China Boasts Breakthrough in Nuclear Technology

[Mark Maker]

Source: ABC News

BEIJING (Reuters) - Chinese scientists have made a breakthrough in spent fuel reprocessing technology that could potentially solve China's uranium supply problem, state television reported on Monday.

The technology, developed and tested at the No.404 Factory of China National Nuclear Corp in the Gobi desert in remote Gansu province, enables the re-use of irradiated fuel and is able to boost the usage rate of uranium materials at nuclear plants by 60 folds.


"With the new technology, China's existing detected uranium resources can be used for 3,000 years," Chinese Central Television reported.

China, as well as France, the United Kingdom and Russia, actively supports reprocessing as a means for the management of highly radioactive spent fuel and as a source of fissile material for future nuclear fuel supply.

But independent scientists argued that commercial application of nuclear fuel reprocessing has always been hindered by cost, technology, proliferation risk and safety challenges.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=12525886&tqkw=&tqshow=

---

I've long been of the opinion that no matter how deep they bury the casks, someday we'll be digging them up to reprocess the so-called "nuclear waste". Remember that the early oil refiners considered gasoline to be a waste product of the process.

The "nuculearphobes" will still tout their unreliable solar and wind daydreams, but this could be a real break through.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. humans will regret that they ever split the atom

[Mark Maker]

2. Or harnessed electricity too, it can kill ya.

It's fortunate we replaced whale oil with petroleum though, don't ya think? There wouldn't be a living whale today if we hadn't.

[JDPriestly]

3. Will this solve the problem of nuclear waste that remains

radioactive for so long after it is no longer used?

Because if it does, then that is the breakthrough that is needed. If it doesn't, then it will just cause a bigger problem for future generations.

What countries are the primary producers of uranium?

[FreakinDJ]

12. This and 1 other process will

I don't know how much I can openly discuss

but on another process I sure wish Dr Moses's plan would get funded. He says he can break it down to "harmless photons"

http://fora.tv/2010/05/22/Dr_Edward_Moses_Is_Fusion_Energy_in_Our_Future

[wickerwoman]

16. Canada and Australia.

The US has tons in Colorado too.

I remember reading that the craze for granite kitchen countertops led to a lot of granite being mined too close to uranium sources in Colorado and that as a result some peoples' new kitchens were setting off geiger counters.

[TheMadMonk]

17. There are at least two known and proven ways to "incinerate" radioactive waste.

1) Stuff it in a jacket around a breeder type reactor. A thorium fueled reactor is to be prefered, but it will work with a conventional fast breeder as well. Stray neutrons which would otherwise have irradiated the outer shell of the reactor vessel instead transmute waste into shorter lived radioisotopes.

2) Use a high flux neutron gun to directly transmute waste by irradiating it with neutrons "tuned" to the exact energy level most liklely to result in a neutron being adsorbed by a target nucleus.


Both methods have been successfully demonstrated in small scale projects, and there are no obvious reasons why it shouldn't be possible to scale it up to whatever level is needed, and do it at a cost inside existing waste mangement budgets.

So why don't we? DoD is the obvious answer on the first, these (along with the reprocessing of spent uranium fuel) are where plutonium comes from, and this is how it is done. Although to be fair the number of reactors of this type around the world is not enough to make a dent in existing waste stockpiles, or even do much towards preventing them from getting larger.

On the second. Well I do find it interesting that almost on the heels of announcing his breakthrough in generating an aimable stream of neutrons tuned to almost any desirable energy, the inventor switches his focus to an almost completely unrelated discipline, and doesn't discuss his previous work. Nor does there appear to be much in the way of follow up work by others or anything that might discredit him either. Just a sudden deafening silence. Given that if it does work as advertised, it potentially puts a plutonium factory inside a shipping container, it wouldn't surprise me if the DoD hasn't claimed sole proprietership on this one too. It certainly fits the pattern of their "weaponising" a number of promising NASA developments over the years.

[Safetykitten]

4. Brought to you by the country that can build a railroad.

[lunasun]

5. High speed rail there

The Shanghai Maglev Train, an airport rail link service opened in 2004, that travels 30.5 km (19 mi.) in 7 minutes and 20 seconds, averaging 245.5 km (152.5 mph) and reaching top speed of 431 km/h (268 mph).
When finished in 2020 they will have trains going 575 km/h!!

[Celefin]

6. As in Error 404: Factory not found/does not exist? Thought so. -nt-

...

[jpak]

7. "unreliable solar and wind day dreams" - what horseshit

:rofl:

You do know that China is now the world's largest manufacturer of PV modules don't you...

don't you?

You do know that China will deploy 150 GW of "unreliable" wind and 20 GW of "unreliable" solar daydream capacity by 2020 don't you?

don't you?????

:rofl:

[Mark Maker]

8. Or they will become more reliant on safe, clean, sustainable

nuclear power if they increase by 60 fold the resources and have an energy supply for the next 3000 years.

And you'll be rolling on the floor as we are passed up again.

[jpak]

9. You do know that China is a major importer of uranium - don't you?

and the US will soon export uranium to China because they lack sufficient uranium resources to supply their currently operating reactors

don't you?

China does not have the uranium resources - 60-fold reprocessing or not - to sustain a large nuclear power program.

You do know that China will build 500 GW of daydream renewable power capacity (hydro, biomass, wind and solar) by 2020 - don't you?

and only 77 GW of new "real man" nuclear capacity by 2020

don't you?

Don't you?????

:rofl:

Oh yeah that 500 GW doesn't include the 300 million square meters of new chinese unreliable daydream solar thermal capacity for hot water.

You do know that China is the world leader in operational solar hot water systems don't you???

don't you????

:rofl:

[Mark Maker]

10. FTA: "With the new technology,

China's existing detected uranium resources can be used for 3,000 years,"

Looks like a solution to that problem too doesn't it.

[jpak]

11. No - it looks like they can stretch their current domestic supply and demand for 3000 years

You do know that current chinese nuclear capacity is only 9 GW (13 nuclear power plants).

don't you?

If they build to 80 GW, they will still import most of their uranium (>60% of demand)

yup!

:rofl:

[NickB79]

14. 3000 years of known uranium supplies in China to support 9 GW of production

Ramped up to 80 GW of nuclear, they'd "only" have enough reserves for 300 years without any additional imports, assuming they fully developed all the currently known uranium deposits in-country.

[jpak]

15. So say the commies

when they suspend all imports of uranium

(which they won't)

:rofl:

[originalpckelly]

13. Not all nuclear waste is capable of being used as fuel.

Although, I agree wind and solar do not seem to really have the potential to replace fossil fuels like nuclear would in theory, that is if you could eliminate the whole down side of possible human error or the whole waste thing.

[djysrv]

18. China Boasts Breakthrough in Nuclear Technology

It is not a breakthrough. If anything it is a report of work that has been underway for some time. What would be a breakthrough is progress on fast reactors. There isn't one at this time. http://fuelcycle.blogspot.com/2011/01/china-now-reprocessing-beginning-not.html

[daleo]

19. Are they talking about a breeder reactor?

Because I can't see what else they could be getting at, that would have the kind of leverage they are claiming (3000 years). More likely, it's just hyperbole.