TED Conversations

O'Neil Poree

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

A Voluntary International Effort to Produce Safe Nuclear Power Reactors

There is apparently a desperate reqiurement for safe nuclear power reactors.

They are the most feasible way to produce essentially pollution-free power, in the sense of preventing release of climate changing gaseousemissions.
(A caveat here is the present necessity to safely reprocess their waste radioactive products and released waste heat.)

The recent Japanese power plant disasters, along with earlier US and USSR nuclear accidents, emphasize the present lacks of both safe station designs and safe siting requirements of the past.

An effort of superb technical quality such as was devoted to the WW II Manhattan Project and later, to the USA-USSR space exploration competition, should be instituted. The latter effort developed into today's cooperative program between those formerly hostile countries.

That is the main thrust of this proposal: that no country on earth be excluded from letting their genius nuclear physicists and engineers contribute to producing a safe, livable nuclear power station in the very near future. So I suggest that this effort be entirely volunteer in origin; for example, the OAPABA (Oregon Asian-Pacific ABA) could initiate such an effort, motivated by their experience and capability in such endeavors, by the recent tragic Japanese nuclear accident, and by their potential access to useful nuclear designers in both the Occident and Asia.
It might begin with an open formational meeting of an INCNGO for SNP (International Non-Commercial Non-Governmental Organization for Safe Nuclear Power) excluding no-one, not even India, Pakistan, North and South Koreas (If the USA and USSR could get togethor on space exploration, little such cooperation should be unbelievable).

We, the human race, have the knowledge, we have the resources, but do we have the resolution and courage to get on with such a critical need to satisfy in such a hurry?

Well, heck, nothing beats a good try (but a FAILURE, which is unlikely in this case).


Closing Statement from O'Neil Poree

The general ezpert disinterest shown (by the ignoring of my proposal) shows that commerciality has pretty much strangled humane responsibility in this work area.

While we may therefore get what we (huamanity as a collective whole) deserve, down the line, I hope somebody can come up with the charisma ahd opportunity to wake us up. We will NEED safe nuclear reactors someday, for hothouse-type sanctuary against devastating ambient climate heat simultaneously with necessary abandonment of carbon-dioxide-generating fuels power devices.

progress indicator
  • thumb
    Feb 9 2012: you want to solve a problem that is solved already. the fukushima plant design is over 40 years old. same for TMI and chernobyl. nobody builds reactors of that type these days, or at least they shouldn't. we have modern reactor designs readily available, usually called the 3.5th generation plants. such as the westinghouse AP1000 or the new farmatome EPR designs. these reactors provide extreme safety, and we don't need any more.

    we do need is new reactor designs though, for reduced cost and extended sustainability. these are also close to marketability. we have the TWR, thorium cycle, molten salt and pebble bed designs.

    what we need is available capital and less disruptive regulations to implement these new technologies. the last thing we need is yet another design that can not be implemented due to red tape and lack of capital.
    • Feb 9 2012: Mr. Ponter,
      Your reply seems to indicate that you missed the thrust of what I proposed.
      Because of the limited space therein, I didn't specify any of the fine details of what I hope to see.
      Let me list a few:
      First: Siting, of any nuclear plant: It was the Japanese plant's siting that was the deadly mistake.
      Second: Reused existing nuclear wastes as fuels: I expect that to be the only widely acceptable disposition of decades of dangerous accumulants from all those "old designs".
      Second, prime: avoiding such accumalants in all ongoing designs. Plan to recycle from day one.
      Third: Swords into plow shares strategies: Get all these bombs transformed into useful devices, which has ineffable side benefits your reply doesn't consider.
      Fourth: Retrofit particularly FAIL-safe safing and backup devices into all extant, as well as emplacing them inforthcoming, power plants.
      Fifth: Share the wealth: many desirable locations are in countries that cannot afford these power suppliers: international support for those dispositions should be diligently and widely sought, for the same reasons many other Iinternational assistances are now rendered.
      I am sure you can continue to add justifications for my original suggestion .
      Perhaps some other readers will do so.

      Many forthcoming suggestions will require engineering innovations that do not even exist at present (no profitable bottom line for commercial manufacturers).

      And there is absolutely no telling what else my proposed conclaves of engineering physics geniuses will come up with. I don't think human creativity is anywhere near done yet.