Tag Archives: nuclear energy

Mass produced nuclear power plants?

A slightly weird picture of the rather unusual House of Porcelain in Tianjin, which is slowly turning black in the smog.

Porcelain House in Tianjin, which is slowly turning black in the smog.

In the pocket of my coat I have a peculiar souvenir of my recent visit to China. It’s a white face-mask with a little filter built-in to one side. It cost 2 Yuan, or about £0.2, and was given to me by a research student in Tianjin, who worked in my lab in Liverpool for a year. She bought it for me one Saturday when we were going out sightseeing in Tianjin because the air quality was so poor it caught on the back of your throat. The smog was so thick you could not see the tops of even modestly tall buildings.

This is a daily reality for millions of people in many of China’s cities. I reported in my blog entitled ‘Year of the Air: 2013’ [November 20th, 2013] about the number of deaths from pollution.  PM2.5 that’s particles with a diameter less than 2.5 microns are damaging to human health. While I was in Beijing the level of PM2.5 was 144 micrograms per cubic metre, compared to 13 at home in Liverpool.  My student’s mother had visited her while she was in Liverpool and I asked what she liked most during her visit – the fresh air was her reply.

I can’t really remember smog in England though I do remember buildings in the city centres being gradually cleaned because the smog had turned them black. And I remember shortly after I finished my PhD, being shown by a collaborator in the Pathology Department, the lungs from a recent post-mortem – they were grey-black from the smog!

The scale of the problem is difficult to grasp. Tianjin is a provincial city about 30 minutes by bullet train south-east of Beijing with a population of 14 million people, almost twice that of London, and 2.4 million cars.  The smog is generated by pollution from factories, power-stations and cars.  Hybrid cars could make a difference but there are none because they are too expensive, a Beijing colleague told me as he drove me in his brand new Volkswagen Passat. Plug-in cars would not solve the problem because the electricity would come mainly from coal-fired power stations, so the pollution would be simply moved elsewhere.

China needs clean energy, fast and lots of it.  In 2011 China’s installed electricity generating capacity was  about 1TW (Tera Watts or 1 with 12 noughts after it), of which about 2% comes from China’s 21 operating nuclear power plants.  Typical modern nuclear power plants take years to build and generate around 1,000 MW; perhaps we should be considering the small-scale mass production of medium-size modular power plants.  Huge, complex, reliable aeroplanes are made in this way, for instance the current Airbus A380 is production rate is about 25 per year.  So why not medium-size nuclear power plants?  Mass-production would also make decommissioning cheaper since it not be a bespoke process for each plant.

Maybe now that the Lockheed Martin’s Skunk Works have turned their attention to developing a fusion reactor, power-stations will be produced like airliners before I retire.

Sources:

Porcelain House, Tianjin

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2014/10/27/desperate-measures-as-world-leaders-visit-beijing-tries-to-reduce-pollution-by-40/

http://aqicn.org/city/united-kingdom/liverpool-speke/

BTW – My pathology colleague and I were interested in whether people with osteoporosis could break their hips and fall, rather than the usual assumption of falling and break their hips. See:

Wilkinson JM, Cotton DWK, Harris SC & Patterson EA, Assessment of osteoporosis at autopsy: mechanical methods compared to radiological and histological techniques, Medicine, Science & the Law, 31(1):19-24, 1991.

Cotton DWK, Whitehead CL, Vyas S, Cooper C & Patterson EA, Are hip fractures caused by falling and breaking or breaking and falling? Forensic Science Int., 65(2):105-112, 1994.

 

 

Dream Car?

f1When you are young most people would like a car with the performance of a racing car. When you get a little older and have children then you want something with the strength of an armoured personnel carrier in order to keep them safe. By the time you are old enough to have grandchildren, you are worried about whether the world’s resources will still be round for them and you would like a car with the fuel efficiency of the ETH PAC Car II which at 15,212 mpg, or 0.01857 litres/100 km holds the world record for fuel efficiency. In my case the compromise is a Volkswagen Golf, which is an example of the engineering conflict resolution between cost, structural integrity, performance and sustainability discussed in last week’s post [‘Conflict Resolution’ on June 25, 2014].

My colleague who lives in Zürich has an alternative resolution to the conflict. He does not own a car. Instead he has bought shares in a car sharing scheme, Mobility. If he needs a car then he selects a car on-line from those available in the nearest car-park and there 2500 available from 1200 in Switzerland. When I visited him a few weeks ago he picked up a sporty BMW 1 series by using a smart card in his wallet to open the car and said if he had been on his own then he would have taken the little SMART car parked next to it. As my Swiss colleague said if you are the car you drive then he can be a different person everyday.

Conflict Resolution

conflict pyramidEngineers need to be experts in resolving conflicts…

Every man-made device that moves required energy to make it and uses energy when it moves. Heavier devices have greater inertia than small ones and hence more energy is needed to set them in motion – think about peddling an old-fashioned steel-framed bike compared to a modern alloy one. So, designing for sustainability requires engineers to minimise the quantity of raw materials and energy used to manufacture a device AND to minimize its weight if the device moves as part of its function.

Now, here comes the conflict.

Sustainability also implies that devices should have a long, maintenance-free service life so that resources used in maintenance and replacement are minimized. Service life is usually limited by fatigue and, or wear and the probability of these failure mechanisms occurring can be reduced by lowering stress levels. However, stress is inversely proportional to cross-section area and so can be reduced by adding material, i.e. increasing the mass of the device which will also increase its inertia, or resistance to motion. The probability of failure can be reduced by using stronger, more sophisticated materials that are lightweight and almost always more expensive, e.g. composites. Customers also want performance and additional expense might be acceptable if it is accompanied by additional performance – some people will pay for a carbon-fibre frame for their bicycle. Elegant engineering design requires resolution of the conflict between cost, safety and reliability, performance and sustainability.

This is why engineers are trained in conflict resolution or as it is more commonly known: problem-solving.

Energy efficiency

We were sent a summary of our annual gas and electricity consumption recently by our local utility company. The utility quantified our consumption of both gas and electricity in units of kilowatt-hours (kWh). It is usual to be sold electricity in kilowatt-hours but most people are confused by this unit. Perhaps because they learnt at school that the units of energy are Joules in the SI system and the power rating of appliances is usually given in Watts. They might know that a Watt is a Joule of energy per second, so what is a kilowatt-hour? Well it is about 3.6 x 106 Joules or 3.6 MJ, because it is 1000 Joules per second (= Watt) for one hour. So, I think the utility company should be telling me how many MegaJoules (MJ) we have consumed. After all we are used to seeing the energy content of our food quoted in kiloJoules (kJ), as well as calories.

The situation with our gas consumption is rather different because the utility does not supply energy but gas. The amount of energy that I get from it depends on what I do with it. If I burn it under conditions of constant volume, e.g. in a closed rigid container with exactly the correct concentration of oxygen then it will generate more energy in terms of heat than when it is burnt in constant pressure conditions, such as at atmospheric pressure in air. This is because in constant pressure conditions some of the energy released by combustion is used to expand the exhaust gases against the constant pressure, i.e. to do work, and only what is left is released as heat. So the utility should sell the gas by weight. If they sold it by volume then I would be paying more for the same amount of gas (i.e. number of hydrocarbon molecules) when the supply pressure was reduced.

Oil companies don’t sell gasoline or diesel in Joules for the same reason but they can sell by volume because it is always supplied to our cars at atmospheric pressure and the volume of a liquid is essentially constant.

We like to compare the efficiency of cars in terms of miles per gallon, or kilometres per litres. Efficiency can be loosely defined as what you want divided what you have to put in [See my post entitled ‘National Efficiency‘ on May 29th, 2013]. So for a car, what you want is kilometres travelled and what you put in is litres of fuel. However, when we are all driving plug-in electric cars then we will probably talk about how many kilometres per megajoule our car achieves [see my post entitled ‘Are electric car back?‘ on May 28th, 2014] . Unfortunately, while we are in transition with plug-in hybrids, car manufacturers like to quote very attractive kilometres per litre and ignore the electricity supplied via the plug – as if it were free!

Image courtesy KKN Liebstadt NPP from http://www.nucleartourist.com/systems/ct.htm