Sometimes, the surprisingly high level of ingrained stupidity which we see in government is overwhelming. Understandable, but still overwhelming. Case in point: basic honesty in the context of available energy resources.
Heavy Water �cost� is a touchy subject with historical baggage ... Deuterium is a near perfect future fuel� in many guises of which LENR is one. It also carries �collateral� risks in the wrong hands. But that situation is now out of US control, yet our history of duplicity and uneeded secrecy remains firmly intact. One downside of heavy water usage has been said to be its high cost, but is that really accurate? Many of our own nuclear engineers believe it is accurate, because our government tells them it is true, yet... look at the world market. Things are far different there. Isn�t the US-quoted price of D2O really a subterfuge for �other� concerns ? If so, it is really a pity as far as the future use of an improved version of nuclear energy is concerned. Recently it has been stated, in the rumor mill, that Russia, for whatever reason (probable scenario: oversupply meets hard currency shortage) will supply heavy water in hundred ton quantities at an incredibly low price � about one thousandth the commonly heard quote from US sources (for smaller quantity). Whether true or not, the rumor underscores the assertion that, especially in enegy markets, �price� often bears little relationship to actual �cost.� And that variance goes both ways - up and down. Supplying the CANDU reactor with its heavy water gives us the basics of actual cost. This reactor differs most significantly from others in the US in reliance on lots of heavy water as moderator - which is necessary to achieve a nuclear reaction with natural uranium fuel. It needs about a ton of heavy water per megawatt of capacity � so a 400 megawatt plant needs 400 tons initially. If we used the "offical" cost, this reactor could not be built, so what is the "real" cost? Heavy water is present in only small quantities in natural water (1 part in 4000-8000, depending on source). There are many ways to enrich it but most employ chemical improvements to �fractional distillation�. Energy costs can be as much as 50% of the total cost of production. Factories processing large quantities of natural water use substantial quantities of energy BUT all of the energy requirement can be made up from �waste heat� combined with off-peak steam from the same reactors � the ones which are using it as moderator � IF (big if) they have been engineered to do so. And that is one of the reasons why the cost can vary so much � depending on who you are. Any CANDU reactor can double its heavy water inventory in less than a year if one really wants to go to the trouble building a modern thermochemical + fractional-distillation scheme into it, using off-peak and waste energy. A history of the original heavy water production in Canada (Rae, 1991) indicates that energy equivalent to 1 to 5 barrels of heavy oil/ kg heavy water was needed, at the start, depending on the efficiency of the chosen separation process and the technology applied. Using coal or natural gas, the most efficient process uses about $5 equivalent of energy per pound of D2O produced, which is about half of what the Russians are reportedly offering to sell the end product for. BUT again, any CANDU reactor, or equivalent can double its heavy water inventory in a very short time with modern use of a hybrid thermochemical �fractional distillation� scheme. Even so, the first D2O was supplied by electrolysis � which was extremely expensive, unless you had a giant dam close by (as did Norsk hydro in Norway in the 1940s) The first major Canadian plant used coal as a source of energy for heavy water production. The second used steam from a backpressure in a cogeneration mode. Subsequently two larger plants derived energy directly from steam provided by the Bruce Plant in Ontario, but believe it or not � they did not try to maximize the process using waste heat. The actual cost at Bruce for D2O is essentially very low anyway, even though it does not benefit much from modern thermochemical techniques, so why maximize when there are few internation buyers � due to overly willing suppliers in China and Russia. OK now we get down to Arms Control issues � which is probably the �real� determinant of price in the USA. That and its potential "value." Speaking of "potential value"... Flash back to WWII and Norway. The Allies mounted an enormous efforts to interrupt heavy water production at the Norsk Hydro plant in German-occupied Norway, even before we had any idea precisely how it was to be used. There was a failed glider assault by British commandos in 1942, then the destruction of a portion of the plant by Norwegian Resistance in 1943, an Eighth Air Force bombing raid in November 1943 left the plant largely intact, but a subsequent operation in 1944 destroyed a final shipment of heavy water on its way to Germany and were loosely the basis for the 1965 movie "The Heroes of Telemark," starring Kirk Douglas and Richard Harris. Since then, Norway has historically made its own large blunders, and supposedly unwitting contribution to the spread of nuclear weapons- essentially by its selling heavy water indiscriminately. According to the Norwegian government, by 1987 they had produced 450 tons of heavy water and every kilogram of it was exported at top dollar, mostly to Israel and South Arfica. Norway built a small heavy water reactor of its own at Halden in 1957, but GET THIS they chose to import the 16 tons of American heavy water needed to fill it!!! This left Norway free to sell its own heavy water on the world market- at a higher price. American heavy water was available only with inspection rights; Norwegian water had no restriction. And it was EXTREMELY profitable _then_ due to the artificially high price, even though they used the most inefficient technology imaginable (electrolysis). Since then, starting in the late-eighties, Russia, China and India all have heavy water plants using waste heat reactor energy, and are selling it on the world market for pennies on the dollar compared to what Norway once received. (BTW part of the reason how Israel was able to build so many bombs in the eighties goes back to Norway and D2O, and for some reason, the US government still thinks this method is not being used secretely in places like Iran, but that is another story) So it is no mystery, historically, why it once benefited our government to officially quote very high prices for heavy water, and to demand restrictions and inspection rights. However, when the actual cost + generous normal markup - make D2O potentially a very cheap commodity, the problem becomes � does this archaic duplicity now hurt the long-term US planner, who must abide by this kind of official stupidity? I call it �stupidity� because now Russia and China sell heavy water to everyone, internationally, few questions asked, so why do we maintain this ridiculous stance? If we (our own nuclear engineers) knew the real bottom line cost, and they do not, as most of them are chosen for both their intellignece and their "obedience quotient" - then one should suspect that there are some promising schemes which might be worth looking into... one of which involves our huge stockpile of so-called "depleted" uranium. We have been so desperate to "get rid" of this enormous potential asset they we even give it away free for the taking to ammo-makers to be used in armor piercing rounds for armor which our enemies do not possess. Double stupidity, perhaps, especially when consdiered in the context of cheap D2O. Hint: this stockpile is really not "that" depleted. They only remove about half of the fissile content. There is enough potential energy in this 50 year accumulated stockpile to supply all our future needs for hundreds of years. Check online references and you will discover how may kilotons of fissile material are still in this so-called "depleted" stockpile (and "on the ground" in places like Bosnia and Iraq). Anything further said on "how" to do it, would not be wise, so I will stop here - but lets just say, we may never know the real potential as things stand now... our ingrained offical duplicity keeps that which is even possible - about two layers deep in anachronistic secrecy. Jones
