The REAL case for "BIG nuclear batteries"
As always, it’s not technical, nor environmental.
A new generation of nuclear reactors similar to oversized batteries is on the horizon, says MIT News.
These mini-reactors are called “nuclear batteries” because they would:
- fit within a standard container
- be trucked to the single factories, military bases or neighborhoods that would use all their power (about 10 megawatts)
- run there unattended, for five to 10 years, and then
- be trucked back to the factory for refueling and refurbishment
Why these nuclear batteries would be good
According to their designers, the “nuclear batteries”:
- do not need large, very complex sites, that are also extremely expensive to build
- the small physical size also makes them much more secure (see the article for details)
- they make nuclear energy become “an [affordable] product, not a mega-project”
- mass adoption would play a significant role to avert catastrophic climate change
The REAL reason why these nuclear batteries could be good
If, how and how much modern society should use more nuclear power is a bigger, separate question. But if more nuclear power is needed, I am almost certain that it should come from “nuclear batteries” for political, not environmental nor technical reasons.
MIT News “hides” those reasons in this single sentence: “nuclear batteries are ideally suited to create resilience in every sectors of the economy”.
But that is the same reason I first discussed two years ago, introducing these other “nuclear batteries”:
<u><em><strong>CAPTION:</strong>
<a href="/2019/05/the-political-reasons-to-support-nuscale-powers-small-modular-reactors/" target="_blank">Nuclear batteries, 2019 version</a>
</em></u>
“The main, long term impact of renewables or nuclear is [to] change the structure and placement of political power: the least energy you need, from whatever [far-away] source, the greater your freedom is”.