TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microreactor

353 点作者 akeck超过 2 年前

32 条评论

photochemsyn超过 2 年前
It&#x27;s a liquid-sodium-cooled, graphite-core system with no need for pumps, aka &#x27;passively cooled&#x27; via heat [edit] pipes. Output is:<p>&gt; &quot;The microreactor can generate 5 MW of electricity or 13 MW of heat from a 15 MW thermal core. Exhaust heat from the power conversion system can be used for district heating applications or low-temperature steam.&quot;<p>Control systems are kind of interesting:<p>&gt; &quot;The only moving or mechanical parts in the reactor system are reactivity control drums, which manage the power level and allow absorber material to passively turn inward toward the core if power demand is reduced or lost, and turn a reflector material toward the core if demand increases automatically. Hence the term “nuclear battery.”&quot;<p>I&#x27;m generally not a nuclear advocate but if they&#x27;ve really managed to eliminate the need for active cooling, and have a robust system that can safely shut down with concerns about meltdown even without external power, that&#x27;s a pretty big advance. Looks remarkably promising... keep your fingers crossed. (New nuclear tech hasn&#x27;t had the greatest track record over the past several decades, i.e. pebble beds didn&#x27;t work out etc.)
评论 #33728232 未加载
评论 #33727560 未加载
评论 #33731952 未加载
评论 #33726514 未加载
评论 #33729040 未加载
amluto超过 2 年前
If the price is right and medium size communities could get their acts together, something like this could potentially disrupt the entire grid model. In California, regardless of what wholesale electricity costs, the <i>retail</i> cost is something like $200&#x2F;MWh more than could be considered reasonable. Put another way, the utility (PG&amp;E) is charging an immense premium. Normally, displacing PG&amp;E would be impractical:<p>a. The actual transmission system is a phenomenally large capital investment developed over many decades. You can’t just VC up a new electric grid in a developed area. And the incumbent mostly owns the existing infrastructure.<p>b. Regulation, good and bad.<p>It’s possible to sell power <i>to the utility</i> for a reasonable price per MWh. But one can’t easily sell to the utility’s customers.<p>But this reactor is small! 5 MW could serve maybe 1000 expensive homes in an expensive area without an enormous transmission system. Anyone trying to disrupt the incumbent utility with something like this has $200&#x2F;MWh of inefficiency to exploit. $24k per <i>day</i> of operation will offset a decent amount of capital cost and regulatory effort to get the electricity to customers.<p>Put another way, a wealthy community could buy a few of these, figure out local distribution, and ditch the incumbent utility. This could be fantastic.
评论 #33727861 未加载
评论 #33727589 未加载
评论 #33727656 未加载
评论 #33727481 未加载
评论 #33729199 未加载
评论 #33729817 未加载
评论 #33735289 未加载
评论 #33729985 未加载
multiplegeorges超过 2 年前
Northern communities in Canada are a perfect application of this tech. Currently, they mostly burn diesel for power.
评论 #33726958 未加载
评论 #33726146 未加载
评论 #33728323 未加载
评论 #33727441 未加载
评论 #33727122 未加载
评论 #33727744 未加载
sebmellen超过 2 年前
I love seeing innovative tech like this spring out of the Pittsburgh region… Once the nation’s capitol of industry innovation, maybe it can be again.
评论 #33726449 未加载
评论 #33725310 未加载
评论 #33727226 未加载
ngvrnd超过 2 年前
Wow... Walt&#x27;s Mill. My mom worked there, I have a photo of her standing above a fuel storage well... It used to be a test reactor with a channel of water through the core that they would send boats through to test samples of materials for radiation exposure effects.
评论 #33726182 未加载
评论 #33726027 未加载
Terretta超过 2 年前
Curiously, Russia has the largest number of small nuclear reactors in the world, albeit legacy tech.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;List_of_Russian_small_nuclear_reactors" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;List_of_Russian_small_nuclear_...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;defense-arab.com&#x2F;vb&#x2F;attachments&#x2F;10536&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;defense-arab.com&#x2F;vb&#x2F;attachments&#x2F;10536&#x2F;</a><p>This boat is online and puts out ~70 MW of electricity gross:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Akademik_Lomonosov" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Akademik_Lomonosov</a>
评论 #33726326 未加载
评论 #33730452 未加载
Gravityloss超过 2 年前
I feel that this reactor is <i>too small</i> for actual usage. It&#x27;s about wind turbine sized. But better to err on this side, if you want the iteration speed up and start mass production. Future versions can always be scaled up.
评论 #33725179 未加载
评论 #33725488 未加载
评论 #33725648 未加载
评论 #33725688 未加载
pfdietz超过 2 年前
A serious problem with this is scaling of operating costs.<p>A 5 MWe reactor, operating at about 90% capacity factor and selling power at wholesale prices (maybe $0.03&#x2F;kWh) will earn $1.2M&#x2F;year. You need at least four employees to operate it (3 shifts, with a spare), and probably many more.
评论 #33728457 未加载
评论 #33727568 未加载
评论 #33727078 未加载
rx_tx超过 2 年前
&gt; The microreactor can generate 5 MW of electricity or 13 MW of heat from a 15 MW thermal core. Exhaust heat from the power conversion system can be used for district heating applications or low-temperature steam.<p>They are aiming 8 years planned service life, and one novel thing is the use of heatpipes (like your CPU cooler) using liquid metal as a working fluid.<p>They actually don&#x27;t say how big it is, I guess still quite sizeable given the heat output. Definitely not a single-family home device.
评论 #33726453 未加载
评论 #33725561 未加载
评论 #33725831 未加载
评论 #33726845 未加载
评论 #33725345 未加载
评论 #33725735 未加载
评论 #33725194 未加载
rgmerk超过 2 年前
There is no way in the world this is going to be economically competitive to connect to big electricity grids any time soon.<p>Even taking into account the cost of extra transmission and storage (and to a certain extent, building extra storage, which is politically easier, reduces the amount of transmission you have to build), wind and solar are ridiculously cheap and trending cheaper long term, and you don&#x27;t really run into the requirements for massive amounts of storage until the fraction of your power from VRE gets very, very high.<p>Remote parts of Alaska, Canada etc face very very high power costs and solar isn&#x27;t viable there (though wind might be depending on the site), so I can absolutely see the initial applications there.
评论 #33727974 未加载
评论 #33727191 未加载
评论 #33726955 未加载
locallost超过 2 年前
The decisive thing is always going to be cost. Thus far, reducing capacity has made nuclear plants faster to build, but the outcome was more expensive per MWh [1]. This then forced future plants to again increase in scale, but it again made them too slow and expensive to build, with huge budget overruns. We&#x27;re now back to small modular, but if the electricity they produce is again even more expensive, it will offset any other benefit.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;publication&#x2F;275673955_The_forgotten_history_of_small_nuclear_reactors" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.researchgate.net&#x2F;publication&#x2F;275673955_The_forgo...</a>
nwatson超过 2 年前
After ethics reviews, send some prototypes to Ukraine this winter.
评论 #33725475 未加载
评论 #33725503 未加载
perihelions超过 2 年前
- <i>&quot;the power conversion unit (an open-air Brayton Cycle system)&quot;</i><p>Isn&#x27;t that essentially a jet engine?
LatteLazy超过 2 年前
The advantage of small reactors is that you can make them in factories (mass production).<p>The disadvantages are that you lose all on site scale and you are very vulnerable to a single part failure or design floor. Also miniaturising things is non-trivial.<p>Then you still have all the other issues around nuclear (waste and perception)<p>Given the cost of nuclear, you need that advantage to be much much bigger than the disadvantages. If someone can do that, they&#x27;ll make (serious) money. But it&#x27;s a &gt;100bnUSD project. So I don&#x27;t think there are many corps who will take that sort of risk given the uncertainty.
TheRealPomax超过 2 年前
What a bizarre title. Either it is, and then &quot;sees&quot; makes no sense, it&#x27;s a proven disruptor, or it&#x27;s not, and it&#x27;s just armchair self-congratulatory PR speak.
评论 #33726516 未加载
评论 #33726610 未加载
评论 #33726532 未加载
ngcc_hk超过 2 年前
The only option is to put many of these to replace old plant. Any other is not feasible due to its nuclear.<p>Even a small amount of bombing it can be used to threaten local or even there is anyway to hack dirty bomb threat to a city. Once security concern is in not just regulation, back to the hole. But if it is safer than mild one even if more expensive, it can still have some use.
Schroedingersat超过 2 年前
Using TRISO fuel, which is (best case) half as fuel efficient as a PWR and costs $40-500&#x2F;MWh just for the fuel<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.mit.edu&#x2F;nse&#x2F;pdf&#x2F;researchstaff&#x2F;forsberg&#x2F;FHR%20Point%20Design%2014-002%20UCB.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;web.mit.edu&#x2F;nse&#x2F;pdf&#x2F;researchstaff&#x2F;forsberg&#x2F;FHR%20Poi...</a>
jakuboboza超过 2 年前
Passive cooling sounds super turbo safe which is what we always seek in reactors. Yeah that would disrupt the market.
UltraViolence超过 2 年前
This device is mostly aimed at the military and maybe the industrial market (think about a chemical plant or large factory).<p>When our military invade yet another country they now don&#x27;t need to haul diesel fuel to keep the lights on.
perihelions超过 2 年前
I don&#x27;t know why people are enthused about &quot;passive heat removal&quot; for a reactor that&#x27;s operating and generating electricity (as opposed to post-shutdown decay heat removal). That requirement rules out every possible type of fission reactor there is, other than extremely small ones with very low power densities (like OP).<p>Forced convection is how you fit gigawatts of power in the volume of a small room; it&#x27;s what makes nuclear fission practical at scale.
评论 #33726585 未加载
thelittleone超过 2 年前
&quot;I want to start a business that builds garden lights, fridges and nuclear microreactors&quot;.
jsight超过 2 年前
It would only take ~2 of those to power a decent sized charging site for electric semi trucks.
jensenbox超过 2 年前
I get that it makes and moves heat... What process is it using to create the electricity?
评论 #33726187 未加载
vagrantJin超过 2 年前
A bit off topic but Factorio buffs will find this microreactor eerily familiar.
djmips超过 2 年前
Seems perfect for mining... crypto mining that is!
system2超过 2 年前
I am not very knowledgeable about nuclear reactors but wouldn&#x27;t it be concerning to have tiny nuclear reactors everywhere in the city? Doesn&#x27;t this increase the potential dangers?
评论 #33727697 未加载
mkoubaa超过 2 年前
Really cool to see this close to completion
naeq超过 2 年前
At 2:34 camera captured reactor failure
keepquestioning超过 2 年前
Finally some real innovation on here.
评论 #33725792 未加载
threads2超过 2 年前
how micro is micro? how big is this thing?
评论 #33727327 未加载
ramshanker超过 2 年前
I guess Elon Musk will be interested in taking one of these things to Mars. He is almost getting the transport capability part done.
评论 #33727192 未加载
bayesian_horse超过 2 年前
Reminder: Microreactors mean more radioactive waste, not less. No country has solved the safe long term storage radioactive waste. No, not even Finland, even though they are close. Expanding nuclear power, especially through microreactors means expanding access to extremely toxic radioactive material. And make sure the government is stable (for the next few hundred years) and there&#x27;s no war in the area.
评论 #33730114 未加载
评论 #33728611 未加载