Wouldn’t it be cheaper and more feasible to build and try experimental reactors 10x smaller for research and development purposes and _then_ built the proper size when they are proven to be efficient?
In: 2
The physics they work with does not scale that way. The research reactors are already as small as we can make them to still create the conditions required for the physics to work. The matter undergoing fission in a normal research reactor is only a few kilograms. The rest of the structure is all the moderators, reflectors, cooling systems, radiation shielding, control systems, etc. For just such little fission material this still takes up a building. Even if you half the amount of fission material you still need the exact same structure around it, in fact you probably need more neutron reflectors to get enough neutron density to get fission. The same with fusion reactors, the amount of matter undergoing fusion is just a few grams. The rest of the reactor is just the support structure needed to get the reaction going and to make sure the reactor does not explode.
The research reactors are actually very tiny compared to the commercial reactors. Because they are so small they do not produce much energy and there is no need for huge power generation and cooling structures. Even the reactor vessel itself tends to be less then half the size of a typical commercial reactor. So a research reactor can be built in the basement of a wing of the university while a commercial reactor takes up the entire campus.
Latest Answers