455.4509 Robert Jan v/d Berg - After his retirement Crommelin started the Romawa company, dealing with innovative energy production. Similar to a sub-marine power supply unit he designed a comparable one for land-based purposes powered by a small nuclear reactor. The reactor core exists of graphite balls filled with 19,5 percent enriched uranium particles. Cooling is done by helium gas which drives a generator for electricity production and heats water for industrial purposes. These small nuclear reactor (about 20MWe) could be built near industries that need electricity and proces heat, like oil reffineries.
Romawa presented its idea two years ago to the Dutch Energy Research Foundation ECN and together with 3 other organisations (engineering firm Stork Nucon, the Technical University at Delft and the research institut KEMA) the consortium was founded. The goal is to develop a reactor for Dutch industry but there also seem to be contacts with Indonesia and South-Africa. The consortium will possibly give know-how to South-Africa if they decide to built a HTR in Koeberg. A decision if such a reactor will be built in S-Africa is expected in 1997.
Dutch firms and companies were invitated on a July 4 meeting to discuss the future of the HTR. First journalist and the documentation and research centre on nuclear energy, the LAKA Foundation, were also invited but on July 3, they were told that they were not allowed to visit the meeting. The Unit Nuclear of the ECN was afraid journalists could get the wrong impressions. Maybe they were afraid a certain sceptisism from the industry leaking out and endangering the whole project.
In front of the conference room at the Technical University at Delft, activists from the political youth-organization Dwars ('contrary' or 'cross-grained') protested. Dressed in protective wear and wearing gas- masks they demanded the end of the research and relocating the funds to renewable energy development. Background information on the HTR (provided by the LAKA foundation) was spread. The action led to critical questions by the industriy representatives to the consortium about safety, realizability and proliferation.
About 60 representatives from industrial firms attented the conference. The representatives were from possible suppliers of equipment and from industries possibly interested in a reactor, like oil reffineries (Elf), a firm in plastics (GE Plastics), paper-mills and a firm in photographic equipment (Fuji). The industry reacted with a wait-and-see policy. This meeting was in an early stage of the HTR development and was mainly ment to investigate the specific wishes of the industry.
Although this early stage it is worth following the project critical. Market perspectives are low for nuclear constructors after the Harrisburg and Chernobyl disasters. But efforts are made to sell new reactors. The energy research centre ECN is confronted with cuts in nuclear research funding. This project is a way of keeping the nuclear research alive and therefor the nuclear option open. In several countries development of the HTR was frozen due to a lack of perspective.
Other arguments against the HTR are:
- The danger of graphite in the reactor. Graphite can burn. The Chernobyl disaster showed which consequences a graphite fire can have. This fire could be started by a explosive reaction with water leaking from the water heat-exchanger system.
- The HTR is designed without a containment. A containment is designed to prevent the spread of radioactivity after an accident but also as protection to forces from outside like a plane crash and an explosion outside. The reactors are designed to be located very near to other possible dangerous (chemical) industry.
- The consortium says an accident is not possible, but a study on a Dutch university shows that the chance on a accident might theoretical be low but cannot be excluded.
- The ECN project-leader says the HTR is so safe that an emergency disaster-plan will not be needed and less licencing rules are necessary. This will certainly lead to less possibilities in public participation in the licencing procedure.
- The HTR is a producer of good quality weapons-grade plutonium. The five official nuclear weapon states produced their weapons-plutonium in graphite reactors. Graphite neutron moderation is more suitable to produce weapons-grade material than water moderation. The spread of HTR technology will stimulate the proliferation of nuclear weapons.
It is not likely that Dutch industry will invest in a not-proven technology with possible profits that can be made only in the long term (if ever). In 1995 the ECN presented a study on the feasability of the HTR in The Netherlands. Main conclusion was that the HTR could only compete when gas and coal prices would double.
The research money now spent to develop the HTR, should be invested in renewable energy sources. These are cleaner, cheaper and more efficient in fighting the greenhouse effect.
Source and Contact: Robert Jan van den Berg, LAKA Foundation, Ketelhuisplein 43, 1054 RD Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Tel: +31-20-6168294; Fax: +31-20-6892179
E-mail: laka@antenna.nl
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |