I suppose we'll need that coal and gas to counteract global cooling.
Stewart Peterson | Homepage | 05.27.07 - 8:23 pm | #

Re: "We need to have the reactor core below ground level"

I'm trying & failing to come up with a reason to regard that as an important safety feature.
Jim Baerg | 05.27.07 - 9:56 pm | #

I also wonder about the "deep" vacuum comment. Containments are normally kept under a few inches of vacuum in order to ensure that any leakage is into the containment, but that is not something that an engineer - of any kind - would call a deep vacuum.

My beef with Carter's statement that he was a "nuclear engineer" is that he essentially took a few introductory level courses and quit nuclear power training before completion. He then spent 20+ years farming peanuts and serving in elective office before running for president.

Any knowledge that he had about nuclear power was perfunctory at best. Why did a man with supposedly high integrity lie about his level of expertise on this particular topic? Inquiring minds - at least one of them - want to know.
Rod Adams | Homepage | 05.28.07 - 6:13 am | #

How about the role of West Virginia politicians (including Robert Byrd) in Carter's energy policy? I seem to remember a bunch of synfuel (coal-to-liquids) proposals back then.

Mind you, I was in 7th grade back then...
Ruth Sponsler | Homepage | 05.28.07 - 8:38 pm | #

Rod,
I can see one reason to put the core below grade. The MHTGR of General Atomics, and GE's PRISM reactor cores were below grade to provide an extra heat sink to pull heat off the shut down core (plus convection) to keep the core temp down and delay or prevent (depending on energy density) a meltdown. Carter could be thinking of something along those lines...maybe.

As for the deep vacuum...the only thing that makes sense is to add another 14PSI resistance to failure for the containment from hot gases being released from the reactor vessel in an accident, an extra margin of safety. But it would sure make refueling and routine inspection a real pain, which means it doesn't make much sense IMHO.
Calixto M. Lopez | Homepage | 05.30.07 - 1:24 pm | #

I could see deep vacuum making sense with a space reactor (where it'd probably be the cheapest option) but not one on a planet with an atmosphere.
bestonnet | Homepage | 05.31.07 - 5:37 am | #