SEPTEMBER
2004 BROADSHEET
- The Future of Nuclear Power
The 2004-05 programme of the
CETC (the newly renamed Cambridge Enterprise & Technology Club) got off to
an excellent start. In September, 49 members and guests met at TWI to hear two
contrasting yet complementary presentations on The Future of Nuclear Power.
Beforehand,
Philip
Sargent mentioned the establishment of the Cambridge
Energy Forum. Meeting regularly from January 2005, this seeks to provide an
opportunity for interested parties to debate issues and help to inform
policy-making on appropriate matters. (See http://www.cambridgeenergy.com
for details.)
The main talks began with Malcolm
Grimston from the Royal Institute of International Affairs, Chatham
House providing a brief history of nuclear fission technology from 1938 to the
present view. In doing so, he highlighted a number of contrasting experiences
and talked about the development of reactors from Magnox through advanced gas
cooled reactors to pressurised water reactors.
In the
UK
several nuclear reactors of different styles were developed as prototypes, the
idea being to then use the most efficient one for future reactors. This meant
that the benefits of the learning effect were not gained.
France
on the other hand tested one design until it was deemed to be correct and then
duplicated it. Not all reactors were white elephants. One in
Minsk
,
Russia
came on-stream in 1954 and continued to produce electricity for almost 50
years.
A lot of development work was
undertaken
during the
Suez
oil crisis in the 1950s but when that eased, demand for nuclear power was
scaled back. However, the scale and length of development of power stations is
so long that their development should not be determined by short-term factors.
Further, given the risk associated with the long lead-time, significant private
investment is not likely. Governments must decide but this could impact on their
popularity.
As with so many areas of science
and business, the human dimension is important. Malcolm concluded by asserting
that in the past technologists had been overly optimistic about their work and
had paid insufficient attention to people’s fears and concerns. This resulted
in the public at large losing confidence in nuclear fission as a source of cheap
plentiful electricity. If this is to be overcome and the objective reached
before fossil fuels decline much further, designs for smaller, easier to build
reactors will be necessary.
Dr Tom Todd, Chief Engineer at Culham Science Centre, Oxfordshire
then spoke about nuclear fusion, the power source of stars. The need for cheap
sources of electricity is self-evident: fossil fuels are non renewable and world
energy consumption is doubling every 50 years with per capita consumption
greatest in the USA at 12.5 TCE compared to India’s consumption of 0.7. The
growth of
China
as an industrial powerhouse will have a dramatic effect.
Unlike nuclear fission which has
gained some notoriety, fusion is a clean source of electricity. It takes several
years to develop plants and forward planning and significant investments are
required for what are substantial engineering projects.
The development of torus rings
capable of confining high plasma fields remains a technical challenge, one
reason why the use of fusion as an energy source is unlikely to be commercial
for several decades (a similar forecast to 50 years ago). Interestingly, there
are few incentives to develop commercial spin-offs from what is largely a
researched-based environment, though new materials technologies and high power
magnetic field technologies will be required to deliver sustained fusion
processes.
Several versions of small scale
prototype plants have been developed and much has resulted from these both
directly (understanding sub-atomic particles) and indirectly. The application of
new areas of knowledge such as nanotechnology will help further understanding of
the processes necessary to manage and control fusion.
The two
entertaining, provocative talks resulted in a lively question-time on such
issues as the future of renewables, the problems of decommissioning reactors,
policy makers playing safe and not wanting to use “unorthodox science”.
