C.W. Forsberg, P.F. Peterson, H. Zhao - 2004 Feb 28: Describes new technologies that improve the characteristics of a molten salt reactor design. Two liquid fuelled reactors were built and operated in the USA during the 1950's and 1960's. This research lead to a design for a 1000 MW(e) molten salt reactor. This paper describes the improvements that can be made in this design by using modern technologies that were not available when the original was produced. The improved technologies are Brayton helium power cycles, compact heat exchangers, and carbon-carbon composites.

Evgeny Adamov - 2004 Jun: Innovative "fast" nuclear power plants offer solutions for environmental, political, and technical issues. This article reviews the advantages of fast nuclear reactors as seen from a Russian viewpoint. Using nuclear fission to produce electricity has developed quickly, but has not dominated the energy generation industry. Military, political, environmental, and financial factors have both encouraged and constrained it. Shortages of carbon fuels, global warming, and the proliferation of nuclear weapons are all influencing the advance of nuclear electrical power. Its future depends on many factors outside the realm of strictly commercial business. Energy independence is driving its expansion in some states. Introducing safe electrical power into energy-poor regions may turn out to be the most effective means for establishing peace in these areas. Fast nuclear reactors solve all the problems of today's thermal reactors: fuel is used efficiently, used fuel is easily managed, safe operation is guaranteed, and weapon's proliferation is stopped. This makes possible an international program to improve the world's living standards.

R.E. Chaney, S.G. Colt, R.A. Johnson, R.W. Wies, G.J. White - 2004 Dec 15: A comparison of electricity generation options for Galena, Alaska. Nuclear is the best. This report covers: - energy load profiles for Galena, - technologies and resources available - uses for any extra power - environmental and permitting issues, and - the economics of these energy options. Conclusions: The nuclear system will provide the lowest cost power. For environmental concerns the nuclear plant is a clear winner. Obtaining permits for the coal plant appears to be the most difficult. The assumption is that NRC approval will establish reasonable staffing levels. The coal option may be economic in some scenarios compared to enhanced diesel systems, so the coal option should not be entirely dismissed. Even though installation of the 4S nuclear plant presents a potential long-term solution to Galena's critical energy issues, other aspects, such as safety analyses, remain to be performed as part of the licensing process. Ultimately, the selection of the best energy option must consider these analyses and other factors. Specifically, regarding the 4S nuclear plant option, safety relating to potential accidents involving the reactor core and the use of liquid sodium as a heat transfer medium must be adequately addressed. If this technology is successfully deployed in Galena, its economic viability in other Alaska villages and elsewhere depends on the actual life cycle costs yet to be quantified. Benefits associated with adoption of one or more of the technologies discussed in this report go beyond their ability to meet Galena's immediate needs. There is potential for Galena to serve as a training center for rural Alaskans interested in using similar technologies in their villages. And there is potential for use of additional cogeneration leading to economic development such as horticulture and aquaculture.

John K. Sutherland - 2004 May 19: The used once fuel from nuclear reactors can be resued to produce a lot more power. Nuclear power reduces the risk of war by eliminating the need for conflict over scarce oil resources. The used fuel produced by nuclear reactors is more than 95% uranium. This, along with the depleted uranium left behind by the enrichment process, can be used to produce more electricity. If this potential energy was fully reused we would get more than one hundred times as much energy for each kilogram of mined uranium. Throwing this material away as waste is not reasonable. It is more valuabel than gold.

Michael Freemantle - 2004 Sep 13: An explanation of II, III, III+, and IV generation reactors. Summarizes the direction being taken to develop better reactors. Current reactors work well. Even so, many design changes have been proposed to make them safer, more efficient, more economical, and more acceptable for widespread use. These proposals can be categorized as "evolutionary" and "revolutionary". If we think of today's systems as the II Generation, then the evolutionary designs are designated as generation III and III+, while the revolutionary systems are IV generation. The most revolutionary IV generation systems are fast reactors that employ a closed fuel cycle and passive safety features. These reactors can also be small, and assembly line produced, making them much more useful for a wider range of applications: electricity, water purification, hydrogen production, and heating. Given the forecasts, a large number of new reactors will soon be needed. However, only a few countries are building new ones, mostly in the far east. China, India, Japan, and Russia are experimenting with the most advanced designs. For all new reactors safety is a primary objective, and the newer designs make much more use of passive characteristics. This means that everyday forces such as gravity are used to move safety elements into place when needed, instead of active elements such as motors or pumps. As a result these designs are simpler, and less expensive. The closed fuel cycle is also important. It ensures that all the fuel is converted into energy. Today's II generation systems only use about one percent of the fuel's potential. The USA is planning to deply generation III reactors in the 2010 timeframe, and the revolutionary generation IV systems around 2040.

R. Mayson, A, Worrall, K. Hesketh - 2004: Written for the Institute of Physics, this article explains how present day nuclear reactors work, and what improvements are being considered. The 440 fission reactors around the world have a good and improving record for performance and safety. These facts are stimulating new orders for new plants. Anticpating these opportunities, designers are studying better ways to build these systems. Some of the proposals are evolutionary, offering simplifications that reduce costs. Others are revolutionary, offering significant efficiency and sustainability gains. The evolutionary developments are being worked out for thermal reactors similar to those in use today. Costs can be reduced by using simpler means for safety shutdown, by using less expensive components such as light water instead of heavy water as a coolant, and by employing standardized production procedures. At the same time, the Generation IV research initiative is investigating six advanced designs with fast neutron flux, closed fuel cycles, various fission fuels, and modular construction. Other topics such as actinide transmutation are also explained. The article ends with a recommendation that we take full advantage of these engineering initiatives to reduce the global warming threat.