Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
UK diy (uk.d-i-y) For the discussion of all topics related to diy (do-it-yourself) in the UK. All levels of experience and proficency are welcome to join in to ask questions or offer solutions. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition "The UK government has launched a competition to select a design of a small modular reactor (SMR) for future deployment in the UK. The idea behind SMRs is that they can be factory built and stamped out like aircraft and transported to location on the back of a truck. With thirty-three companies / designs on the shortlist, this looks like the process could take a while to complete" http://euanmearns.com/the-uks-small-...r-competition/ An interesting read. The idea of lots of small reactors distributed widely is appealing. It gives redundancy, means that spares for only one type of reactor needs to be held, and training is simplified. -- (\_/) (='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10 (")_(") |
#2
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 18:57:07 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition "The UK government has launched a competition to select a design of a small modular reactor (SMR) for future deployment in the UK. The idea behind SMRs is that they can be factory built and stamped out like aircraft and transported to location on the back of a truck. With thirty-three companies / designs on the shortlist, this looks like the process could take a while to complete" http://euanmearns.com/the-uks-small-...r-competition/ An interesting read. The idea of lots of small reactors distributed widely is appealing. It gives redundancy, means that spares for only one type of reactor needs to be held, and training is simplified. And more chances of a cock up. More sources of radio active material for terrorist dirty bomb. |
#3
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On Thursday, 16 June 2016 07:42:50 UTC+1, harry wrote:
On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 18:57:07 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote: Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. And more chances of a cock up. So that's the gay club sorted.... More sources of radio active material for terrorist dirty bomb. Is that because gay sex is dirty, but I can;t yet see a link to brexit. |
#4
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
In article ,
harry scribeth thus On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 18:57:07 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote: Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition "The UK government has launched a competition to select a design of a small modular reactor (SMR) for future deployment in the UK. The idea behind SMRs is that they can be factory built and stamped out like aircraft and transported to location on the back of a truck. With thirty-three companies / designs on the shortlist, this looks like the process could take a while to complete" http://euanmearns.com/the-uks-small-...r-competition/ An interesting read. The idea of lots of small reactors distributed widely is appealing. It gives redundancy, means that spares for only one type of reactor needs to be held, and training is simplified. And more chances of a cock up. More sources of radio active material for terrorist dirty bomb. I knew it was you who wrote the even before i looked see who had;!.... How sadly predictable(... -- Tony Sayer |
#5
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 17/06/16 16:04, tony sayer wrote:
In article , harry scribeth thus On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 18:57:07 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote: Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition "The UK government has launched a competition to select a design of a small modular reactor (SMR) for future deployment in the UK. The idea behind SMRs is that they can be factory built and stamped out like aircraft and transported to location on the back of a truck. With thirty-three companies / designs on the shortlist, this looks like the process could take a while to complete" http://euanmearns.com/the-uks-small-...r-competition/ An interesting read. The idea of lots of small reactors distributed widely is appealing. It gives redundancy, means that spares for only one type of reactor needs to be held, and training is simplified. And more chances of a cock up. More sources of radio active material for terrorist dirty bomb. I knew it was you who wrote the even before i looked see who had;!.... How sadly predictable(... Well yes. Of course te reactors are generally 'sealed fir life' so its pretty hard to actually get he material out without some pretty specialised kit, and you would either have to do that onsite, or steal the whole 1000 tonne reactor.... And if you start dismantling a scrammed reactor, you have better be quick or very protected, cos the gamma is gonna fry you in an hour -- To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote. |
#6
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 6/17/2016 4:22 PM, Tim Streater wrote:
And more chances of a cock up. More sources of radio active material for terrorist dirty bomb. I knew it was you who wrote the even before i looked see who had;!.... How sadly predictable(... Well yes. Of course te reactors are generally 'sealed fir life' so its pretty hard to actually get he material out without some pretty specialised kit, and you would either have to do that onsite, or steal the whole 1000 tonne reactor.... And if you start dismantling a scrammed reactor, you have better be quick or very protected, cos the gamma is gonna fry you in an hour Perhaps harry, with all his nuclear expertise, can explain how to get radioactive stuff out (without killing yourself, that is). I'm pretty relaxed about terrorists taking on either a full sized or a small modular reactor. Knocking any power station off the grid is pretty easy of course, but I reckon there are far softer targets around than a reactor pressure vessel (or other sensitive parts). And I think we can be reasonably sure that anyone googling too assiduously for details will get ....noticed. |
#7
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 17/06/2016 16:22, Tim Streater wrote:
Perhaps harry, with all his nuclear expertise, can explain how to get radioactive stuff out (without killing yourself, that is). Its obvious, you blow it up with a nuke. |
#8
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
"Tim Streater" wrote in message .. . In article , The Natural Philosopher wrote: On 17/06/16 16:04, tony sayer wrote: In article , harry scribeth thus On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 18:57:07 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote: Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition "The UK government has launched a competition to select a design of a small modular reactor (SMR) for future deployment in the UK. The idea behind SMRs is that they can be factory built and stamped out like aircraft and transported to location on the back of a truck. With thirty-three companies / designs on the shortlist, this looks like the process could take a while to complete" http://euanmearns.com/the-uks-small-...r-competition/ An interesting read. The idea of lots of small reactors distributed widely is appealing. It gives redundancy, means that spares for only one type of reactor needs to be held, and training is simplified. And more chances of a cock up. More sources of radio active material for terrorist dirty bomb. I knew it was you who wrote the even before i looked see who had;!.... How sadly predictable(... Well yes. Of course te reactors are generally 'sealed fir life' so its pretty hard to actually get he material out without some pretty specialised kit, and you would either have to do that onsite, or steal the whole 1000 tonne reactor.... And if you start dismantling a scrammed reactor, you have better be quick or very protected, cos the gamma is gonna fry you in an hour Perhaps harry, with all his nuclear expertise, can explain how to get radioactive stuff out (without killing yourself, that is). Of course he can, you use disposable immigrants and keep well away yourself. |
#10
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Brian Gaff wrote:
I suggested this years ago, using designs originally intended for submarines and ships. Probably the Rolls Royce one is based on their sub reactor? |
#11
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 16-Jun-16 9:03 AM, Brian Gaff wrote:
I suggested this years ago, using designs originally intended for submarines and ships. In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. -- -- Colin Bignell |
#12
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Nightjar wrote:
In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. Yes, but with enough juice for a light bulb ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator#Terrestrial |
#13
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Andy Burns wrote:
Nightjar wrote: In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. Yes, but with enough juice for a light bulb ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator#Terrestrial These were used in desert regions where solar panels with back up batteries suffered from dust problems. I went to a lecture on them in the 60s. Also used in spacecraft for deep space long journeys where solar panels could not generate enough power. |
#14
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 16-Jun-16 9:58 AM, Andy Burns wrote:
Nightjar wrote: In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. Yes, but with enough juice for a light bulb ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator#Terrestrial Isn't a light bulb basically all that a lighthouse needs? -- -- Colin Bignell |
#15
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 17/06/2016 09:09, Nightjar wrote:
On 16-Jun-16 9:58 AM, Andy Burns wrote: Nightjar wrote: In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. Yes, but with enough juice for a light bulb ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator#Terrestrial Isn't a light bulb basically all that a lighthouse needs? Not a very powerful light bulb, though, according to the figures on WP. Even allowing for it flashing on and off, so it's not powered all the time, you are looking at a couple of hundred watts, maximum. |
#16
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Nightjar wrote:
Andy Burns wrote: Nightjar wrote: In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. Yes, but with enough juice for a light bulb ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator#Terrestrial Isn't a light bulb basically all that a lighthouse needs? Yes, but that hardly makes them candidates for a UK modular reactor ... |
#17
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 17-Jun-16 9:49 AM, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:09:09 +0100, Nightjar wrote: On 16-Jun-16 9:58 AM, Andy Burns wrote: Nightjar wrote: In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. Yes, but with enough juice for a light bulb ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_generator#Terrestrial Isn't a light bulb basically all that a lighthouse needs? Bulb wattages vary widely. Here's a big one of 3 kW http://tinyurl.com/hdbxwl5 . But modern LED arrays probably use much less. But in older lighthouses, you also needed to supply the power for turning the huge (and technically and aesthetically rather beautiful IMO*) Fresnel lens systems**. Although the bigger ones typically weighed several tons, they floated on a bath of mercury so actually required very little effort to turn them once the initial inertia had been overcome***. In older, manned lighthouses, this was manpower, literally. The lighthouse keepers would regularly (every few hours) have to wind up a falling-weight system that rotated the lens (think Grandfather clock), but later, on unmanned lighthouses the power had to come from another source, usually electric, from diesel generators and batteries IIRC. * Images here http://tinyurl.com/z2kpsu8 The bigger and heavier ones stand several feet high. ** A rotating lens system was essential, to give the appropriate number of flashes per minute that identified the particular lighthouse, rather than just switching the lamp on and off repeatedly, which as we all know, shortens the life of the bulb dramatically. The Fresnel lenses were very efficient at gathering the maximum amount of light from the bulb and focusing it where needed. Ranges were typically 20 miles or so, depending on lighthouse height, bulb power and atmospheric conditions. *** There used to be the national lighthouse museum run by Trinity House in Penzance some years ago, and they had several in a range of sizes. The biggest floated in a mercury bath and could be turned with one finger. But Trinity House closed the museum in 2005 and I think the collection was broken up and dispersed. An absolute tragedy and disgrace! Although they are described as lighthouses, the vast majority of the Soviet nuclear powered lights were little more than navigation beacons. There is one that often appears in photos, which does have all the gubbins of a full blown lighthouse and that has radiation warnings, but it also has diesel generators and large fuel tanks, so the reactor was obviously not there to run the light. Perhaps it ran a backup system to call for attention if the main power failed. -- -- Colin Bignell |
#18
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 16/06/2016 09:26, Nightjar wrote:
On 16-Jun-16 9:03 AM, Brian Gaff wrote: I suggested this years ago, using designs originally intended for submarines and ships. In the 1970s, the Soviet Union built a series of remote lighthouses along their northern coast, which ran off individual subcritical reactors. Also radio beacons of some kind. After being decommissioned they were just abandoned. Some have been canabalised by metal thieves with unfortunate consequences for the people involved. |
#19
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Talking of wheels reinvented, I came across this thing, 'invented' by two
'brilliant' Africans. https://youtu.be/sgWWXSEw0Dc?list=PL...aHONfSYCX0R H It just amazes me that people believe this is new. (Brian; it's a video of a rolling barrel with a handle, for transporting water) On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 09:03:30 +0100, Brian Gaff wrote: I suggested this years ago, using designs originally intended for submarines and ships. Wheels reinvented while you wait. Brian -- My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message. Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org *lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor |
#20
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
It really makes a lot of sense. If you consired Chernobel and Five Mile
Island they were both huge - experimental type facilities. We need a "standard" that has been tested to the extreme. Were failure effects would be limited by its size. Standardisation would mean predictability. |
#21
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 16/06/16 10:12, DerbyBorn wrote:
It really makes a lot of sense. If you consired Chernobel and Five Mile Island they were both huge - experimental type facilities. We need a "standard" that has been tested to the extreme. Were failure effects would be limited by its size. Standardisation would mean predictability. Predictable? Ye'd then know where the moment of non-passive[1] failure was on the MTBF plot, and the day before that would be only one that the bean counters would let ye spend money on preventative maintenance. [1] - er, boom .. -- Adrian C |
#22
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 16/06/16 10:04, Bob Eager wrote:
Talking of wheels reinvented, I came across this thing, 'invented' by two 'brilliant' Africans. https://youtu.be/sgWWXSEw0Dc?list=PL...aHONfSYCX0R H It just amazes me that people believe this is new. Yeah - they reinvented the Aquaroll I was using on holiday in the 70's. |
#23
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Tim Watts wrote:
Yeah - they reinvented the Aquaroll I was using on holiday in the 70's. Same here, marketed at the parents to get the kids to fill the water ... https://youtu.be/ClaXPqdUmyw |
#24
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 10:32:14 +0100, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/06/16 10:04, Bob Eager wrote: Talking of wheels reinvented, I came across this thing, 'invented' by two 'brilliant' Africans. https://youtu.be/sgWWXSEw0Dc?list=PL...aHONfSYCX0R H It just amazes me that people believe this is new. Yeah - they reinvented the Aquaroll I was using on holiday in the 70's. I did put the Aquaroll link in the comments, as someone really wouldn't believe me. -- My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message. Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org *lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor |
#25
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 16/06/16 10:32, Tim Watts wrote:
On 16/06/16 10:04, Bob Eager wrote: Talking of wheels reinvented, I came across this thing, 'invented' by two 'brilliant' Africans. https://youtu.be/sgWWXSEw0Dc?list=PL...aHONfSYCX0R H It just amazes me that people believe this is new. Yeah - they reinvented the Aquaroll I was using on holiday in the 70's. 1953: http://www.aquaroll.com/news/item/di...-aquaroll.html |
#26
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
Bob Eager wrote:
https://youtu.be/sgWWXSEw0Dc It just amazes me that people believe this is new. 1953 for the Aquaroll http://www.aquaroll.com/shop/aquaroll |
#27
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 10:46:39 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:
Bob Eager wrote: https://youtu.be/sgWWXSEw0Dc It just amazes me that people believe this is new. 1953 for the Aquaroll http://www.aquaroll.com/shop/aquaroll I put that link in the comments. -- My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message. Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org *lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor |
#28
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On Wednesday, 15 June 2016 18:57:07 UTC+1, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. Your not implying there's a connection between the two are you ? ;-) It wouldnl't suprise me that one group would claim there is to get their POV across |
#29
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
On 6/15/2016 6:57 PM, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition "The UK government has launched a competition to select a design of a small modular reactor (SMR) for future deployment in the UK. The idea behind SMRs is that they can be factory built and stamped out like aircraft and transported to location on the back of a truck. With thirty-three companies / designs on the shortlist, this looks like the process could take a while to complete" http://euanmearns.com/the-uks-small-...r-competition/ An interesting read. The idea of lots of small reactors distributed widely is appealing. It gives redundancy, means that spares for only one type of reactor needs to be held, and training is simplified. Indeed, an interesting article, to my mind worth reading for the Rickover quote alone. It was a new quote to me, but it does rather sum up my opinion. Not so many years ago, there was quite a lot of enthusiasm in the UK industry for the South African PBMR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble...odular_reactor but it seems to have sunk without trace. If I were asked to bet on one, I would agree with the author's view on the Westinghouse one, except that it is probably really too large. But while every country has a regulatory system which seems to insist on analysing every design from first principles, and even "repeat orders" need a major reassessment, I can't see SMRs getting off the ground, at least in the west. I know nothing about the regulation of the airliner industry, but we don't seem to see every country reassessing each new plane or modification and, Concord(e) apart, you don't seem to get countries blocking introduction of major "foreign" planes. |
#30
Posted to uk.d-i-y
|
|||
|
|||
The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition
"newshound" wrote in message o.uk... On 6/15/2016 6:57 PM, Mike Tomlinson wrote: Let's talk about something other than Brexit and the gay club shootings. The UK's Small Modular Reactor Competition "The UK government has launched a competition to select a design of a small modular reactor (SMR) for future deployment in the UK. The idea behind SMRs is that they can be factory built and stamped out like aircraft and transported to location on the back of a truck. With thirty-three companies / designs on the shortlist, this looks like the process could take a while to complete" http://euanmearns.com/the-uks-small-...r-competition/ An interesting read. The idea of lots of small reactors distributed widely is appealing. It gives redundancy, means that spares for only one type of reactor needs to be held, and training is simplified. Indeed, an interesting article, to my mind worth reading for the Rickover quote alone. It was a new quote to me, but it does rather sum up my opinion. Not so many years ago, there was quite a lot of enthusiasm in the UK industry for the South African PBMR https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pebble...odular_reactor but it seems to have sunk without trace. If I were asked to bet on one, I would agree with the author's view on the Westinghouse one, except that it is probably really too large. But while every country has a regulatory system which seems to insist on analysing every design from first principles, and even "repeat orders" need a major reassessment, I can't see SMRs getting off the ground, at least in the west. I know nothing about the regulation of the airliner industry, but we don't seem to see every country reassessing each new plane or modification and, Concord(e) apart, you don't seem to get countries blocking introduction of major "foreign" planes. They do actually. That's why you don’t see the russian passenger aircraft flying into the EU or the US etc. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT Hinckley point new reactor | UK diy | |||
Every UK reactor operational | UK diy | |||
Lockheed fusion reactor | Metalworking | |||
Nuclear Reactor Problems | Woodworking | |||
what's a line reactor? | Metalworking |