Home Energy Nuclear Electricity Climate Change Lighting Control Contacts Links



By Charles Rhodes, P. Eng., Ph.D.

Xylene Power Ltd. provides professional engineering services relating to energy, nuclear power, electricity, climate change and commercial lighting.

This web site contains over 200 technical web pages that are accessible via six tables of contents titled:

Hydrocarbon pipeline related matters are included in the ELECTRICITY section under the heading:

Synthetic liquid hydrocarbon fuel production matters are included in the ELECTRICITY section under the heading:

Natural biologic processes took over 500,000,000 years to convert water and atmospheric CO2 into atmospheric oxygen, carbonate rock and sequestered fossil hydrocarbons. In less than a century extraction and oxidation of previously sequestered fossil hydrocarbons has triggered an extinction process known as thermal runaway. Unless extraction of fossil hydrocarbons is immediately halted planet Earth will spontaneously accumulate net radiant energy until there is 17.5 degree C increase in average temperature.

This website focuses on the measures required to meet mankind's energy, power and material requirements without further extraction of fossil hydrocarbons.

1) Replacing fossil fuels with non-fossil energy will require a 5 to 10 fold expansion in electricity system capacity using only non-fossil electricity generation.

2) The available non-fossil energy sources are nuclear, hydroelectric, solar, and wind.

3) In most jurisdictions the available hydroelectric capacity is already fully exploited. In industrialized countries nuclear electricity generation is much less expensive than intermittent solar and wind electricity generation in combination with the transmission and seasonal energy storage required to make power from the intermittent generation acceptably reliable.

4) Sustainable nuclear electricity generation requires adoption of liquid sodium cooled fast neutron reactors and nuclear fuel reprocessing. Nuclear electricity is more economic if each customer has load control and behind-the-meter thermal energy storage.

5) Displacement of fossil fuels by non-fossil electricity and installation of behind-the-meter thermal energy storage cannot commence until the billing rate for uninterruptible electricity is made primarily proportional to measured peak demand (kW or kVA) instead of being proportional to measured energy consumption (kWh). The delivery charge must also be proportional to measured peak demand (kW or kVA). The contemplated new retail electricity rate is [($70.00 / kW-month) + ($0.02 / kWh)].

6) Maximum economic displacement of fossil fuels by non-fossil electricity will require a supplementary interruptible electricity rate. At times when interruptible electricity is provided there should be no charge for peak demand.

7) For both uninterruptible and interruptible electricity the new rate per kWh ($0.02 / kWh) must be less than the cost of competitive fossil fuels to be displaced.

8) Full displacement of fossil fuels by non-fossil electricity will require a fossil carbon tax that is sufficient to keep fossil carbon in the ground.

9) In urban centers waste heat from nuclear power stations could be used for comfort heating and water heating. This heat would be delivered to customers via buried district heating pipes.

Planet Earth continuously absorbs a fraction of incident solar radiation and continuously emits infrared radiation. At long term steady state conditions the law of conservation of energy forces these two energy fluxs to be in approximate balance. Earth's planetary emission temperature T is the cloud top temperature at which:
(average absorbed solar radiant power) = (average emitted infrared radiant power).

Earth's average planetary emission temperature:
T = 270 degrees K
and emissivity:
Ft = 0.7555
were measured in November 1996 using a far infrared spectrometer mounted on an interplanetary spacecraft.

Due to non-linearity in the radiant energy equations Earth's average planetary emission temperature T has two real stable solutions, a "cool" state corresponding to presence of polar ice and a "warm" state corresponding to absence of polar ice. These two stable solutions are separated by about 17.5 degrees C.

In the "cool" state:
T ~ 270 degrees K
as measured by the Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft in November 1996.

In the "warm" state:
T ~ 287 degrees K.
as determined by astrophysical albedo measurements.

The local value of emission temperature Tr at which state switching occurs satisfies:
Tr < 273.15 degrees K
where 273.15 degrees K is the freezing point of water.

In recent decades products of combustion of fossil fuels have increased Earth's absorption of solar radiant power and have reduced Earth's emission of infrared radiant power. As a result there is ongoing net energy absorption by planet Earth which is gradually raising Earth's average planetary emission temperature T. The rate of temperature rise is limited by the heat capacity of the oceans.

In early 2017 Earth is still in its "cool" state but due to falling planetary albedo caused by polar ice melting and due to falling infrared emissivity caused by an increasing atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations a near term spontaneous transition from the "cool" state into the "warm" state is anticipated. This spontaneous "cool" state to "warm" state transition, is known as thermal runaway.

The paramount challenge facing mankind is halting thermal runaway.. Thermal runaway is an extinction level threat to all large land animal species on Earth. This web site addresses the physical origin of thermal runaway and the measures necessary to prevent thermal runaway continuing..

In Ontario politically driven attempts to implement solar and wind based electricity generation, without seasonal energy storage, achieved little net reduction in fossil CO2 emissions. Without sufficient seasonal energy storage wind and solar electricity generation cannot meet electricity system reliability requirements. In Ontario, due to geographic constraints, seasonal energy storage is prohibitively expensive. Furthermore, over commitment to wind and solar generation without self excitation has reduced the electricity grid stability and black start capability.

However, a major reduction in fossil CO2 emissions was achieved by replacing coal fired electricity generation with nuclear electricity generation.

Unfortunately part of the public has an irrational fear of nuclear energy. This fear is largely a result of poor long term planning by governments and electricity utilities with respect to nuclear safety, nuclear sustainability and disposal of nuclear waste.

The failure of elected governments to rationally choose power obtained by sustainable nuclear fission, over power obtained by combustion of fossil hydrocarbons, may ultimately lead to the extinction of large animal life on planet Earth.

In most jurisdictions fast neutron nuclear fission is the only non-fossil process that can sustainably, economically and safely supply sufficient power, when and where required, to completely displace fossil hydrocarbons.

In spite of public education about global warming, according to the UK Times, in the following countries the numbers of coal fired electricity generating plants operating or under construction in February 2017 were:
Europe: 468 operating plants, building 27 more, for a total of 495
Turkey: 56 operating plants, building 93 more, for a total of 149
South Africa: 79 operating plants, building 24 more, for a total of 103
India: 589 operating plants, building 446 more, for a total of 1036
Philippines: 19 operating plants, building 60 more, for a total of 79
South Korea: 58 operating plants, building 26 more, for a total 84
Japan: 90 operating plants, building 45 more, for a total of 135
China: 2363 operating plants,building 1171, for a total of 3534

Missing from this list are coal fired electricity generating plants in Canada, USA, Russia and numerous other countries.

The increase in Earth's atmospheric CO2 concentration due to combustion of fossil fuels reduces Earth's thermal infrared emissivity below its long term steady state value. This decrease in thermal infrared emissivity causes net thermal energy absorption by the oceans. The absorbed heat circulates via ocean currents, melts near polar floating ice and liberates methane (CH4) and more CO2.

Soot accumulation on ice sheet top surfaces captures solar photons and causes yet more ice melting. Melting of the ice reduces Earth's average solar reflectivity (planetary Bond albedo) which causes yet more net thermal energy absorption.

These processes acting together form a positive feedback loop which accelerates net heat accumulation by planet Earth and hastens the approach of thermal runaway.

If present trends continue thermal runaway will eventually melt all of Earth's surface ice. The resulting decrease in Earth's average solar reflectivity (planetary Bond albedo) from about 0.30 to about 0.10 will cause: an average planetary thermal emission temperature rise of about 17.5 degrees C, an average sea level rise of about 80 m and a global extinction of all large land animal species including humans. The geophysical isotope record shows that thermal runaway has occurred in the past and that climatic recovery from thermal runaway via natural processes takes about 200 thousand years.

Today Earth's atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration is over 406 ppmv and the atmospheric CO2 concentration is rising at over 2.5 ppmv per year. Humans are injecting fossil CO2 into the atmosphere faster than the rate at which CO2 is absorbed by the oceans and at many times the rate at which CO2 is removed from the oceans by natural processes (formation of carbonate rock and natural sequestration of fossil hydrocarbons). Prior to the industrial revolution Earth's atmospheric CO2 concentration was nearly steady at about 280 ppmv. A consequence of the increased atmospheric CO2 concentration is that Earth's oceans are continuously absorbing more radiant solar energy from the sun than is emitted via thermal infrared radiation. This net energy absorption is causing continuous heat accumulation by the oceans.

There is further solar energy absorption due to soot (incompletely burned carbon compounds) accumulating on the surface of otherwise clean snow and ice.

The net heat accumulation is melting: ice that floats on the ocean surface, ice that occurs as land borne glaciers, ice that occurs as permafrost and ice that occurs as fine particles in clouds. This melting of ice is reducing Earth's solar reflectivity (planetary Bond albedo), which is further increasing the rate of net energy absorption. This net energy absorption is gradually warming the oceans. This warming process will continue until the average Earth solar reflectivity (planetary Bond albedo) drops from 30% to 10% with an accompanying planetary emission temperature rise of about 17.5 degrees C.

A foreseeable consequence of thermal runaway will be uncontrolled human migration into Canada from lower latitude countries to such an extent that there will be insufficient food and serious conflict.

Thermal runaway is not an unproven theory. The sedimentary isotope ratio and fossil record show that CO2 triggered atmospheric thermal runaway occurred about 55 million years ago, during a period known as the Paleocene Eocene Thermal Maximum (PETM). During the PETM the polar ice caps completely melted and all land animals larger than a mole became extinct. Thermal runaway will not happen over night. It will take several decades to fully develop. However, once underway thermal runaway will be impossible to stop.

The geophysical record indicates that the emission temperature increase caused by thermal runaway will persist for about two hundred thousand years. This emission temperature increase is due to a decrease in Earth's average solar reflectivity (planetary Bond albedo) from about 0.30 to about 0.10 caused by the phase change of water from ice to liquid both in clouds and in the polar regions. There may also be a further emission temperature increase of as much as 4 degrees C due to the decrease in Earth infrared emissivity caused by increased CO2 and H2O concentrations in the upper atmosphere.

The only means of preventing thermal runaway is:
leaving fossil carbon in the ground.

Leaving fossil carbon in the ground requires:
1. Availability of sufficient affordable non-fossil electricity when and where required to completely displace fossil fuels;
2. An electricity rate that rewards efficient use of electricity transmission and non-fossil electricity generation;
3. A fossil carbon tax sufficient to keep fossil carbon in the ground.

Note that when extraction of fossil carbon is halted
net planetary heat accumulation will continue for at least the atmospheric retention time of CO2 (16 years) and the ice retention time of soot (decades).
The retention time of soot on glacier surfaces depends in part on the exact soot composition, which is dependent on the combustion process that produces the soot.

Natural gas is often claimed to be "clean burning". However, natural gas fuelled combustion turbines tend to produce very fine (2.5 um) soot particles which are invisible to the naked eye but which, when they deposit on snow or ice, can strongly absorb solar radiation.

Some coal and oil combustion processes produce soot containing stable aromatic carbon rings that may persist in the environment for many years.

Reliance on the much heralded 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change will guarantee human extinction via thermal runaway because the fossil CO2 emission reductions contemplated in the Paris agreement are not sufficient to prevent thermal runaway. Due to a combination of increasing atmospheric CO2 concentration and decreasing local Bond albedo in much of Canada the 1.5 degree C to 2.0 degree C average temperature rise contemplated in the Paris Agreement has already been exceeded.

On November 29, 2016 the Liberal government of Canada demonstrated its refusal to be guided by science by its approval of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipe Line expansion from Edmonton, Alberta to Burnaby, British Columbia. The energy, jobs, investment and tax revenue from that new liquid fossil fuel infrastructure investment would be much better realized via a comparable investment in nuclear power capacity.

The concept that Canada can economically gain via expansion of tar sands production is completely preposterous. The contemplated new multi-billion dollar liquid fossil fuel infrastructure will quickly become a stranded asset that will threaten the solvency of Canadian banks and the value of pension funds and life insurance policies.

The future consequences of thermal runaway are immense. The belief that mankind can continue extraction and combustion of fossil hydrocarbons without major climatic consequences is completely false. In a few decades mankind has released into the atmosphere a fossil carbon that natural processes took millions of years to accumulate. Already there are major droughts, land animal species extinctions and mass human migrations from tropical countries to more temperate countries.

At the root of the thermal runaway problem is widespread lack of public understanding regarding the effects of changes in planetary solar reflectivity and planetary infrared emissivity on cumulative net heat absorption. As long as there is an above equilibrium atmospheric CO2 concentration or there is deposition of soot on snow and glaciers
the thermal runaway process will run spontaneously until there is no more ice left to melt. The result will be a decrease in solar reflectivity (planetary Bond albedo) that will increase solar power absorption by the oceans and will over time substantially increase average ambient temperature.

In Canada during the last three decades almost every year has been significantly warmer than the year before. The cumulative warming effects on glaciers, ocean ice, ice roads, permafrost, average air temperature, insect infestations, forest fires and flash floods have been obvious. In the USA in recent years the direct costs of sea level rise, floods, storms, wild fires and droughts have risen by more than $100 billion per year. In the US south-west major aquifers critical for agriculture are near depletion.

Fossil fuel producers and consumers must face the reality that they are directly responsible for the consequences of fossil carbon triggered climate change. Continued extraction of fossil hydrocarbons is simply not a sustainable option. Citizens must do all necessary to make investments in fossil hydrocarbon extraction, refining, transportation and combustion financially unrewarding.

Governments must face the politically difficult decision to leave fossil hydrocarbon compounds in the ground and to adopt an appropriate mix of renewable energy and nuclear energy.
The optimum energy supply mix depends on the availability and reliability of local sources of renewable energy, the availability and sufficiency of local energy storage and on political stability, public education and work force training.

Problems common to all renewable energy forms are the intermittency and seasonality of renewable energy supply and seasonal storage of renewable energy when it is plentiful for later use when it is scarce. Energy storage for a few hours is possible but energy storage for weeks or months is frequently both extremely inefficient and prohibitively expensive.

A mountainous region blessed with consistent rainfall and a low average population density, such as British Columbia or Quebec, can rely on hydraulic energy storage if the population is willing to build and maintain the required large hydraulic reservoirs. Adjacent regions with intermittent solar and wind generation may be able to access this hydraulic energy storage capacity by integrating their electricity grids with the region containing the hydraulic energy storage. However, there are significant constraints on hydraulic balancing of intermittent wind and solar generation imposed by dam storage capacity, high and low limits on downstream river flow and impacts on fisheries and indigenous populations.

A related major issue is that river water that is used for hydraulic electricity production is river water that is not available for agricultural irrigation or for recharging depleted aquifers. The amount of river water required per kWh for hydraulic electricity production is far greater than the amount of river water required per kWh for nuclear electricity production. As fresh water aquifers are depleted the resulting increased requirement for river water for agricultural irrigation will reduce the amount of river water that is available for hydraulic electricity generation and hence will reduce the hydraulic power available for balancing wind and solar power.

In theory the river water shortage could be mitigated by use of pumped storage, but the practical political problems attendant to large scale pumped storage systems are immense. From a geographical perspective the obvious place in North America for implementation of large scale pumped storage is between Lake Ontario and Lake Erie. However, there are so many conflicting governmental and water front property interests around these two great lakes that realizing a cost effective pumped storage implementation agreement is thought to be impossible.

The nuclear energy supply alternative requires transparency, political stability, public education, a highly trained work force and year round access to sufficient water for evaporative cooling. Making nuclear power safe and sustainable requires enlightened government policies relating to: fast neutron nuclear reactor technology, natural draft cooling towers, nuclear fuel reprocessing, radioactive material transport and radio isotope storage. Obtaining such enlightened government policies from legislators who lack an advanced science education can be extremely difficult. The legislators respond to irrational demands of voters and special interest lobbies neither of which understand of the relevant technical issues. The North American education system has failed to teach the general pubic basic energy related physics and economics. The general public is totally unaware of advances in fast neutron reactors that as compared to CANDU reactors have improved uranium utilization 100 fold and have reduced long term spent fuel storage requirements 1000 fold.

The present electricity rate structure in Ontario is primarily based on measured kWh consumed rather than on measured peak kW or peak kVA. This existing electricity rate structure discourages construction and use of consumer owned energy storage. At the root of this problem is a faulty government policy of encouraging minimization of electrical kWh consumption instead of encouraging minimization of peak kW or peak kVA demand and encouraging minimization of overall fossil fuel consumption.

An issue of paramount importance is adopting a retail electricity rate structure that financially enables consumer owned energy storage, load management and displacement of fossil fuels with off-peak non-fossil electricity.

As a result of over a century of heavy dependence on fossil fuels, in most jurisdictions the electricity rate is primarily based on measured kWh consumed. However, that electricity rate encourages use of fossil fuels in preference to non-fossil electricity even when there are surplus non-fossil kWh available at zero marginal cost to the electricity system. In order for non-fossil electricity to economically displace fossil fuels the electricty rate must be primarily based on measured peak kW or peak kVA during each billing period. A peak kW or peak kVA based electricity rate, in addition to encouraging conservation of energy, financially encourages construction and appropriate use of consumer owned energy storage and encourages substitution of electricity for fossil fuels when surplus non-fossil electrical energy is available. Measurements of kWh consumed should be used for allocating surplus non-fossil electrical energy to parties equiped for intermittent electricity use.

In order to commence displacement of fossil fuels with electricity the cost of a marginal electrical kWh to the consumer must be less than the cost of a marginal fossil fuel thermal kWh. To meet this requirement the electricity system revenue must be primarily obtained from a charge proportional to each consumer's metered monthly peak kW or peak kVA. The peak kW or kVA meter should have a 90% step response in 4.3 hours and should be automatically disabled at times when the Independent Electricity System Operator (IESO) is providing non-fossil interruptible electricity.

A new retail electricity rate rate of the form:
[($70.00 / peak kW-month) + ($0.02 / kWh)]
would allow economic use of surplus non-fossil electrical kWh for displacement of fossil fuels in Ontario while maintaining electricity rate revenue. This rate would also encourage implementation of behind the meter energy storage.

Changing the electricity billing methodology involves transition issues relating to consumer education. Consumers must be taught that to reduce electricity and fossil fuel costs they should invest in energy storage, load management and hybrid heating (fossil fuel displacement) equipment. That education process will take several years. It is recommended that in the initial years adoption of the new electricity rate be voluntary.

Today, in spite of decades of overwhelming scientific evidence, most governments have failed to adopt the energy system changes required to prevent severe climate change. These governmental failures include:
1) Continued planning and construction of new fossil fuel infrastructure;

2) Failure to build sufficient non-fossil electricity generation, transmission and energy storage capacity to replace fossil fuels;

3) Failure to impose a tax on fossil carbon sufficient to keep fossil carbon in the ground;

4) Failure to set aside and suitably zone river valleys that are potentially suitable for hydraulic energy storage;

5) Failure to set aside and suitably zone the land corridors needed for the high voltage electricity transmission lines, rail lines and district heating pipelines required for fossil fuel displacement;

6) Failure to set aside and suitably zone sites suitable for the required nuclear electricity generating stations, nuclear district heating plants and commuter railway parking lots;

7) Failure to set aside and suitably zone depleted mine sites and surrounding property suitable for medium and long term nuclear waste storage;

8) Failure to adopt an electricity rate structure that financially rewards appropriate use of load management and energy storage;

9) Failure to adopt an electricity rate structure that enables economic use of intermittent surplus non-fossil electricity generation capacity for displacement of fossil fuels.

10) Failure to educate the public with respect to critical energy related matters including:
a) the law of conservation of energy;
b) thermal runaway;
c) the nature of electricity;
d) photon energy quantization;
e) sustainable non-fossil energy sources;
f) constraints on utility supplied power and energy;
g) long distance electricity transmission;
h) energy storage;
i) electricity rate structure;
j) nuclear energy;
k) fast neutron reactors;
l) nuclear fuel reprocessing;
m) nuclear waste disposal.

11) When legislators comprehend the scope of the work that must be done to prevent thermal runaway they often feel overwhelmed and do nothing. Legislative action is driven by public demand and most voters do not understand the basic physics of energy systems and climate change.

In North America no major political party is facing the full scope of the required fossil carbon extraction reduction. Nowhere in North America is net new nuclear power capacity being built. In every case corruption by the fossil fuel industry is driving government decisions. In the USA CO2 emissions are increasing due to replacement of non-fossil nuclear electricity generation capacity by natural gas fuelled electricity generation.

In Ontario the Liberal government is presently unwilling to adopt peak kVA based electricity rates to enable displacement of fossil fuel consumption by surplus non-fossil electricity.

In Ontario CO2 emissions are increasing due to replacement of non-fossil nuclear electricity generation capacity by natural gas fuelled electricity generation.

Substantial reductions in fossil CO2 emissions can only be achieved by construction of additional nuclear power capacity. The fossil fuel industry funds multiple parties that lobby against construction of additional nuclear capacity. The problem is compounded by a voting public that does not understand basic energy issues.

The Ontario Long Term Energy Plan does not adequately address displacement of fossil fuels in the heating and transportation markets with non-fossil electricity. The present Ontario government refuses to face the reality that to completely displace fossil carbon the operating nuclear reactor capacity in Ontario must be increased about 10 fold.

Energy requirements that are missing from the Ontario long term energy plan include non-fossil energy for biomass processing to make synthetic liquid hydrocarbon fuels, for additional cement production to replace asphalt and for non-combustion municipal waste processing to recycle hydrocarbon resins.

In recent years in Ontario there has been a disproportionate investment in wind, solar and run-of-river electricity generation without sufficient investment in nuclear power, energy storage and electricity transmission. Over investment in intermittent renewable electricity generation without sufficient seasonal energy storage creates stranded assets having little market value.

As nuclear electricity generation displaces fossil fueled electricity generation the market value of intermittent renewable electricity generation decreases unless there is sufficient seasonal energy storage. However, in Ontario there is no seasonal energy storage.

As a result Ontario electricity rates are sky high and much of the renewable electricity generation capacity is going to waste. This waste has been concealed by improper electricity rates and by deceptive accounting by parties with short term political and profit agendas.

Ontario is in the ridiculous position of exporting electricity at about $0.016 / kWh while charging Ontario rural consumers as much as $0.270 / kWh. This electricity pricing strategy has increased consumption of fossil fuels in Ontario and has made many Ontario businesses internationally uncompetitive. The Ontario government has repeatedly ignored engineering advice to allow consumers voluntary change from the obsolete electicity rate primarily based on measured kWh to a new electricity rate primarily based on measured peak kW or peak kVA. This proposed new rate reflects the true cost of electricity generation and transmission in Ontario.

A new retail electricity rate rate of the form:
[($70.00 /peak kW-month) + ($0.02 / kWh)]
a) maintain electricity system revenue;
b) encourage implementation of behind the meter energy storage;
c) allow economic use of surplus non-fossil electrical kWh for displacement of fossil fuels;
d) reduce the blended cost of electricity per kWh by enabling larger kWh consumption without increasing peak demand.

At this time the government of Ontario is unwilling to act rationally to displace fossil hydrocarbon fuels with available zero cost surplus non-fossil electricity, which would reduce the blended electricity cost per kWh. The only rational explanations for this continuing governmental inaction are incompetence or corruption by the financial beneficiaries: US bulk electricity purchasers and the Canadian oil industry. In the presence of this continuing incompetence or apparent corruption this author is not confident that thermal runaway can be avoided.

The failure of elected governments to commit to advanced nuclear power technology is highly troubling. If present governmental behavior patterns continue much of the existing world population will die of starvation within the 21st century. This starvation will be triggered by agricultural failures due to drought and aquifer depletion at equatorial and middle latitudes. As Earth's atmospheric temperature continues to rise so also will the sea level and soil moisture evaporation. Absent sufficient nuclear power for desalination of sea water and for pumping of desalinated water inland, in many places there will not be enough fresh water in the dry season to support intensive agriculture.

Already there are substantial reductions in land used for agriculture in Australia, Africa and North America due to lack of irrigation water. At the time of writing over 5 million people in Somolia, Etheopia, South Sudan and neighboring equatorial regions are facing death due to drought induced starvation. Less wwell covered by the news media is drought in parts of South America.

In most jurisdictions the available renewable energy supply and energy storage options are not sufficient for displacement of fossil fuels, so rapid deployment of advanced nuclear power reactors and corresponding electricity transmission/distribution is essential.

There is insufficient public recognition that the cost of nuclear electricity delivered to an urban load is much less than the cost of equal reliability wind and solar energy delivered to the same urban load. A faulty electricity transmission rate structure is largely to blame. Nuclear electricity kWh measured at the generator are more expensive than wind generated kWh measured at the generator but nuclear electricity is reliable, is 3 fold less expensive to transmit per kWh-km, involves about 4 fold shorter average transmission distances, does not require expensive seasonal energy storage, does not incur energy storage related losses and does not require balancing generation.

These issues collectively make reliable electricity delivered to an urban load from a nuclear power station in Ontario about five fold less expensive than equally reliable electricity supplied by wind and solar generation.

There is only one sustainable path for displacement of fossil fuels and that path requires widespread adoption of liquid sodium cooled fast neutron reactors. Hence, for expansion of nuclear power capacity to make economic and environmental sense there must also be a major investment in conversion from CANDU and other water moderated reactors to liquid sodium cooled Fast Neutron Reactors.

In 1994 former US president Bill Clinton, for reasons of political expediency, cancelled the highly successsful US fast neutron reactor development program. The USA, which had been a world leader in nuclear engineering matters, totally gave up its leadership role. Hopefully the Trump administration will address this problem.

There is a failure by all levels of government to recognize that in high latitude countries such as Canada the only technology that can sustainably displace fossil fuels is liquid sodium cooled fast neutron reactors (FNRs).

There is also insufficient public recognition that advances in liquid sodium cooled fast neutron reactors and related technology have potentially enabled a large increase in nuclear plant life, an over 100 fold improvement in natural uranium utilization efficiency and an over 1000 fold reduction in the requirement for isolated long term storage of spent nuclear fuel.

For safety each Fast Neutron Reactor (FNR) fuel bundle features:
1) Natural sodium circulation;
2) Passive automatic shut down if its operating temperature exceeds its operating temperature setpoint;
3) Independent discharge temperature setpoint control;
4) Independent shutdown control.
Each FNR typically has 16 independent heat removal systems. In addition commercial FNRs should be fitted with sodium pool bottom material and contours that, in the event of fuel melting, will prevent formation of a critical mass on the sodium pool bottom.

Properly designed FNRs include a 2.8 m thickness of liquid sodium around the outside of the reactor blanket for neutron shielding, to extend equipment life and to avoid production of decommissioning waste.

Due to repeated political procrastination with respect to fossil carbon taxes, electricity rates and new nuclear reactor development there is no certainty that thermal runaway can be halted. Under the best of circumstances the time required to build the nuclear reactor capacity required for total fossil carbon displacement in Ontario is at least 40 years. During that time interval spontaneous thermal runaway may become impossible to stop. However, absent prompt construction of this new nuclear reactor capacity it is certain that thermal runaway will become impossible to stop.

In summary, stopping thermal runaway requires:
a) A fossil carbon tax sufficient to keep fossil carbon in the ground;
b) Immediate construction of much more nuclear electricity generation and related electricity transmission capacity;
c) Widespread adoption of liquid sodium cooled fast neutron reactors (FNRs) and nuclear fuel recycling;
d) Interim use of renewable energy when and where readily available for displacement of fossil fuels;
e) Adoption of electricity rates primarily based on each consumer's monthly peak kW or kVA measured at times when the electricity grid is heavily loaded;
f) Widespread adoption of consumer owned behind-the-meter energy storage;
g) Large scale production of synthetic liquid hydrocarbon fuels for fueling aircraft;
h) Large scale production of ammonia, sodium and chlorine for fueling ships;
i) Wide spread adoption of lithium batteries and compressed hydrogen for automotive propulsion;
j) Widespread adoption of electricity and liquid / compressed hydrogen for railway propulsion;
k) Adoption of nuclear district heating and/or cooling in urban areas;
l) Widespread adoption of ground source heat pumps for comfort heating and cooling.

A document worthy of careful study is a March 2016 report by the Ontario Society of Professional Engineers titled: Ontario's Energy Dilemma: Reducing Emissions at an Affordable Cost.

Most of the material on this web site is suitable for persons with a high school science education. However, some of the material requires the reader to have a deeper understanding of mathematics, physics, chemistry or engineering.

The web page ENERGY AND SOCIETY gives an overview of some of the major issues that are more fully developed elsewhere on this web site.

Visitors to this web site should review the tables of contents that are accessible via links located at the top and bottom of each web page.

Web site visitors are encouraged to email constructive comments to the author.

This web page last updated April 24, 2017.

Home Energy Nuclear Electricity Climate Change Lighting Control Contacts Links