in the US. For decades, roughly half the world’s
output of 99Mo has been provided, and most of the US demand has been
met, by the Canadian company Nordion, which processes HEU targets
irradiated at the aging National Research Universal (NRU) reactor in
Chalk River, Ontario.
In recent years the NRU has been forced to
shut down for extended periods, which produced severe shortages of 99Mo.
In October NRU operator Atomic Energy of Canada reaffirmed previous
commitments to halt medical isotope production in 2016." ... "In
addition to its cooperative agreement with NorthStar, the NNSA is
funding different novel approaches to 99Mo production at three other US
companies: GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy has
U
of Saskatchewan must see videos: "about the cobalt-60 legacy, new U of S
initiatives that advance nuclear medicine, and former or current U of S
scientists who’ve made advances in medical imaging and nuclear medicine
research. Some of these videos are produced by the U of S and some are
produced by others." http://www.usask.ca/cobalt60/videos.php
Now
that the restructuring of AECL is completed is the time to make
decisions about new nuclear builds in Ontario as well as the future of
Chalk River Labs including building a new research reactor to replace
the aging NRU: "To win internationally we have to win domestically”. The
need for collaborative efforts between the Canadian nuclear industry,
its partners and all levels of government is needed to encourage growth
and development in the Canadian Nuclear industry, an industry expert
told local business and industry representatives..." ..."Mr. Lamarre
noted that to win internationally we have to win domestically and the
decision to build CANDU in Ontario would send a powerful signal to the
global nuclear marketplace that Ontario has a leading energy-generating
manufacturing technology. Mr. Lamarre said that support of Durham Region
is essential to CANDU and the future of the industry in Ontario and
Canada and that we all need to be ambassadors for this technology.
Mr. Lamarre finished by identifying the need for collaborative efforts
between the Canadian nuclear industry, its partners and all levels of
government in encouraging growth and development in the industry. Mr.
Lamarre identifying the potential of the creation a ‘nuclear cluster’ in
southern Ontario, incorporating existing nuclear industries and
offering opportunities for future expansion.
A clearly defined national nuclear energy strategy is supported by the Greater Oshawa Chamber of Commerce." read more: http://www.oshawachamber.com/What-s-New/building-candu-in-ontario-would-send-powerful-signal.html
Companies
should think nuclear: "Imagine if a Hamilton company won a contract to
build a supertanker in its port. Now imagine if there was a contract to
build 90 supertankers throughout southern Ontario.
The
multimillion-dollar refurbishment of the Darlington nuclear power plant
scheduled to start in 2014 has the equivalent potential to boost the
province’s economy."... "“There does need to be some internal discussion
around (the importance of nuclear),” she said about government
departments. “People have to stop tiptoeing around nuclear.”"... read
more: http://www.thespec.com/news/business/article/634825--backers-urge-area-companies-to-think-nuclear
A
national energy strategy must be established before it is too late, a
national dialouge is a good start!: "The federal government must start
playing a more active role in establishing an energy strategy and
coordinating with Canadian provinces. If they don’t, we will leave it up
to industry and our American partners to define what this strategy
should be."... "We need to address nuclear energy issues such as nuclear
waste management and the future role of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited
(AECL), the exploration of inter-provincial energy and electricity
interconnectedness and opportunities, technology developments and
R&D investments for cleaner energy generation and extraction. We
also need to deal with energy supplies and security in northern
communities and the risks of deep water and Arctic drilling for oil and
gas resources."... read more: http://www.hilltimes.com/policy-briefing/2011/12/05/we-need-a-coordinated-national-strategy-more-than-any-in-the-world/29012
A
point of view on the wind turbines for electricity production: "There
are many hidden truths about the world of wind turbines from the
pollution and environmental damage caused in China by manufacturing bird
choppers, the blight on people’s lives of noise and the flicker factor
and the countless numbers of birds that are killed each year by these
blots on the landscape.
The symbol of Green renewable energy, our
saviour from the non existent problem of Global Warming, abandoned wind
farms are starting to litter the planet as globally governments cut the
subsidies taxes that consumers pay for the privilege of having a very
expensive power source that does not work every day for various reasons
like it’s too cold or the wind speed is too high." read more: http://toryaardvark.com/2011/11/17/14000-abandoned-wind-turbines-in-the-usa/
As
you may know Canada was also putting in efforts to achieve the
sustained nuclear chain reaction during the same time period, the reason
they lost to the Americans in the race was access to large quantities
of high purity graphite. There is a very nice write up by George C.
Laurence detailing these efforts: "Experiments in Ottawa
Heavy water
was scarce and costly to produce. The 185 kilograms, that the French
scientists had obtained from a hydroelectric plant in Norway and brought
to England, was most of the world's supply. Rough calculations with the
inaccurate data then available suggested that it might be possible to
obtain a large release of energy using some form of carbon, instead of
heavy water, with the uranium. Carbon would be less suitable for the
purpose but was cheaper and easier to obtain. I decided to experiment
with carbon and uranium oxide. The experiment would have to be done
mostly in overtime because my small section was very busy assisting
Canadian industry to become proficient in the radiographic inspection of
parts for military aircraft and other equipment. Months later, I
learned without surprise that similar experiments with carbon and
uranium had been started both in England and the United States at about
the same time.
The purpose of the experiment was to determine whether
a very large release of nuclear energy would be possible in a large
bulk of the kinds of uranium and carbon which I had. It would be
possible if at least as many neutrons were released by fission as were
captured. That implied that if an independent source of neutrons is
surrounded by a small quantity (i.e. a few tonnes) of the combination of
uranium and carbon, more neutrons would reach the surrounding walls
than if the combination of materials was not present.
In our
experiments in Ottawa to test this, the source of neutrons was beryllium
mixed with a radium compound in a metal tube about 2.5 centimetres
long. Alpha particles, emitted spontaneously from the radium,
bombarded atoms of beryllium and released neutrons from them. The
carbon was in the form of ten tonnes of calcined petroleum coke, a very
fine black dust that easily spread over floors, furniture and
ourselves. The uranium was 450 kilograms of black oxide, which was
borrowed from Eldorado Gold Mines Limited. It was in small paper sacks
distributed amongst larger paper sacks of the petroleum coke.
The
sacks of uranium and coke were held in a wooden bin, so that they
occupied a space that was roughly spherical, 2.7 m in diameter. The
wooden bin was lined with paraffin wax about five centimetres thick to
reduce the escape of neutrons. The arrangement is shown above, as a
sectional view through the bin and its contents.
A thin wall metal
tube supported the neutron source at the centre of the bin, and provided
a passage for insertion of a neutron detector which could be placed at
different distances from the source. In the first tests the detector
was a silver coin, but in most of the experiments it was a layer of
dysprosium oxide on an aluminum disc.
The experimental routine was to
expose the detector to the neutrons for a suitable length of time, then
remove it quickly from the assembly and place it in front of a Geiger
counter to measure the radioactivity produced in it by the neutrons.
The Geiger counter tubes and the associated electrical instruments were
homemade because there was very little money to spend on equipment.
The
relative rates of neutron capture and neutron release by fission were
calculated from the data obtained. If the release had been greater
than the capture it would have been possible to estimate the "critical
quantity" of uranium and coke, that is the minimum quantity needed to
produce a self-sustained reaction that would release a large amount of
nuclear energy.
Prof. B. Sargent of Queen's University joined me in
these experiments during the summer university vacations of 1941 and
1942. Progress was slow because the work was interrupted by other
duties and we lacked the better equipment that would be available today.
By
late summer in 1942, our measurements had shown that the release of
neutrons by fission in our combination of materials was a few percent
less than the capture. Therefore, it would not be possible to obtain a
large release of nuclear energy in that combination of materials even
if large quantities were used. There was too much loss of neutrons by
capture in impurities in the coke and uranium oxide and in the small
quantities of paper and brass that were present. We did not then
realize how a little impurity could lead to failure.
Meanwhile in the
United States, E. Fermi, H.L. Anderson, B. Field, G. Weil and W. Zinn,
after a first attempt that was also unsuccessful, did succeed in showing
that a large release of energy would be possible using purer uranium
and very pure carbon in the form of graphite. Using the necessarily
larger quantities, the Americans then built the first nuclear reactor
and operated it on December 2, 1942. They called it an "atomic pile".
In
the summer of 1940, R.H. Fowler visited Ottawa, followed soon by J.D.
Cockroft. They had been to the United States to stimulate greater
American interest in research of military importance. They told me
about the nuclear energy research in England and that in the United
States which they had just seen.
With Prof. Fowler's introduction, I
visited L.J. Briggs, who was chairman of the committee that coordinated
the American nuclear energy research at that time, and also J.B. Conant,
E. Fermi, H.C. Urey and P.H. Abelson and learned of their work. After
my visit, we received in Ottawa copies of reports on the American
nuclear energy research for the next two years. One of them that was
particularly helpful was "A Study Concerning Uranium as a Source of
Power" by J.B. Fisk and W. Shockly, dated September 17, 1940, a
remarkable theoretical discussion of the feasibility of a nuclear
reactor to have been written so early.
In response to Cockroft's
suggestion when he returned to England we received a gift of $5,000 from
Imperial Chemical Industries, which was involved in the nuclear
research in England, in support of our experiment. It was an important
addition to our budget, but I valued it most as an expression to Dr.
Mackenzie of British confidence in our work." read more: http://media.cns-snc.ca/history/early_years/earlyyears.html
did
you know: "Nuclear power now accounts for nearly 14% of electricity
generated in the world with 440 active reactors in 30 countries,
according to the World Nuclear Association (WNA). Six countries, the
United States, France, Japan, Russia, Germany and South Korea, account
for three-quarters of the energy so generated." see nice graphics here: http://news.sympatico.cbc.ca/world/contentposting/the_role_of_nuclear_power_in_the_world/bcb64876
Here are a couple of good articles to learn more about how nuclear fuel is used for space missions and its history: http://www.space.com/12118-space-nuclear-power-50-years-transit-4a.html ..., see also: http://www.space.com/13709-plutonium-shortage-nasa-planetary-science-future.html
...."Plutonium-238, which is different than the type of plutonium used
in nuclear weapons, emits heat that is converted into electricity. The
material has been particularly useful on missions that venture into the
outer solar system, where the scant sunlight cannot effectively be
harnessed using solar panels."
Parliament
session: Nov. 21, 2011, neutron scattering at CRL is mentioned in a
speech by the Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke member of Parliament, Mrs.
Cheryl Gallant: http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Mode=1&Pub=hansard&Language=E
This is the part related to neutron scattering: "Using the technique
that Brockhouse pioneered, the NRC Canadian Neutron Beam Centre at NRU
today enables scientists from across Canada and around the world to
investigate new materials with neutrons. In fact, after the tragedy with
the space shuttle Challenger, NASA commissioned the Canadian Neutron
Beam Centre to determine whether or not it was a seal that caused the
accident.
Dr. Dominic Ryan, president of the Canadian Institute
for Neutron Scattering, outlined that the NRC-CNBC in Chalk River is
Canada's scientific hub for research using neutron beams as probes of
materials. Since everything is made of material, even our own bodies,
materials research using neutron beams has a broad range of
applications."
This is the full speech:
"Mrs. Cheryl Gallant (Renfrew—Nipissing—Pembroke, CPC): next intervention
Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the member for Willowdale.
It is my pleasure on behalf of the people of
Renfrew--Nipissing--Pembroke to speak in support of the legislation
before us, the keeping Canada's economy and jobs growing act.
The decision by the people of Canada to vote in favour of a strong,
stable, majority government was our mandate to get on with the job of
providing Canadians with good government.
This
is a great document describing the history of the NIST reactor and
neutron program over the past 50 years, the full pdf could be found at: http://www.ncnr.nist.gov/NCNRHistory_Rush_Cappelletti.pdf by Jack Rush (a NIST Senior Fellow (Emeritus) and was the leader of neutron scattering research at the NCNR for 35
years) and Ron Cappelletti (Professor of Physics (Emeritus), Ohio
University, has worked as a physicist at the NCNR since 1999): "This
brief history will attempt to place the NBSR and its evolution into the
most heavily used and productive neutron source in the United States
within the perspective of events of the last half of the twentieth
century which greatly influenced the need for large facilities in
American science and technology (and at NBS)."
Jeff
Lynn wins Presidential Rank Award for his many contributions to
condensed matter physics. Congratulations Jeff, this is richly deserved!
http://www.ncnr.nist.gov/news/Lynn_Presidential_Rank_Award.html
Nuclear-powered
Mars Rover ready for launch: "it’s does not have solar panels, and
that’s because it does not need them. NASA has opted for a more reliable
miniature nuclear battery to serve as Curiosity’s main power
source."... "A few days before the rover's scheduled launch on November
25, NASA scientists will install the Multi-Mission Radioisotope
Thermoelectric Generator. The generator is equipped
with thermocouples that convert the heat generated from the natural
decay of the plutonium dioxide into electricity. The power supply can
provide Curiosity with a constant 110 watts of electricity that will
allow the rover to travel farther than previous rovers and use more
powerful analytical tools, all while continuously recharging its
batteries." http://www.pcworld.com/article/242302/the_next_mars_rover_is_nuclearpowered.html , see also: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN_One_week_to_go_for_nuclear_rover_1811111.html
Cobalt-60
at 60: The Legacy of Saskatchewan’s Innovative Cancer Treatment, an
open-house event on December 4, 2011... seems a great event with a great
panel discussion after the official opening ceremony: "Following the
formal opening ceremony, the WDM has organized, in partnership with the
University of Saskatchewan, a discussion by a panel of experts from the
field of nuclear medicine on the legacy of the cobalt bomb. Speakers
will include Dr. Paul Babyn, Dr. John Root and Dr. L. Dean Chapman from
the U of S in Saskatoon, and Dr. David Pantalony from the Canada Science
and Technology Museum, Ottawa."... check out the details: http://wdm.ca/stoon/cobalt_opening.html
SNC-Lavalin
is forecasting profits for its Candu Energy sector next year:
"SNC-Lavalin is forecasting operating profits for its Candu Energy
sector next year, a month after completing the acquisition of the
commercial division of the Atomic Energy of Canada.
“Despite the
challenge we face, we are confident that Candu Energy is well-positioned
for 2012 given the opportunities in this sector as well as the quality and professionalism of our new 1,400 personnel,” CEO Pierre Duhaime said Friday in a conference call.
The company took on more workers than originally forecast, in part,
because it won a contract to upgrade Argentina’s 27-year-old Embalse
generating station. The $440-million deal followed five years of
discussions. The total refurbishment will cost more than US$1.3 billion
and take some five years to complete. Additional projects are possible
in Ontario and Quebec, along with new build construction opportunities
in Romania, Jordan and Ontario." read more: http://www.canadianmanufacturing.com/design-engineering/news/snc-bullish-on-nuclear-division-46511
CANDUs
can be more flexible than natural gas-fired & hydro generation:
"New nuclear build in Ontario will be highly manoeuvrable with a
dispatchable power range wider than gas or coal and could even have
dispatching preference over hydro. See Appendix which describes the
operation of the Ontario grid." read more: http://canadianenergyissues.com/2011/11/09/ontarios-nuclear-electric-generation-can-be-more-flexible-than-natural-gas-fired-generation/
"Nothing in life is to be
feared, it is only to be understood. Now is the time to understand more,
so that we may fear less." Marie Curie
A
must see: "At TED2010, Bill Gates unveils his vision for the world's
energy future, describing the need for "miracles" to avoid planetary
catastrophe and explaining why he's backing a dramatically different
type of nuclear reactor. The necessary goal? Zero carbon emissions
globally by 2050." http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/bill_gates.html
This is also a must see,
Nuclear Energy After Fukushima: "in a video broadcast to the
International Framework for Nuclear Energy Cooperation, Bill discusses
what governments and the private sector can do to increase the role of
nuclear power in delivering safe, affordable, and clean energy to the
world – and especially to the poor." http://www.thegatesnotes.com/Topics/Energy/Nuclear-Energy-After-Fukushima
Wow
it is incredible: it has been 103 years since Lord Ernest Rutherford
was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry for his research on the
chemistry of radioactive substances in Oct. 1908. Here (http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Ernest_Rutherford)
is a nice bio for "father" of nuclear physics. Among quotes referred to
him, I love this one the best!:) "All science is either physics or
stamp collecting" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Rutherford)
Meanwhile
CANDU business continues: "Companies that supply parts for Candu
nuclear plants say a new contract to refurbish a reactor in Argentina
will mean $100 million worth of business for them.
The newly
privatized arm of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL), Candu Energy,
signed the $400-million deal with Argentina in August to overhaul a
Candu reactor that has been providing electricity in Argentina since
1984.
Companies that make up the supply chain for Candu say the contract will keep skilled jobs in Canada." http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/10/08/candu-reactor-argentina.html
Chalk
River Nuclear Labs will receive more funding in the budget: "Another
$200 million — on top of nearly $250 million previously approved — will
be coughed up for Atomic Energy of Canada Limited's research
laboratories and the Chalk River facility that are still a part of the
financially troubled Crown corporation.": http://www.canada.com/life/Feds+hook+million+sold+AECL+reactor+division/5654186/story.html
AECL
gets new chief executive, chairman: it is great to have a scientist
leading the laboratories especially in these crucial times with
uncertain future!: "Ottawa said Robert Walker, who was senior
vice-president of nuclear laboratories at AECL, will take over from Hugh
MacDiarmid as chief executive.
Walker, an engineer by training, has
also worked as assistant deputy minister of science and technology at
the Department of National Defence and the chief executive of Defence
Research and Development Canada.": http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/story/2011/10/07/aecl-chief-executive.html
The
first is the great news that CNSC has approved AECL's application to
renew the operating license for the Chalk River Laboratories Site for a
period of 5 years. This is great news for
neutron scattering, isotope and nuclear research communities as it means
NRU is allowed to operate for the next 5 years: http://www.nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/mediacentre/releases/news_release.cfm?news_release_id=393
"While in principle the
decision allows for an extension to the life of NRU, operation remains
contingent on the results of licensed safety requirements, one such
being a reactor vessel inspection report CNSC expects to receive from
AECL by February 2012." from http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/IT-Chalk_River_licensed_for_five_more_years-281011a.html
"I am extremely pleased that
the Commission has renewed the Chalk River operating licence for five
years," said Dr. Robert Walker, AECL President and Chief Executive
Officer. "This license is vital to enabling AECL to deliver value to
Canadians and the world as Canada’s premier nuclear Science and
Technology organization.” from: http://www.neimagazine.com/story.asp?sectionCode=132&storyCode=2061014
Nuclear-powered
Mars Curiosity set to launch in November!!! this awesome news!
"Curiosity’s generator is built to withstand launch explosions or the
extreme heat — up to 3,000 degrees Fahrenheit — that would be
encountered during an inadvertent atmospheric re-entry after an
upper-stage engine failure.
The plutonium dioxide fuel is protected by several layers of safety. Fuel pellets the size of marshmallows
are sheathed in a dense, iridium heat shield. The pellets are bundled
in pairs in high-strength graphite shells designed to absorb the most
powerful possible impacts. And those shells are wrapped with ablative
sleeves made of carbon-bonded fiber." read more:
http://www.floridatoday.com/article/20110929/NEWS02/309290002/Safety-team-finalizes-plan-nuke-powered-rover-launch
A
great article about the target station at ESS in the Oct issue of the
Physics World: "Handling 100 °C temperature changes that occur in less
than 3 ms is a key task for those designing the European Spallation
Source, as Michael Banks reports... When complete in 2019, the €1.48bn
European Spallation Source (ESS) will be the most powerful source of
neutrons in the world. With construction expected to start in 2013, and
the facility fully open by 2025, the ESS will produce neutrons by
accelerating protons in a linac to 2.5 GeV before smashing them into a
seven-tonne target. The neutrons will then be cooled by a moderator and
sent to 22 experimental stations to be used by researchers to probe the
structure and physical properties of a wide range of solids, liquids and
gases. The ESS will specialize in long wavelength, or "cold", neutrons
that suit experiments on large-scale structures such as polymers and
biological molecules.". See http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/indepth/47369
to read about technical challenges of building the target station...
The full issue dealing with also other types of large scale facilities
could be downloaded here: http://images.iop.org/dl/physicsweb/2011/PW-big-science-web.pdf
Did
you know 25 years ago, on Oct. 3, 1986, the world's first Tandem
Accelerator Superconducting Cyclotron (able to accelerate most elements
to 10 MeV per nucleon) was officially opened at Chalk River
Laboratories? using superconducting technology for the first time in
building accelerators, they were able to create a more powerful yet
smaller and cheaper accelerator http://media.cns-snc.ca/history/fifty_years/hanna.html ... also see http://epaper.kek.jp/p85/PDF/PAC1985_2643.PDF
for a pdf file of the paper describing its commissioning (IEEE
Transaction on Nuclear Science, October 1985, Volume NS-32, Number 5,
p.2643)... more historical highlights could be found here: http://www.candu.org/candu_reactors.html
This
is a great read on why the US is now behind 5 nations in overall
innovation and competitiveness and continues to fall further behind, a
national innovation strategy is needed to reverse this course... perhaps
there are lessons to be learned here in Canada as well... see www.uic.edu/index.html/Chancellor/risingabove.pdf
for the report Rising Above the Gathering Storm. "Each of the five
nations ranked by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
as “out-competing” the U.S. has implemented a national competitiveness
or innovation strategy: that is, a unified plan to marshal their
governmental and private resources to support new technologies and
ideas. Worldwide, at least 30 countries have established their own
competitiveness plans. Yet the U.S.– alone among the world’s
technological leaders–has failed to draw up a roadmap for innovation. Is
it any wonder that, with no clear view of our destination, America has
failed to make strides in the right direction?"... "Now is not the time
to be slashing federal investment in research and development in
science. Investments in our federal science agencies and our national
innovation infrastructure are minimal down-payments on our country’s
security, public health, and economic vitality that we cannot afford to
postpone."... read more: http://www.aps.org/publications/apsnews/201108/backpage.cfm
This is the latest Global Innovation Index 2011 rankings of the world’s most innovative countries, Canada ranks 8 behind Switzerland, Sweden, Singapore, Hong Kong (SAR), Finland, Denmark, and the US: http://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii/main/analysis/rankings.cfm?vno=a&viewall=true
There
is still no plan to solve the medical (as well as industrial and
research) isotope shortage problem in the long term: "At present, both
the Dutch and Canadian reactors are operational again, and doctors have
enough isotopes to carry out millions of routine nuclear medicine
procedures per year, as they have in the past. But because both of these
reactors, as well as all of the rest in the small fleet of research reactors that generate medical isotopes, are rapidly aging, a replacement for them is desperately needed.
The Canadian government has even given the world a hard deadline for
this replacement. In 2016, it has pledged to shut down the 50-year-old
Chalk River reactor forever." ... Let's not forget a replacement for the
aging NRU not only will solve the medical isotope problem but also
allows Canada to continue with its leadership role in neutron scattering
and nuclear science and technology for years to come... Read more: http://www.txchnologist.com/2011/endangered-isotopes-where-will-nuclear-medicine-get-its-critical-tool
Whether
this idea will work or not, it is great that someone is willing to put
the money required to do the research required for it! without such
investments and research no progress could be made: "The outside of the
travelling-wave reactor will be similar to today's reactors, but the
inside is radically different. A conventional nuclear reactor depends on
enriched uranium to generate its heat and
electricity, but the travelling-wave reactor uses only a small amount
of highly enriched uranium (U-235) to kickstart fission and a
slow-moving chain-wave reaction. Two parallel waves of fission then move
about a centimetre a year, splitting uranium atoms of the spent nuclear
fuel (reprocessed uranium) or unenriched uranium (depleted uranium,
U-238) packed into the core, in a process that first creates
plutonium-239 and then consumes it. This reaction should be much more
efficient than a conventional reactor and, in theory, can be sustained
for decades." Read more: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/green-living/has-bill-gates-come-up-with-a-safe-clean-way-to-harness-nuclear-power-2363205.html
What
now that Germany dims nuclear power plants? really bad news in terms of
climate change "Even if Germany succeeds in producing the electricity
it needs, “the nuclear moratorium is very bad news in terms of climate
policy,” Mr. Varro said. “We are not far from losing that battle, and
losing nuclear makes that unnecessarily difficult.”" read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/30/science/earth/30germany.html?_r=2&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha2,
also to satisfy the required power they are buying power generated by
nuclear in neighboruring countries!!! "Set in the lush, rolling Bohemian
hills of the Czech Republic, the twin reactors of the Soviet-designed
Temelín nuclear power plant lie just 44 miles from the German border.
Since last spring, when Chancellor Angela Merkel began shutting down
Germany’s nuclear reactors, Temelín has stepped up supplies of
electricity to Bavaria, where big German manufacturers including BMW,
Audi, and Siemens (SI) have factories.
There’s a double paradox
here. Germany says its future will be nuclear-free. For the present,
though, it’s nuclear not-so-free, relying more than ever on electricity
from atomic-powered neighbors. What’s more, the Germans have been
turning off their reactors because they don’t want a Fukushima-style
meltdown spewing radiation across their country. Yet the Temelín
reactors, which are in good shape, are close enough to the border to
rain down radiation on Germany should a serious accident occur." read
more: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/nukefree-germany-isnt-exactly-nukefree-09292011.html
Is aecl sale "The dumbest in history"? NDP MP Nathan Cullen thinks so, Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Sale+dumbest+Canada+history/5468896/story.html#ixzz1ZO08xqdg
'The government, as part of its decision to privatize the Candu
division of AECL, is facing a $59 million restructuring charge and "$93
million in adjustments to revenue and costs resulting from AECL's
subcontract agreement with Candu Energy Inc.," the newly created subsidiary company of SNC-Lavalin.
Federal spending on the sold nuclear reactor division includes cash to
"further commercial operations' progress on life extension reactor
projects" that will be factored into future royalties paid back to the
government.
Under the terms of the sale of the commercial division,
the government and AECL must provide up to $75 million in support toward
the completion of the Enhanced Candu Reactor development program.
The sale - which was announced in June and is to close by Friday -
likely will also see more than 800 people lose their jobs. SNC-Lavalin
has committed to hiring about 1,200 of AECL's commercial operations
staff, which totals about 2,025." AT least with the sale behind us
finally, the focus could now be put back to research in nuclear science
and technology and what Canada needs to be able to continue with that,
i.e. a new research reactor...
And
now you ask what about Canada especially considering that its only
major neutron source is the aging NRU, could be that Saskatchewan will
be the scientific centre of Canada with its already operating light
source, add a new research reactor, and the sky will be the limit! It is
remarkable that Saskatchewan has realized the opportunity and initiated
its commitment... This is the link to the video
of the announcement for a New Centre for Research in Nuclear Medicine
and Materials at the University of Saskatchewan back in March: "The
University of Saskatchewan will receive $30 million in funding over the
next seven years to establish a centre for the study of nuclear medicine
and science.
"In the early 1950s, scientists at the University of
Saskatchewan pioneered the use of cobalt 60 for cancer treatment,"
Premier Wall said. "Today we are taking another important step in
re-capturing that international leadership position in nuclear medicine
and expanding it to include research in materials science and small
reactor design."
The province's $30 million investment in nuclear
research builds on January's announcement of $12 million in funding from
the federal and provincial governments to build a new linear
accelerator and support research into the production medical isotopes at
the Canadian Light Source." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0saRviWgEWg&feature=relmfu
As
far as new neutron sources are concerned, let's not forget the China
Spallation Neutron Source currently under construction: http://csns.ihep.ac.cn/english/index.htm
... and that is in addition to the Chinese research reactor already
started up and with neutron instruments being currently built: http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/NN-Chinese_research_reactor_starts_up-1805107.html
The
European Spallation Source (ESS) will be a world-leading centre for
materials research with neutrons and will host the world’s most powerful
neutron source when commissioned in 2025: http://ess-scandinavia.eu/ ... and it will be in addition to 12 or so already existing neutron sources in Europe (http://neutron.neutron-eu.net/n_about/n_where/europe)...
Also it was recently announced that the ESS and ILL (Institut
Laue-Langevin) are initiating an extensive collaboration for research
and development activities within neutron science, another major step
towards maintaining a significant role for Europe in neutron science
well beyond 2025 (http://www.cisionwire.com/european-spallation-source-ab/r/ess-and-ill-start-joint-r-d-in-neutron-science,c9166154).
