Now That I Am Back From China I Felt I Needed An Open Water Swim. It Was A Lovely Day. Stacey, Colin

Asgard

WELL begun; half done. That proverbor, rather, its obverseencapsulates the problems which have dogged civil nuclear power since its inception. Atomic energy is...

This article from The economist magazine talks about using Thorium as a Nuclear Fuel instead of Uranium.  Thorium has several advantages over Uranium and in the view of the author of this article the most important is the relative resistance to proliferation compared to Uranium.  I learned a few things from this article.  The things I learned was that the US did build a few bombs out of U233 which is the fissile element formed from the fertile Thorium.  I was always a bit unsure as to whether or not any bombs had been built.  The article also confirms my prior understanding that U233 makes a poor nuclear bomb material because of the presence of small amounts of other radioactive isotopes that emit hard gamma radiation that messes up the other mechanisms required for a bomb.

We went to the Blue Lagoon today. I do love hot springs.

On the 16th of June seven international clean energy organizations launched a major new campaign aimed at keeping nuclear power out–as in completely out–of all negotiations at the upcoming COP 21 climate talks in Paris in December. To me this is a really bad idea. Existing Nuclear technologies are the best way to decarbonise electricity production. Newer technologies, Small Modular Reactors especially, have the ability to decarbonise electricity production as well as other sectors. Two sectors that come to mind immediately are process heat and marine transport.

It looks like there was lido in Dunoon at one point. This is an old poster, part of a display in Gourock Station. #lido #Gourock #swimming #dunoon (at Gourock railway station)

Thoughts on Prague

We just came back from a break in Prague. We had a good time by walking around a lot, eating & drinking and being with each other. Given my interest in dome cities what would I take away from the visit to guide me about my dome city design. This is a list of things go liked about Prague and I would hope that these things would be available (if required) in a dome city. 1 - Great walk ability 2 - green space easily accessible from the city centre 3 - affordability 4 - friendly and honest people 5 - good public transport 6 - a lively centre in the evenings with plenty of entertainment, bars and places to eat I will discuss these things more in future blogs.

I had a nice swim with Colin and David tonight. It was high tide and very calm. I saw a few jellyfish. There was a rainbow at the start of the swim. I swam to the "yellow" pole. #inverclyde #openwaterswimming #Greenock #RWSABC #Scotland #esplanade (at The Royal West of Scotland Boat Club)

Dome City Blog 6 - Ring Park

Something I feel strongly about is that it is important to spend time outside and to have public parks that are easily accessible from the Dome City.  Therefore, I would like to see the Dome City surround by a ring of park land 500m wide.  

This Ring Park would provide parkland with an area of 235 hectares (580 acres).  

To put this into context, in London, Hyde Park and Kensington Gardens together are 253 hectares (625 acres) while New York's Central park is 341 hectares (843 acres).  Of course, for the residents of the Dome City, would never be more than 500m horizontally from the Ring Park unlike residents of London and New York who could be much further away from these outstanding green spaces.

Some of the features i would hope to see in the Ring Park are sports fields with modest amounts of spectator seating for football, rugby, cricket, and field hockey.  There should also be some outdoor tennis and basketball courts. Pitches and courts for these sports would also be available within the Dome City but with limited head room due to height restrictions of the levels in the Dome City.  These are the sports I would choose but ultimately it would be for the residents to decide.  

I would expect that we would make allotments available for residents who want them to grow their own fruits, vegetables, herbs and other plants.

There should be a wide range of play parks for children of all ages and I would include a skate park within the Ring Park.

I would hope that there would be a lake where water sports such as swimming and kayaking could take place.

Somewhere in the Ring Park we should have a cemetery.  

Aside - I understand that the largest municipal cemetery in the whole of Europe is in Greenock, the town next to where I live.  It is 31 hectares.  If you are ever in Greenock and have a at a few hours visit this cemetery, it is fascinating - End aside 

Within the Ring Park here should be a range of different habitats such as grasslands, forests and marshes.  These habitats should become a haven for wildlife.

Footpaths and cycle ways would exist to encourage walking and cycling.

These are my initial suggestions and I think that the residents of the Dome City should have a say in what they want from the park.

Joe Heffernan - 8 April 2015

Really Tiny Reactors

I would be keen to see really tiny reactors becoming ubiquitous.  We need more than the typical 1000 MWe class reactors to help solve the world's energy and climate problems.  The problem with this class of Large Reactor is that they cost Billions and take between 4 and 6 years to build.

What if a reactor were the size of a tea kettle and the whole of the reactor, shielding and power production could fit in something the size of a tall refrigerator?  These reactors could be rolled out much more quickly at  low capital cost and very low fuel costs. 

In my opinion the requirements for such a reactor are:

Inherent and passive safety of operation, 

At least 5 years before reactor needs to be refueled, 

An ability to run unattended,

Production of both electricity and heat as required,

Ability to load follow electricity demand,

Use of either naturally occurring Uranium or Low Enriched Uranium.

I would hope that there would be a range of power outputs from this family of reactors.  I would hope that a reactor as small as 3 kW electric could be produced.  The size of 3 kW was chosen as that seems to be the typical small petrol generator size.  

This size of reactor does exist in the form of research reactors.  According to World Nuclear Association web site on research reactors, reactors with heat outputs as low as 0.1 kW thermal exist.  

An example of the kind of reactor (although not for the production of electricity) is the SLOWPOKE reactor designed by Atomic Energy Canada Limited (AECL).  There have been different variations of this reactor but the standard one has an output of 20 kW thermal.  AECL have done the design for a larger one with an output of between 2 and 10 Mw thermal to be used as a source of district heating.  To me this shows that the class of reactors I am interested in is possible from a technical point of view. Of course, like most things associated with Nuclear Power the technical aspects are only a small part of the ability to introduce the technology.

Reflections on Scottish Independence as set out in "A Green Yes"

On September 18, 2014 Scotland will vote whether or not to become an Independent Country.  Currently I am reading the White Paper issued by the Government of Scotland titled "Scotland's Future".  I am about 45% of the way through it and expect to reflect on it once I have finished it.  Currently I am undecided as to how I will vote.  That is why I am reading "Scotland's Future".  

The Scottish Green Party supports Independence and they have issued a document which sets out their main reasons for supporting Independence.  This blog is to reflect on this document.  

Extracts from "A Green Yes" that I like:

Whichever way Scotland votes, the referendum will leave some people celebrating, and others deeply dismayed. It’s vital that celebration does not turn into divisive triumphalism. The result will be far more readily accepted by the losing side if the winners act with respect and a constructive spirit; that will be as difficult for some as losing would be. (page 4)

Oil and Gas

Some still make the case for a Yes vote with tired old slogans about “Scotland’s oil”. Even if there was no environmental consequence from burning fossil fuels, Scotland’s remaining reserves would only offer an economic future for a few more decades. Greens want an independent Scotland to be successful far longer than that! 

But the hard truth, for all fossil fuel nations, is that we can’t even afford to burn what we have. The world has far more fossil fuel in existing reserves than can safely be used, if we’re remotely serious about preserving a liveable environment. So as well as opposing new extraction from deep-water oil drilling, opencast coal, and unconventional gas technology such as fracking, we need to leave a great deal of our oil and gas in the ground, or support a more diverse range of petrochemical uses which don’t involve greenhouse gas emissions. 

Scotland has the skills to do that, and with the usable portion of oil and gas funding public investment in renewables to replace future revenue, we have the opportunity to make this transition rapidly. The UK will only ever see North Sea oil as a revenue source; Scotland could see it as a springboard, taking us from reliance on polluting and finite energy sources to the cleantech of the future. (page 6) 

The document "A Green Yes" has the following section titles:

A Green Yes

Could Westminster Deliver?

Will Holyrood Deliver?

Transition

Developing a Constitution

Parliament and Democracy

Currency

Ending the 'Tyranny of Big'

Oil & Gas

Welfare

Closing the Wealth Gap

Peace & Security

Employment

Immigration/Asylum

The document is quite short, only 8 pages long. From reading this document the main points that I take away are:

They remind us that the White Paper sets out the current Government of Scotland's view on what should happen post independence but that post independence these policies would need to be decided democratically by whichever parties form a new government.  To that end they state, "The development of a written constitution should be led by a new constitutional convention, to be established before the end of 2014, with political parties involved but not in sole charge.  

"A Green Yes" suggests that the Government of Scotland should have a "Plan B" with regards to currency because in the longer term they expect Scotland to have it's own currency and as an interim measure having a "Plan B" would improve the negotiating position of the Government of Scotland when discussing a Currency Union with the Rest of the UK.  

"A Green Yes" recognises that if every other oil producing nation in the world takes the view that it is their right and duty to produce every barrel of oil then there are significant implications with regards to climate change.  Based on the above extract they seem to have a realistic view that Scotland will not shut down the oil wells the day after independence but are suggesting that after this Scotland should be striving to leave the oil in the ground and using what oil is produced as a springboard to "Cleantech of the future".  The document is silent on Nuclear Power but I am not optimistic about the ability of the Scottish Green Party to embrace nuclear power.

"A Green Yes" has a strong emphasis on reducing inequality.

"A Green Yes" reminds me that when/if Scotland becomes an Independent Country that the expectations set out in "Scotland's Future" are uncertain.  The future is like that.  I would expect that some of the things that Government of Scotland wants will not come to pass or will only be achieved with greater than expected cost.  Other things will go better than expected.  If we want certainty we are in the wrong world.  

I am still undecided about which way to vote in the referendum.

You can find "A Green Yes" at:

http://www.scottishgreens.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/downloads/2013/11/Green-Yes-document.pdf

You can find "Scotland's Future" at:

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/11/9348

Give Nuclear Power Plants cool names

The list below shows the 16 Nuclear Reactors currently operating in the UK.  It was taken from the World Nuclear web site at

http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/Country-Profiles/Countries-T-Z/United-Kingdom/

I would urge those naming Nuclear Power Plants in the future, pick cool names for Nuclear Power Plants instead of simply naming them after a location.  Names that come to mind are "Opportunity", "Hope", "Progress", "Our Children's Future", "Reliability" etc.  In fact you could have a competition and ask local children to name the plant. 

In the Iain M. Banks Science Fiction books there are ships capable of faster than light travel controlled by "Minds".  "Minds" are cognitive machine and because they are cognitive they get to name themselves.  There names introduce a bit of whimsy into what often is a very serious business.  A bit like Nuclear Power, a serious business that would benefit from a lighter and more fun image.

A list of the names of the "Minds" appearing in some of Iain M. Banks novels is available at Wikipedia at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_%28The_Culture%29

I think the favourite name there that could be applied to a good Nuclear Power Plant is "Vision Of Hope Surpassed".

In addition, it might be good to hear an opponent of a Nuclear Power Plant saying something along the lines of  "I don't want to see "Our Children's Future" built" or carrying placards the say "No Nukes ! Stop Hope!".  Quite often this is what they really are saying but without being explicit.