Front-end Nuclear Fuel Cycle

Front end Nuclear Fuel Cycle talks about the process of how uranium is mined from the very ground of the Earth, and then how it is being processes to make into Uranium Oxide or also known as yellow cake. However, today topic is not on the fuel cycle itself, but rather we are focusing much on the aspect of uranium abundances in the Earth.



As we can see in the picture below, we know that the current consumption is much lesser than the current usage of uranium in the world. Bt the question is how can this happen? This in short is because partly:

1) some country has started digging uranium long before NPP is founded.
2) the megatons to megawatts project which converts HEU (highly enriched uranium) into enriched uranium which can be used as fuel for power plant.



However, as we know, the current global power generated by nuclear power plant is roughly 6-7% of the total world power generated. Fossil fuel takes about around 80% of fossiel fuel consumption. So the question here arises is that are there enough uranium to fuel up for few hundred years before it run dry? This is to ensure that given the possibility of NPP to replace all fossil fuel, hence we can estimated the demand of uranium would increase at least 10 fold!!!. This shows that, if the current usage of uranium is 4.5million tonnes, per year by the time NPP take over all the fossil fuel, the demand will become 45 million tonnes per year. This is a huge number to worry about.

However, there are few reason why our group believe that uranium is not going to be depleted.

1) Nuclear price per tonne is still relatively cheap (less than USD80 per tonne).
Cheap price, means less $ goes into the R&D, which leads into less exploration to discover uranium deposits and also less mining of uranium ore. However, should the price rocketed to USD130 or more per tonne, we believe rigorous R&D will be poured into uranium searching, mining techniques and etc. This is because, its much more worth to mine uranium now as the profit margin obtained is so much higher.



2) Megatons to Megawatts Project.
This is a project whereby the US and the Russian has sign a pact to deplete their HEU into NPP fuels. And as we know HEU are at least 90% concentrated with U-235. Hence assuming perfect conversion of 3% enriched uranium-235, we can see that 1 tonne of HEU can produce 30 tonne of fossil fuel. So do imagine the number of enriched uranium we can get from this project.

3) Based on ecolo.org,

PROVEN Uranium reserves worldwide: about 4 million tons (current consumption rate of U worldwide is 60 000 tons per year => proven reserves at 80-130 $/kgU these proven reserves are enough for 65 years of use at the current consumption rate)

ESTIMATED Uranium reserves worldwide: about 16 million tons (current consumption rate of U worldwide is 60 000 tons per year => proven reserves at 80-130 $/kgU these proven reserves are enough for 265 years of use at the current consumption rate)

NON-CONVENTIONAL Uranium reserves worldwide (i.e. uranium contained in phosphates): an ADDITIONAL 22 million tons (representing an additional 365 years of use)

Uranium dissolved in sea water: about 4 billion tons (but more difficult and costly to retrieve)

Therefore, leaving aside the U in sea water, the total ESTIMATED + NON-CONVENTIONAL uranium reserves are enough for more than 600 years of use at current consumption rate using today's reactors and at a cost less than 80-130$/kg U (about twice today's spot price).

This shows that we have a long enough uranium supply for at least 8 generations. It should buy us enough time to discover other possible green fuels to supply our power plant by then.

4) Thorium as nuclear fuel.

Thorium is 3 times more abundant than uranium. However, according to world-nuclear.org, thorium can work pretty well in CANDU reactors ( Canada NPP which operates using normal uranium). Although currently thorium is not able to fissile on its own, if we can convert in into uranium 233 from thorium, we would also obtain a substantial amount of nuclear fuel. Do note that U-233 is as good as U-235 for nuclear power plants fuels.

Nuclear ... BOMB or ENERGY?

As we all know, nuclear is not something new. It has been existence since the early 1940 . But here is a fun fact ... is it a bomb or energy? how do we differentiate them? @,@

The answer is simple:

1) Control. The fission process in nuclear power plant is controllable. While the fission process in nuclear bomb is not controllable because they desire as many fission process before detonation for a more damaging effect.


2) Fuel Enrichment. Fuel Enrichment is about the concentration of the U-235 used. This is because uranium 235 is the useful isotope for nuclear activity. Hence, the concentration of U-235 isotope in a nuclear power plant is just 3-5%. On the other hand, U-235 in the nuclear bomb is at least 90-95%. This means that fuel enrichment for a nuclear bomb is very high as is regard as Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU).

Nuclear Myths I

Myth 1: Nuclear power is bad for the environment.

Fact : In today's world, our top priority concern is actually global warming. This is because, the abundant releases of carbon emissions through combustion is getting higher daily. How do we know? The proof are the melting of the North and South Pole. Besides that, our daily outdoor temperature has increased at least 3-5 degree Celsius. The heat is making our Earth unbearable to stay on. Do you know that if our body temperature changes more than 4 degrees Celsius we will fall sick? So like wise, if our surrounding temperature is increasing, we might not be able to live on this earth comfortably. For extra explanation, imagine the whole world is like the Sahara Desert, you don't want to live in such heated conditions. As engineers we need to find solution so that this earth can still be exists for say the next 100 years. We need to find sustainable solution without compromising mother nature. Now, the best solution we have is nuclear power to fulfill the escalating demand of electricity.



As repeated, nuclear energy is actually the best solution to green house effect and global warming. Why? This is because, nuclear energy does not release any significant amount of carbon emissions. Do you know that coal, petrol and natural gas power plant is a major contributing factor for green house effect? Besides these power plant, vehicles are the next major contributors. That's why scientist and engineers are gearing towards hybrid or electrical power car to stop or minimize vehicles to contribute to global warming. This same application goes to the power plant. Let me explain further.



Unlike cars which can be powered by electricity, power plant cannot be powered by electricity. This is because, power plant produces electricity itself. Car on the other hand is used to transport people from point A to B. Likewise, power plant needs some sort of "initiating energy" to be converted to this electrical energy that we are happily using. As the Principle of Conservation Energy says energy can only convert from 1 source to another. Hope you can understand this fact.

Of course, people will start to debate on nuclear waste and renewable energy such as wind, geothermal and hydroelectric. But we will come to that soon. That's all & thank you!! =)

P/S i am so sorry as i cant reply any comments regarding the Xenon topic due to insufficient time and incomplete the proper study to provide you all accurate and satisfying answer. However we have not given up and still doing a major reading throughot regarding this topic. So please be patient. Thank you for being great commentators and viewers

Cooling Tower VS Nuclear Reactor

This is a very common mistake made by most people. Please take a good look at the picture below:

This picture is actually a Nuclear Power Plant, but the question here is where is the Nuclear Reactor? For most people who do not know a single thing about nuclear, you might guess its this building below:

But the fact is, that picture above is NOT a nuclear Reactor, in fact it is just an ordinary cooling tower. Do note that the white smoke which come off the chimney is NOT radioactive ... or radioactive waste or fission process or etc. The white smoke is in fact water which has undergone condensation because it is used to cool the nuclear power plant, and hence it is never radioactive (unless there is leakage in the nuclear reactor). So where is the nuclear reactor located? It is actually the dome-shaped building in the picture below:

Hope you enjoy this small update!

Nuclear Power Plant or Nuclear Reactor????

This midnight spam is just a light one .... so after the heavy stuff's below, now let me share with you all something factual ... and fun of course. so here it goes~

Do you know the difference between a Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) and a Nuclear Reactor? Anyone???? The clue is in the picture itself~

Alright, maybe you do know it, but to those who don't, I would like to inform you that the Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) and a Nuclear Reactor are actually the same thing. The only difference is that, the Nuclear Reactor doesn't produce or generate any electricity while the Nuclear Power Plant does =).

Just like the picture above, we can see that this is a Nuclear Power Plant. Why? Because it has the turbine and generator. If we remove those 2 components, than we can call the picture above a Nuclear Reactor. Thus we can say that Nuclear Power Plant NEEDS a Nuclear Reactor to be operational while the Nuclear Reactor can just function on its own =D