It struck me as a weak article, in particularly it didn't go into detail about the BWRX 300 which is being built (concrete has been poured) which is a water-based reactor with a rather good cost reduction story
the design depends on natural circulation and completely eliminates the pump, eliminates steam generators because it is a BWR, etc. Also instead of conventional reinforced concrete the containment vessel is made of prefabricated metal sections which are filled with concrete on site, there are no forms to build or remove.
It doesn't make a clear differentiation between that and future non-water based reactors which could potentially be cheaper by replacing a huge and expensive steam turbine with a small Brayton cycle gas turbine or by using nuclear heat to drive industrial processes, like making hydrogen, directly.
Neither the BWRX300 or post-water (Generation 4) paths are going to bear fruit in the current AI boom but if and when we get serious about decarbonization we are going to need a lot of electricity and heat; solar and wind are great when they available, but the storage story is not there 100% yet and nuclear is still in the running.
Another untold story about Gen 4 is that of the liquid metal fast breeder reactor (LMFBR) which I'd say has been maligned, books like We Almost Lost Detroit would make you think it is a dangerous and failed technology. Granted, LMFBR development projects have had some problems, but also some successes, EBR II and the FFTF ran without a hitch in the U.S. Superphenix had problems with the steam turbine and the transfer drum but had great success in term of neutronics, fuel performance and the heat exchanges. In Russia the
PaulHoule•26m ago
It struck me as a weak article, in particularly it didn't go into detail about the BWRX 300 which is being built (concrete has been poured) which is a water-based reactor with a rather good cost reduction story
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BWRX-300
the design depends on natural circulation and completely eliminates the pump, eliminates steam generators because it is a BWR, etc. Also instead of conventional reinforced concrete the containment vessel is made of prefabricated metal sections which are filled with concrete on site, there are no forms to build or remove.
It doesn't make a clear differentiation between that and future non-water based reactors which could potentially be cheaper by replacing a huge and expensive steam turbine with a small Brayton cycle gas turbine or by using nuclear heat to drive industrial processes, like making hydrogen, directly.
Neither the BWRX300 or post-water (Generation 4) paths are going to bear fruit in the current AI boom but if and when we get serious about decarbonization we are going to need a lot of electricity and heat; solar and wind are great when they available, but the storage story is not there 100% yet and nuclear is still in the running.
Another untold story about Gen 4 is that of the liquid metal fast breeder reactor (LMFBR) which I'd say has been maligned, books like We Almost Lost Detroit would make you think it is a dangerous and failed technology. Granted, LMFBR development projects have had some problems, but also some successes, EBR II and the FFTF ran without a hitch in the U.S. Superphenix had problems with the steam turbine and the transfer drum but had great success in term of neutronics, fuel performance and the heat exchanges. In Russia the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BN-800_reactor
is a beautiful and successful machine.
We are hearing a lot about other designs but the LMFBR is still the most developed path to Gen 4.