Article 3: First Small Modular Nuclear Reactor Certified in US
Houser, K. (2023, January 25). First small modular nuclear reactor certified in US. Freethink. Retrieved January 27, 2023, from https://www.freethink.com/energy/small-modular-nuclear-reactor
This article discusses the creation of a miniaturized nuclear reactor by company NuScale, and how it is believed that miniaturization and modularity for nuclear reactors is the way to go, following the footsteps of the French set. These miniaturized reactors would be set up in groups of around 12 depending on the location, and more or less could be added based on necessity. The article then details the process of miniaturizing the reactor and the various feats necessary for such.
This relates to the environment as if research further into miniaturization continues we may be able to achieve the 1950s dream of miniaturized nuclear reactors powering a lot of our day to day existence, and it is not out of the realm of possibility for an updated version of these reactors being able to be set up as a backup for a localized grid.
I like the new idea of miniaturized nuclear reactors. I noticed you stated that many believe that the miniaturization and modularity for nuclear reactors is the way to go, following the footsteps of the French set. However, I’m wondering why many believe it is the way to go and what other potential detriments it has.
In my opinion, the reason for the French system of smaller localized reactors and miniaturization is simply that off utility. For example, it would become relatively easy to expand an energy production for an area if it were to grow simply by adding another reactor or two instead of needing to create a massive concrete monolith in order to power a new development. Additionally, the French system of building plants that are nearly identical is beneficial as you do not suffer from the US problem of having a mish-mash of different eras and designs for a resource that if mismanaged can have disastrous results. One of the downsides however of the French system is that if there is a defect in the design, it affects all the plants.
I agree that these advancements in nuclear technology are going to help replace our reliance on fossil fuels. If nuclear reactors become more readily available and versatile, then more cities would be able to adopt nuclear energy as their main energy source. However, the main drawback to nuclear energy is the public’s opinion on it. Many people still fear possible nuclear reactor meltdowns in their areas so they try to stop the implementation of nuclear reactors. How would the public be able to get over their fear of nuclear energy?
Personally, I believe that an honest analysis of climate change will reveal that nuclear is simply necessary in order to stop global warming. Additionally, it is important to reliably provide information on the benefits of nuclear. Additionally, as people who lived through the hottest periods of the Cold War slowly phase out of policy, new lawmakers will realize the benefits of nuclear.
advancements in nuclear make me very excited because the tech is only getting better and it is the best option to fighting climate change. Do you think the us will ever switch to primarily nuclear?
I believe that the US will eventually have to switch over to majority nuclear, unless there are unseen developments in an alternative energy source. Simply put, it is not economically or environmentally sustainable to continue reliance on fossil fuels. Additionally, concerns of national security concerned to fueling a fighting force through oil further makes the argument for nuclear