Dagsblatt

I recently read an interesting article about district power generation systems.  There are obvious benefits to a localised versus a centralised power generation and distribution – for one you avoid the transmission losses associated with channeling all power generated to a centralised distribution hub only to be redistributed, in some cases back to where it came from originally, again incurring transmission losses.  We have such a system in place here in Ireland.  The efficiency of systems like what we have here in Ireland is approximately 40% if I remember correctly.  At any rate it’s a fairly shocking figure.  For every 1000 kgs of Coal we put in at the power station, we see only 400 kgs worth out at the plug socket in your house. I was gob smacked when I found out about this.  Wind power doesn’t fare any better either only with wind power they talk about installed capacity, ie the rated output from a turbine, presumably under some ideal conditions etc.  Not only will you never see 5 kilowatts out of a turbine rated at 5 KW, you then suffer the transmition losses associated with the sending all the generated leccy to the centralised distribution hub.  And that’s when the wind blows.

So how about having a decentralised system with power generated locally where it is consumed using much smaller power stations.  Any excess generated power can be fed in to the grid or any shortfall can be met from the grid.  But predominantly the area surrounding the power generation facility consumes the power generated there.  There could be other benefits such as a district heating system (like what we see in the nordic countries).  Such a system would require predictability if it was to ensure that only a minimum of power would need to be imported from the grid in the event of a surplus.  Therefore wind alone would not work.  Hydro might, afterall there are apparently over 6000 known water mill sites in Ireland, so if it was good enough in the past to mill corn/drive machinery/etc. perhaps we could use it again as a resource to generate power?  Fossil fuels while reliable in terms of providing an energy source is not sustainable and in the long term is not reliable.  Bio-mass and or biofuels could also be used and will certainly become more economically viable as the price of traditional fossil fuels continues to rise.  How about nuclear?  There have been several key advances in this technology, minimising the waste and hazards associated with this type of generation.  Thorium, MSR etc.  Here’s where the interesting article comes in though.  Look at all of the military vessels sailing the seas which are powered by small, sealed, self contained nuclear power plants.  They’re good for a few decades use between refuelling, are built in a factory (so quality control can be maintained) and delivered as a module.  With the fall off in military spending several manufacturers are turning to power generation for homes and businesses.  If the gen IV advances in reactor design were applied to these sealed modules, it could possibly provide small scale nuclear power suitable for a district combined heat and power system which was relatively safe (I’m not going to catagorically state that it’d be perfectly safe) and much cheaper than a conventional nuclear power plant, of which we’d need at least 2 in Ireland to provide redundancy and backup in the event that one needed to be shut down.
These modules would be miniature nuclear devices.  Mini Nukes.  Or to give it a snappy, modern name, MiNuks.  The manufacturer’s first series of commercially viable examples could, conceivably, be designated the A Series.  Giving us the MiNukA.  Unluckily for the New Zealand Honey industry perhaps, I’m sure the Manuka honey producers would be at pains to differentiate the name of their wonderful honey from a small nuclear device.