
Open-source blueprints for a tiny nuclear reactor - vo2maxer
https://www.open-100.com/
======
donquichotte
These are artistic 3D models of different parts of a fictional miniature
nuclear reactor, right? Am I missing something here?

------
jshevek
Can any knowledgeable person comment on the accuracy / balance of this claim?
I distrust promotional materials, but to an ignorant lay person this is
intriguing:

 _Standard light water reactors are proliferation-resistant by their very
physics. As with uranium, plutonium is only a proliferation risk in a highly
enriched form; but in a light water reactors, plutonium-240 (isotopically
diluting) accumulates in a manner which renders the plutonium-239 (weapons-
grade) useless. This characteristic differentiates Power Reactors (Light
Water, Boiling Water) from Production Reactors (RBMK, Heavy Water Reactors).
OPEN100 is based on a standard Pressurized (Light) Water Reactor._

------
TLightful
I've just finished watching the Chernobyl mini-series.

This strikes me as equal part fascinating, equal part terrifying.

------
pstuart
I know that Bezos is betting on fusion, but dropping a couple billion on
implementing this would be a game changer and would be a PR coup for him.

------
SeekingMeaning
"Ah yes, let’s build a park around a nuclear reactor"

~~~
jshevek
Are they wrong, here?

 _Irrespective of plant location there is no hazard to public health from the
meltdown of a light water reactor. In the case of any nuclear accident there
are two possible paths for radionuclides to affect humans, direct physical
proximity or biological uptake; in the case of a light water reactor accident,
neither apply. The potential of being directly exposed to a dangerous level of
radiation outside of the reactor facility is negligible due to the distance
based fall-off rate of radiation (the inverse square law).

People who are outside of the nuclear reactor building itself would be a
sufficient distance to prevent exposure. Regarding biological uptake, for
radionuclides to reach concentrations high enough to pose a hazard to human
health, they must pass through several stages of environmental re-
concentration: deposition across a farm field, followed by cow grazing,
followed by milk ingestion. As demonstrated by Fukushima, the quantities of
radiation released in the case of a light water reactor accident are so low,
less than 30 grams of I-131, even environmental concentration isn't sufficient
to cause harm.

Thus, whether this type of nuclear reactor was in the middle of a city or a
country field, as long as there are no humans in the reactor room itself,
there is no practical means by which a person could be affected. This is of
course to be differentiated from a graphite reactor that can catch fire,
increasing the distribution of radionuclides to the environment. Given this
understanding, OPEN100 visualizations and models do not preclude siting near
population centers. While many countries have regulatory restrictions on
nuclear plant placement, we challenge this counterproductive restriction to
show a vision of what is possible._

~~~
natmaka
There is no consensual definition of a "negligible" radiation, as, for
example, some induce solid cancers 10 to 15 years after exposition. Risk
calculus is heavily tainted by hypothesis, mainly about
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis)

The amount of victims of the Chernobyl disaster may be up to 965,000, see
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl:_Consequences_of_the_Catastrophe_for_People_and_the_Environment)

Think also of radionucleides in groundwater, drank by millions during many
years... Nuclear waster repositories must, by law, be sealed for 1 million
years.

AFAIK all Fukushima's plant reactors were either inactive or scramed (shut
down) when the disaster happened, the outcome with fully active reactors may
be different.

Fuku cleanup is not neglectable, see
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_disaster_cleanup](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_disaster_cleanup)

Don't forget nuke hot waste, left as a gift for future generations. Officially
'managed', yet there is no exploited repository.

Add combustible dependency (not so much known uranium reserves, no mastered
way to obtain it w/o mining, in a not-so-distant future some may have to wage
war in order to obtain some...), and nuclear proliferation (weapons).

Add the NIMBY effect.

Then consider that many other approaches alleviate all those burdens while
showing an IMHO much better and more realistic vision, for example:
[https://www.cell.com/one-
earth/fulltext/S2590-3322(19)30225-...](https://www.cell.com/one-
earth/fulltext/S2590-3322\(19\)30225-8)

