A Nuclear Reactor that Fits on a Truck

If this thing works at least half as well as they say, it could be the answer to our power problems. Of course, we've been through this 'pie in the sky' thing before with cold fusion. If it does work, it would mean the grid could become a thing of the past because of the modular nature of these small reactors. And, if they're as portable as advertised, it would be a fairly simple matter to get them to where they're needed in a hurry. Okay, everybody, positive thought time.

What they should have been looking at years ago - but liberal nutcases have pretty much ensured our slow death and environmental destruction by coal and oil instead.

I would buy one just to sell houses in a big subdivision with a no electric utility bill selling point, add on free wi-fi. The future looks bright. This is very cool.

A lot of positive thoughts but, I would not believe this as a practical devise until it was explained how this reator can be cooled remotely.

We don't need this garbage.

Naturally we all are skeptical and many cannot seem to get off the negativity bus.Yet with natural resources running low and an all out war over oil,one must recognize any change that is for the best.If deemed safe and built underground (to keep out destruction)and accessed by only strict employees as well as any warning system that the system may blow,this indeed may be a notch up.In review, one might consider a smaller application for zero emission automobiles or even flight oriented vehicles.I personally have Nikola Tesla as my favorite inventor and would love to engage in his theories given the funds.He tapped into an unknown limitless energy field which solved all our issues.Getting the reactor past the oil cartels and energies commisions for them may be the downfall of it.Great ideas and inventions are always shot down by greed and keep us in their game, not the life we should have,free energy for all.Only fear and non action can hold us back.

You still have to secure the reactor against bombs, since it could spread radiation if damaged. Is it really better to have a lot of small reactor facilities spread around than a more centralized single facility which can be secured more easily?

I really do enjoy reading most all the posts. There is real intelligence here and I appreciate being able to post mine...good day.

Our energy choices need to be both "free" and clean. Keep up the faith because it is just around the corner. We don't can't afford any more pollution.

Uhmmmm what are you going to do with the spent fuel rods? Ship them to Iraq?

Iraq insurgents would love this one

Why wasn't this tried years ago? It was. Dig into some of the research the US Army did back in the eraly '60s

Great idea. Rayne, such a reactor does not make fissionable material . . . no worry there.

People dont know much about nuclear reactors? Back in the 1960s, all sorts and kinds of small-scale reactors were tested and tried. The Soviets even installed a small reactor at their Antarctic research station for power and hot water. This is nothing new, and neither is Uranium Hydride fuel.

Nuclear power is a great example of economy of scale. Big 4-reactor multi-gigawatt plant? Cheap over 20 years. Tiny reactor for ship or sub? Very very expensive. The real expense are all the burdened costs in processing (and re-processing) the fuel. Further, if this thing is so small is it because it uses weapons-enriched HEU? I certainly dont want 4,000 power plants running about the planet with 85% enriched U-235 for the plundering!

If you want to see real nuclear power innovation - go goole about the CANDU reactor. The Canadians build them. CANDU
is the future of nuclear power, and its been in production for quite some time now. So long Westinghouse. :)

ithought that we were getting hyped up about iran getting nuclear power and now we can possibly power our personal vehicle with fission? why not solar power? why do we have to use a technology that isn't clean just because it doens't produce greenhouse gases. it is equally as dangerous because we only have so much area on this planet to store our waste. radioactive material is no healthy for our planet than greenhouse gases. GO GREEN.

What's really holding us back from kicking nuke power up a notch is this absurd plutonium-phobia. The cause of the Pu-phobia is the fear that the B&T crowd (aka beard-and-turban crowd) will steal some Pu and somehow DIY themselves a W87 warhead in their goatshack using stolen Los Alamos plans downloaded off Bitorrent. This aint gonna happen folks. Anyone who can figure out how to implode Pu golfball to several million bar pressure has already figured out how to pack the camel and leave Sharialand for good and move to a nice secularized, modern Western country!

I think George Bush might say, "If fear that the B&T crowd is going to steal Pu, then the terrorists have already won".

Plutonium is good. It burns nicely in a power reactor. You can extract fresh Pu everytime you reprocess your fuel load. Reprocessing is good because its recycling right (we dont reprocess now!). Further, you can breed Pu, cheaply too! Whats more, we have DECADES of experience with Pu and fuel reprocessing from the Cold War that is behind. Why throw away so many good opportunities. I love fuel reprocessing, breeding Plutonium and maybe alittle Tritium too to keep the Physics geeks happy.

Stop worrying about Plutonium and start enjoying watching the oil sheikdoms lose their tyrannic grip.

Meanwhile, the uranium still needs to be mined (from Russia, Kazakhstan, Namibia, etc.) using a terribly polluting process. That uranium would then need to be processed (using A LOT of energy) and shipped across the world (using A LOT of energy.) Don't be fooled, nuclear power is not a greenhouse gas free alternative. Yes, the same can be said for mining the materials to make photovoltaic cells and wind blades, but at least those don't require a constant shipping of fuel to continue producing power.

This little reactor is a good idea if it can be protected from terrorists just as the big ones are. How much will these units sell for? Oil is cheap and coal is cheaper, but can this nuke-unit compete for even a lower cost? It's a neat idea, and would be totally awesome if we can figure out a way to power automobiles with it...but maybe that's a question for the auto industry.

*IF* this technology can be clearly shown to be safe, green, and affordable for the targeted customer base, then this is going to hold a lot of promise.

Of course, like a lot of others, I also hope advances are made bringing energy sources, such as wind, sea, and solar power, so we have a buffet of choices.

As we are currently protecting large power plants, maintaining large plants and operating large plants. Seems to me small is good - Easy to protect, easy to maintain, easy to oversee operation. As one who has experienced remote locations and dependency on limited resources, I can tell you that self sufficiency thru multiple redundancy is a requirement in a potentially hostile environment.

I have worked in the "Energy" industries for 30 years. I have been and am involved in developing Oil & Gas, Uranium, Coal and most recently Landfill / Waste gas recovery and conversion to electrical power. Note that all of these except Uranium, require burning of fuel, which of course, creates a "Green House" gas.

All sources need to be part of the mix. Solar, Wind, Tidal and a myriad of other opportunities need to be developed to provide the electrical power we have all come to take for granted.

As control systems and automation have been expanded and vastly improved, I believe the time is right for expansion of our "Nuclear" resources