reactor

China has a nuclear reactor 100 times more efficient than traditional ones. The trick is to shoot atoms with an accelerator

by

China has had one goal in mind for some years: to have a voice in the nuclear race. In the weaponsyes, but also in energy. As Europe argues and the United States attempts to rejuvenate its critical infrastructure to meet AI needs, China has been on the accelerator for months. Recently they have not only approved 10 new reactorsbut they are one step away from turning on a new generation nuclear power plant to provide ‘green’ energy for 1,000 years. This is the CiADS system, or Throttle Actuated System. It is a type of reactor that China has been developing for more than 15 years and that promises to convert waste into energy. Their trick is to convert “garbage” into fuel, and it is a very interesting twist for nuclear energy. And even more so in a China that wants to dominate the atom and renewables as a basis for the development of another of the great ambitions of the country. Artificial intelligence. A twist to nuclear energy In a releasethe Institute of Modern Physics of the Chinese Academy of Sciences gave some details of how this accelerator-driven nuclear reactor works. Uranium is still the fuel, but “reactor driven by an accelerator” is literal. Using a particle accelerator, protons are “shot” at a heavy metal target at a speed of 0.8 times that of light. This generates neutrons that drive a reactor that operates somewhat below the critical threshold to be self-sustaining. The reactor generates energy and this violent reaction causes the long-lived radioactive isotopes that are normally generated in a conventional nuclear power plant to transmute and become materials with a shorter life. As its managers explain in SCMPthe CiADS is a hybrid between a nuclear reactor and a particle accelerator. The main advantage is that greatly reduces the risk of uncontrolled reactionsbut it has another: you can reuse the radioisotopes that normally would be treated as nuclear waste to continue producing energy. Firing beams of protons through these accelerators to bombard the heavy metal makes the uranium-238 give way to a new nuclear fuel: plutonium-239. According to the state media Science and Technology Daily, it is basically turning waste into treasures. According to those responsible, this method is 100 times more efficient than conventional fission and would allow nuclear energy to be converted into “a source of green, safe and stable energy for 1,000 years”, ensuring part of the necessary energy supply for the future. Furthermore, since what would previously be long-lasting waste is reused, the resulting CiADS has a useful life of less than one thousandth compared to conventional waste. The CiADS under construction They are two birds with one stone: China is wildly expanding its nuclear capacity, but it is estimated that it does not have as much uranium of its own and would continue to depend on imports… or to fish it in the sea. With “100 times more efficient” plants, you can get more juice out of what you have. And then there’s the fact that nuclear waste is less dangerous. If everything goes as planned, China will have its first MW-scale CiADS in 2027. It will be then when we check if those theoretical promises achieved by scale prototypes are fulfilled. The CiADS comes at a time when China has emerged as a contradiction in energy matters. They carry years fighting pollution and emissions, but they burn coal. They are a powerhouse in renewables with megastructures and deserts covered by panels. But in the age of AI, it is precisely that coal and gas that is the fuel that allows us to satisfy the demand of data centers at the peak of training. With nuclear weapons, China seeks further reduce your CO2 footprintbut ensuring a future in which it must feed the population, artificial intelligence and a network of technology companies that are doing the most difficult: fighting Western companies without the technological resources of the West. Because right now China doesn’t have the chips or the AI, but yes the energy. And that investment in new generation nuclear plants and, above all, in nuclear fusionrepresents the foundation of what is to come. Everything, that is, if the CiADS works as expected. Images | Sahaza Delis, Tighef In Xataka | There is a global race to be the first to reach nuclear fusion. And Germany just gave it an optimistic date

The SPARC fusion reactor is the “microchip” of the future for AI

by

The “30 years to merger” joke is officially dead in Massachusetts. With the installation of the first high-temperature superconducting magnet in the SPARC reactor, the era of experimentation has given way to the era of manufacturing. With a calendar marking 2027 as the year of the ‘First Plasma’, humanity is just months away from proving that the Sun can be bottled commercially. The rebirth in the desert. The epicenter of this change is the alliance between Commonwealth Fusion Systems (CFS), chip giant Nvidia and industrial powerhouse Siemens at CES 2026 in Las Vegas. As detailed by the agenciesthe three companies have joined forces to create a “digital twin” of SPARC, the demonstration reactor CFS is building outside Boston. This announcement is not just a declaration of intent. As Seeking Alpha reportsCFS has already installed the first of 18 high-temperature superconducting magnets that form the heart of SPARC. According to CFS CEO Bob Mumgaard, in statements to Fortune: “These magnets are powerful enough to lift an aircraft carrier out of the water.” The paradox of AI. As Siemens CEO Roland Busch warned, on the CES stageAI factories and data centers require constant gigawatts of electricity to operate, but AI is, in turn, the tool that will provide that energy. Check a plasma at 100 million degrees Celsius It is an engineering challenge that the human mind cannot solve alone. As Latitude Media explainsthe collaboration with Nvidia makes it possible to compress “years of manual experimentation into just weeks of virtual optimization.” The Digital “Brain” of Fusion. The key to CFS achieving what no one has been able to do in decades lies in an unprecedented digital infrastructure. The company isn’t just welding steel; He is building the reactor twice: once in the real world and once in the virtual one. To do this, it uses the Siemens Xcelerator ecosystem in industrial design and Nvidia’s Omniverse platform to give life to an exact replica of the SPARC reactor. This system works as a sophisticated flight simulator. Bob Mumgaard, CEO of CFS, details what they use an aerial analogy to explain this technological hierarchy; While the digital twin developed with Nvidia acts as the “virtual plane”, Google’s DeepMind artificial intelligence functions as the “co-pilot” that helps navigate the plasma turbulence. This strategy allows you to say “goodbye to guesswork.” As Del Costy states, Siemens executive, “the data doesn’t lie.” The real value of this collaboration is the ability to run thousands of virtual scenarios before moving a single magnet in the physical plant. This technology is what allows engineers to observe in real time what happens inside the magnetic “doughnut” (the tokamak) without having to open the machinery, eliminating the uncertainty that has held back the industry for half a century. The political board. So far, the merger is one of the few issues that enjoys bipartisan support in the United States. However, a new player has shaken the board: Trump Media & Technology Group. According to World Nuclear NewsPresident Donald Trump’s company has merged with TAE Technologies in a $6 billion deal. The goal is to create the first publicly traded fusion energy player to ensure America’s “energy and AI supremacy.” Although CFS and TAE use different technologies – CFS relies on the tokamak and superconducting magnets, while TAE uses particle accelerators and hydrogen and boron fuel – the competition to be the first to inject electricity into the grid is total. CFS also looks askance to Helion, the startup backed by Sam Altman (OpenAI), which you already have a contract to supply power to Microsoft. The horizon. The roadmap presented by CFS, supported by capital from Bill Gates and Mitsubishiseems for the first time tangible: Late 2026: End of SPARC construction in Massachusetts. It will be the time when the “virtual airplane” designed by Nvidia and Siemens fully materializes in the physical world. 2027: The moment of the “First Plasma”. SPARC must turn on its magnetic heart to produce its first plasma and scientifically demonstrate “Q greater than 1”: generating more energy than it consumes. Early 2030s: ARC debuts in Virginia. A 400 megawatt commercial plant capable of supplying 300,000 homes with clean energy literally extracted from hydrogen particles present in water. The end of the “30 years” joke For decades, the scientific community joked that fusion was always 30 years away. But with the backing of Nvidia and Google, the merger has ceased to be a laboratory project and has become a manufacturing industry. “Lego” is complicated, but with instructions from AI and capital from tech giants, the Sun is closer than ever to being bottled up on Earth. Image | CFS Xataka | Russia wants to be the one who turns on the light on the Moon: its plan involves an operational nuclear reactor before 2036

While Silicon Valley dreams of servers in orbit, Russia prepares a nuclear reactor on lunar soil

by

Until recently, the space race was about seeing who could get there first. Today, the question is different: who will be able to turn on the light on the Moon? While companies like Google or Nvidia imagine satellites loaded with computers for their Artificial Intelligence, Russia has hit the table with a much more earthly (or lunar) plan: installing a small nuclear power plant on the surface of our satellite. A reactor by 2036. The Russian space corporation, Roscosmos, has signed a state contract with the aerospace company NPO Lavochkin to develop a lunar nuclear power plant. According to Reutersthe deadline marked in the contract is 2036. However, the political times are much more aggressive: Yury Borisov, head of Roscosmos, has placed the real operational window between 2033 and 2035. Although official statements sometimes avoid the word “nuclear” directly, project participants dispel any doubts, the Kurchatov Institute (a leader in nuclear research in Russia) and Rosatom (the state atomic flagship company) are in charge. As the Interfax media points outthe objective is to power the infrastructure of the International Lunar Research Station (ILRS), a joint project with China that seeks to move from “round trip” missions to a permanent human presence. But why what nuclear? A colony on the Moon faces nights that last 14 Earth days. During that time, the frigid temperatures and lack of light make the solar panels useless to keep astronauts alive or power life support systems. Mikhail Kovalchuk, head of the Kurchatov Institute, he explained in an interview with the Russian agency TASS that Russia must “run forward.” According to this medium, the country seeks to consolidate its leadership through the “Atomic Project 2.0”, which includes new generation reactors and closed cycle systems. It’s not just about science; Russia admits that partners like China and India have learned a lot from them and are now direct competitors. Eyes in the sky: preparing the ground. For the Russian reactor to reach the Moon, Moscow is already preparing the logistics. According to another TASS statementRussia plans to launch 52 satellites from the Vostochny cosmodrome. Among them, the Aist-2T stands out, capable of creating 3D models of the lunar terrain and monitoring emergency situations. It is the necessary infrastructure so that the “lunar atom” does not suffer the same fate as the failed Luna-25 probe in 2023. The Moscow-Beijing axis: a long-range alliance. This deployment is not a solitary effort. As Interfax detailsRussia and China formalized their ambition in May 2024 with a memorandum of cooperation for the joint construction of this nuclear plant. They are not starting from scratch: both countries presented a roadmap in 2021 that includes five joint missions to deploy modules in lunar orbit and surface. While Russia brings its historical advantage in space nuclear facilities, China provides the scientific capacity and resources for the ILRS Station to be permanently inhabited from 2030. The board of the new Cold War. Washington has not stood idly by in the face of the Russian-Chinese alliance. NASA has received a clear directive from the current administration, in which they state that They need a reactor on the Moon by 2030. “We are in a race with China,” said Sean Duffy, Secretary of Transportation and who has led this directive. The background of this urgency is not only prestige, but the control of strategic resources. The Moon is the great deposit of Helium-3, an extremely rare isotope that is emerging as the “fuel of the future” for nuclear fusion. The White House’s fear is that if the alliance between Russia and China comes sooner, they will be able to declare “exclusion zones,” blocking access to this isotope and other essential metals for the technology industry. Faced with this threat, the US has increased the power of its nuclear project from the original 40 kW to a minimum power of 100 kW. Infrastructure over prestige. The space race of the 21st century has ceased to be a question of prestige and has become a question of infrastructure. While Big Tech tries to solve its energy limits with promises of servers in orbitRussia and China have opted for the pragmatism of the reactor on solid, but lunar, soil. Image| freepik Xataka | The race to bring data centers to space promises a lot. Physics says otherwise

When nuclear energy orbited the Earth. The day a Soviet satellite with a reactor fell in Canada and unleashed a crisis

by

In the late 1970s, the idea that a nuclear reactor could fall from space ceased to be science fiction and became a real problem on the table of several governments. A Soviet satellite with a reactor on board It had lost control and was heading towards the Earth’s atmosphere, without anyone being able to specify where its remains would end up or what consequences the impact would have. In the midst of the Cold War, secrecy and urgency marked decisions. From there, questions arose that remain uncomfortable today: what was a nuclear reactor doing in orbit, why that risk was accepted, and what happens when technology escapes the script. As CBC points outOn January 24, 1978, the Soviet satellite Kosmos-954 re-entered the Earth’s atmosphere after weeks of tracking by American radars. No one knew with certainty where he would fall or in what state his remains would reach the ground. Eventually, fragments of the device were scattered over a vast region of northern Canada, from the Northwest Territories to areas that are now part of Nunavut and northern Alberta and Saskatchewan. What began as an orbital control problem suddenly became an international emergency with scientific, diplomatic and health implications. The day the Cold War left radioactive remains over Canada Kosmos-954 was neither a scientific satellite nor an isolated experimental mission, but one more piece of a Soviet military system designed to monitor the oceans. It was part of the US-A series, designed to locate large ships, especially American aircraft carriers, using radar. To power this system, which is very demanding in terms of energy consumption, the Soviet Union resorted to a compact nuclear reactor, a solution that allowed operate for long periods without depending on solar panels. That technical choice explains why the satellite had fissile material on board and why its loss generated so much concern. The technological heart of Kosmos-954 was a BES-5 reactor, known as “Buk”, developed specifically for Soviet military satellites. This type of reactor used uranium-235 and was designed to power the US-A system radar for the life of the satellite. The BBC estimates that 31 devices were launched with BES-5 for this family of satellites, and places the use of reactors in space until the end of the 1980s, with launches that continued until 1988. That history was not a clean line, according to the BBC: there were previous failures and accidents, including serious problems in one of the first flights in 1970 and the fall of another reactor into the Pacific Ocean after a launcher failure in 1973, in addition to the plan security plan contemplated moving the core into a waste orbit to prevent its return to Earth. Arctic Operational Histories explains that The signs that something was wrong came weeks before re-entry. Tracking systems detected that Kosmos-954 was progressively losing altitude, an anomaly that indicated a serious failure in its orbital control. The United States began to follow its trajectory with special attentionaware that the satellite had a nuclear reactor on board. The big unknown was not only when it would fall, but whether the Soviet security system would manage to separate the core and send it to a safe orbit before the device entered the atmosphere. When it was confirmed that the debris had fallen on Canadian territory, the problem took on a completely new dimension. Authorities knew the fragments were scattered over a vast, largely remote, snow-covered region, making any quick assessment difficult. The first measurements detected radiation in some points, although without a clear map of the contamination. Faced with this uncertainty, Canada had to quickly decide how to protect the population and how to locate potentially hazardous materials in an extreme environment. To confront an unprecedented situation, Canada turned to international cooperation. Operation Morning Light mobilized Canadian and American military personnel, scientists and technicians, many of them from units specialized in nuclear emergencies. From improvised bases in the north, flights equipped with sensors capable of detecting radiation from the air were organized. Each anomalous signal led to more detailed inspections, in a race against time marked by extreme cold and lack of infrastructure. As the search continued, it became clear that the contamination was more complex than expected. Not only visible fragments of the satellite appeared, but also much smaller radioactive particles, difficult to detect and remove. This forced the teams to take extreme precautions expand tracking areas. At the same time, delicate communication work began with the northern communities, who wanted to know what real risks existed for health, water and the fauna on which they depended. As the weeks passed, the operation narrowed its objectives. The official Morning Light phase lasted 84 days, although CBC describes the search effort as extending through most of 1978 and the search covering an area of ​​124,000 square kilometers. In this process, 66 kilograms of remains were recovered and Canada considered the immediate threat to the population and the environment contained. The economic cost was raised and Ottawa claimed 6.1 million dollars from the Soviet Union, which in 1981 agreed to pay half, opening an unusual diplomatic process for an incident of this type. The case of Kosmos-954 was not closed with the removal of the remains from the ground. In the months since, the incident reached international forums and fueled an uncomfortable debate about the use of nuclear power in space. Several countries demanded greater security guarantees and more transparency in programs that, until then, had been developed under strong secrecy. The episode served to reinforce the idea that space accidents do not understand borders and that their consequences could directly affect third countries. Images | Arctic Operational Histories In Xataka | Mars is left with one less line of coverage: NASA loses contact with its key orbital repeater

We already have the world’s first fast neutron nuclear reactor. We are going to use it for AI data centers

by

The growth of artificial intelligence is driving global electricity demand to historical figures. The expansion of data centers, the advance of electrification and the industrial rebound are straining aging networks that are already suffering from saturation in multiple countries. In this scenario, the digital sector—a large consumer of electricity for the development of AI—faces a paradox: it needs much more energy, but it must do so without increasing its emissions. And there arises a proposal that until recently would have seemed like science fiction: data centers powered by a compact fast neutron nuclear reactor. The Stellaria–Equinix deal that no one saw coming. The French startup Stellaria, born from commissariat to the atomistic energy (CEA) and Schneider Electric, announced a pre-purchase agreement with Equinix, one of the largest global data center operators. According to the press releasethe agreement secures Equinix the first 500 MW of capacity of the Stellarium, the molten salt and fast neutron reactor that the company plans to deploy starting in 2035. This reserve is part of Equinix’s initiatives to diversify towards “alternative energies” applied to AI-ready data centers. Autonomy, zero carbon and waste management. It is a brief summary of the first reactor breed and burn intended to supply data centers. As explained by Stellariaoffers: Completely carbon-free and controllable energy, enough to make a data center autonomous. Underground design without exclusion zone, thanks to its operation at atmospheric pressure and its liquid core. Ultra-fast response to load variations, essential for generative AI. Virtually infinite regeneration of fuel, part of which can come from current waste from nuclear power plants. Multi-fuel capability, from uranium 235 and 238 to plutonium 239, MOX, minor actinides and thorium. For Equinix, this means solving one of its great challenges: operating with guaranteed clean energy 24/7 without depending on the grid. For Europe, it marks the entry into a new generation of ultra-compact reactors: the Stellarium occupies just four cubic meters. The technology behind the reactor. The Stellarium is a fourth-generation liquid chloride salt reactor, cooled by natural convection and equipped with four physical containment barriers. It operates on a closed fuel cycle, capable of maintaining fission for more than 20 years without recharging. Stellaria’s roadmap establishes that in 2029 there will be the first fission reaction and six years later a commercial deployment and delivery of the reactor to Equinix. According to the company, The energy density of this type of reactor is “70 million times higher than that of lithium-ion batteries”, which would allow a single Stellarium to supply a city of 400,000 inhabitants. As fusion progresses, fast fission arrives first. To understand why a fast neutron reactor comes to the world of AI before fusion, just compare the technological moment of each. The merger is making spectacular progress—such as the record of the French WEST reactorwhich maintained a stable plasma for 22 minutes, or the Wendelstein 7-Xwhich sustained a high-performance plasma for 43 seconds—but remains experimental. ITER will not be operational this decade and commercial prototypes will not arrive until well into the 2030s. Advanced fission, on the other hand, is much closer to the market. Reactors like Stellaria’s, with molten salt and fast neutrons, do not require the extreme conditions of fusion and can be deployed sooner. The company plans its first reaction in 2029 and a commercial deployment in 2035. The data centers of the future will no longer depend on the network. Equinix already operates more than 270 data centers in 77 metropolitan areas. In Europe they are powered by 100% renewables, but their future demand for AI will require a constant, carbon-free source that does not congest the electrical grid. According to Stellariathis agreement “lays the foundation for data centers with lifetime energy autonomy.” And, if the company meets its schedule, Europe will become the first region in the world where artificial intelligence is powered by compact reactors that recycle their own nuclear waste. The technological race between advanced fission and fusion is far from over, but, today, the first fast neutron reactor intended for AI does not come from ITER or an industrial giant: it comes from a French startup. Europe has just opened a door that could transform, at the same time, the future of energy and computing. Image | freepik and Stellaria Xataka | Google hit the red button when ChatGPT came upon it. Now it is OpenAI who has pressed it, according to WSJ

plasma in a nuclear fusion reactor, in color and at 16,000 fps

by

Seeing the inside of a nuclear fusion reactor is, for obvious reasons, complicated. We are talking about temperatures of millions of degrees Celsius, hotter than the core of the Sun. However, the British company Tokamak Energy has just given us unprecedented images of what is happening inside its ST40 spherical reactor: a video in full color and at the incredible speed of 16,000 frames per second. An unprecedented ballet of colors. What we are seeing in the video is, in essence, the choreography of the elements within the tokamak. The ST40, like most of these reactors, uses hydrogen isotopes (deuterium in this case) as fuel. When this gas turns into plasma, it emits a characteristic pink light, which dominates the scene. But the interesting part begins when researchers introduce lithium, which glows red. And no, this is not just a visual spectacle. Every color, every bright filament we see in these images, is a gold mine of information that is helping scientists solve one of the biggest challenges on the long road to commercial fusion energy: how to tame plasma so that it does not degrade reactor materials. What exactly are we seeing? In the images, we see how small granules of lithium are injected into the reactor chamber. Upon entering the outer, colder areas of the plasma, the neutral lithium is excited and emits an intense crimson red light. As they penetrate the hottest and densest regions, lithium atoms lose an electron, become ionized (becoming lithium ions), and begin to glow greenish. Once ionized, lithium no longer moves freely. It is forced to follow the invisible, but very powerful magnetic field lines that confine the plasma. Those green filaments that we see dancing in the video are, literally, the lithium drawing the magnetic cage of the reactor. What is all this for? The lithium acts as a protective shield for the reactor. Recording what happens in color is not easy, but it helps identify whether the impurities that Totakak Energy is introducing into the reactor radiate in the expected place. And if the lithium powders penetrate to the core of the plasma. This experiment is part of research into a mode of operation called the “X-point radiator” (XPR) that uses elements such as lithium so that the edge of the plasma radiates and loses a large amount of heat before touching the reactor walls. It is a protective “atmosphere” that cools the plasma just at the last moment, reducing component wear without sacrificing core performance. The advancement of Tokamak Energy. This approach is the centerpiece of the Dell ST40 upgrade program, which has received funding from the US and UK energy departments. The goal is to coat all the components that face the plasma with lithium, a technique that has already been demonstrated in other laboratories, such as Princeton, to improve plasma performance. This type of visual diagnostics complement the incredibly complex systems that are being installed in reactors such as the JT-60SA in Japan, the most advanced tokamak in the world currentlywhich uses lasers to measure plasma temperature and density indirectly. A global career. While colossal and institutional projects such as ITER They mark a long-term pathwhich plans its first deuterium-tritium experiments by 2039, more agile companies like Tokamak Energy are exploring new designs and technologies, such as spherical tokamaks and high-temperature superconducting magnets, to accelerate the arrival of commercial fusion. The closure of the historic JET reactor in the United Kingdom, who said goodbye breaking an energy recordmarked the end of an era, but its legacy is the foundation on which all these new advances are built. This new window into the heart of plasma is not only visually impressive. It is a small step that brings us a little closer to the goal of replicating the energy of stars on Earth. Nuclear fusion just got a lot more colorful, and that’s great news. Image | Tokamak Energy In Xataka | While the West still waits for fusion energy, China has found a shortcut

Build the first closed cycle nuclear reactor

by

Vladimir Putin has announced what he calls the “first nuclear energy system in the world with a closed fuel cycle”, a technology that promises to reuse up to 95% of nuclear fuel. If it materializes by 2030, as stated by the Russian president, Russia would dodge two of the greatest challenges of current nuclear centrals: the Radioactive waste management and the possible exhaustion of uranium reserves. Uranium? What do you want that. In the Moscow Global Atomic Forum, and before the presence of figures such as Rafael Grossi, director of the OIEA, Putin described the Russian reactor of closed cycle as a “truly revolutionary development” that, in his words, “will eliminate the problem of uranium supply.” The centerpiece of the ambitious Poryv project (“advance” in Russian) is a rapid reactor refrigerated by lead called Brest -od-300, which is being Building in Severska city in the Siberian region of Tomsk. In the same complex, called Odek, Russia will also build the modules for the spongery and reprocessing of the irradiated fuel. 95% recoverable. In addition to using molten lead instead of water as refrigerant, the Brest-O-300 reactor is designed to operate with uranium-reputony nitruro as fuel. It is its in situ integration with the sponge and reprocessing modules that will allow closing the nuclear fuel cycle. According to official statements, this system It will allow 95% of the spent fuel to reusea technically consistent figure with the external reprocess processes, where most of the fuel used (uranium and plutonium) ends up being recovered. The remaining 3-5% corresponds to fission products and minor actinids, which remain high radioactivity residues. It is not a new technology. Countries like France and Russia itself Nuclear fuel already reproces at an industrial scale. And Japan intends to join the club with the Rokkash Plant. However, the Russian project is a pioneer in its attempt to create a fully integrated complex where a fast reactor operates in symbiosis with its own fuel manufacturing and recycling facilities in the same place. If Russia meets its deadlines, you could have The first complex of this type in operation. And to support him, he has established an International Research Center in the Uliánovsk region (the MBIR International Research Center in Dimitrovgragra), inviting scientists around the world to collaborate in what Putin has called a “new era in nuclear energy.” But is uranium running out? Putin’s justification for this strong investment is a future with uranium shortage. During his speech, he cited OECD estimates that suggested a possible exhaustion of uranium resources by 2090, or even before: as soon as in the 2060s. However, the “Red Book” of the OEA does not speak of an exhaustion of uranium, but of An increase in demandwhich could produce tensions in the supply between 2080 and 2110 if significant investments are not made before for the opening of new mines. Russia’s plan It is a strategic bet. If you achieve the closed cycle reactor for the 2030s, we could witness a new way of understanding nuclear energy, and a world with limited resources in which Russia has managed to outdo the rest. Image | ROSATOM In Xataka | France was not prepared for such an extreme climate or to run out of uranium: its energy model cross, and Europe feels it

The OIEA finds evidence of the secret nuclear reactor of Syria

by

In September 2007, Israeli combat aircraft reduced a complex in the Syrian desert of Deir Ezzor to debris. Israel said that there was a nuclear reactor there with the help of North Korea. The Bashar al Asad government replied that it was nothing more than a military base. For years, both versions met in the field of suspicion. Now, eighteen years later, the International Atomic Energy Agency (OIEA) provides evidence that incline the balance: in that place there was processed uranium. A few particles. According to a confidential report quoted by APNewsthe agency’s inspectors found “a significant amount of natural uranium particles” in one of the three sites examined in the last two years. As Reuters has pointed outit is not a rich uranium, but of anthropogenic origin: it had gone through a chemical process. “The analysis indicated that uranium occurred as a result of chemical processing,” the document said. According to Apnewssome of these particles coincide with the conversion of mineral concentrate into uranium oxide, a usual step in fuel production for reactors. A nuclear plan never recognized. The history of this “ghost reactor” begins in 2011. The OIEA had already estimated that the building destroyed by Israel was “most likely a nuclear reactor that should have been declared” by Syria. According to Apnewsthe installation would have been built with the support of North Korean engineers, which would explain the secrecy of the Bashar al Asad regime. Rafael Grossi, current director of the OIEA, acknowledged in statements collected by the news agency that some of the Syrian activities “were probably related to nuclear weapons.” However, Damascus always denied it. After the Israeli bombing, he leveled the land of Deir Ezzor to erase traces and refused to fully answer the questions of the international organism. The fall of Al-ásad. The turn came with the end of the Bashar al Asad regime, overthrown last year After almost three lustra of civil war. The new interim government, led by Ahmed al Sharaa, agreed to cooperate with the UN Nuclear Agency. Besides, As Reuters has had accessin June the authorities allowed for the second time the taking of environmental samples. It was not a linear process. According to The IndependentAsad’s departure temporarily interrupted the investigation: “We are still evaluating what we find there and we have a large questioning sign, because we do not have an interlocutor,” Grossi admitted in December 2024. With the restoration of contacts this year, the OIEA is optimistic: “Once the results are evaluated, it will be possible to resolve the pending issues related to the past nuclear activities of Syria.” A region marked by proliferation. Beyond the Syrian case, the findings are registered in a region marked by the shadow of nuclear proliferation. As we have pointed out in XatakaIsrael has bombarded on different occasions facilities in Iraq, Iran and Syria under the argument of preventing their enemies Develop atomic weapons. Grossi himself warned Bloomberg statements that the power vacuum in Syria opens the risk of looting nuclear materials in research centers. A civil nuclear future for Syria? Paradoxically, the new Syrian leadership has expressed interest in exploring a civil nuclear program. According to Al Jazeerathe interim president Al Sharaa discussed with the OIEA the possibility of resorting to small modular reactors to generate energy and asked for help to rebuild nuclear medical infrastructure, devastated by more than a decade of war. The OIEA has expressed willingness to collaborate in these areas, always under a transparent framework of safeguards. A file to close. The history of Deir Ezzor reactor seems to reach its final chapter. What began as a bombing wrapped in controversy and denials is now corroborated with scientific evidence. The OIEA insists that the new samples will allow the case to close, but the questions persist: How far did the Syrian clandestine nuclear program really arrive? What external actors fed him? And can a country devastated by war reorient its relationship with nuclear energy towards peaceful uses? Eighteen years after the Israeli attack, the ghost reactor is no longer a rumor: it is the proof of a secret that Damascus tried to bury in the desert sand. Image | IAEA IMEBANK and Unspash Xataka | Natural gas has become essential in the AI ​​era, and this chart exposes countries with the largest reserves

The most complex nuclear reactor in the world is underway in the United Kingdom. His critics directly call him “a monster”

by

Two figures are enough to understand the scope of the British challenge: 38,000 million investment pounds and six million homes fed with nuclear electricity for sixty years. This presents Sizewell C, the center that Downing Street describes as a clean energy and employment engine. His detractors, on the other hand, see it as a financial well and the last attempt to give life to a nuclear design so complex that in France it already call it “the monster.” The crown jewel. The objective of the British government is to double the nuclear capacity of the country by 2050 and guarantee a stable supply of low carbon energy. Sizewell C, With two EPR type reactors (European pressurized reactor), is the key piece of that strategy. According to the BBCthe project is the successor of Hinkley Point C, in Somerset, which accumulates a decade of delays and a runaway cost: more than 18,000 million pounds planned in 2010 to about 46,000 million today. Minister Rachel Reeves declared The Guardian that investment is “a powerful support to the United Kingdom as the best place to do business and as a global center of nuclear energy.” Instead, Henri Proglio, former director of the French electric EDF – developmentator of the project -, assured the Financial Times that the reactor design is “scary” and “almost impossible to build.” Faced opinions. The detractors have it clear. Proglio describes it as “a machine with more reinforcement rods than concrete.” Another engineer, Also cited in the FThe spoke of a “colossal error.” And Greenpeace warned the BBC That this time will be taxpayers, not EDF, who pay the inevitable cost overruns. But there are also moderate voices. Tony Roulstone, Professor of Cambridge and exejecutive of Rolls-Royce, declared to FT That Sizewell could be ready “one or two years before Hinkley” and cost 20 % less. Thanks to the fact that much of the design is already tested since the supply chain was consolidated in Somerset. There are already works in Suffolk. The project is not just paper. In Suffolk, 1,700 operators are already working in preliminary works, According to the Financial Times. The first one: a perimeter wall 55 meters deep and 3 kilometers long to drain the marsh before placing the foundations. In addition, Hinkley errors will be avoided. This time the concrete structures will be pregnant in workshops and not in the work, which should accelerate the deadlines. Even so, the official calendar – entered into operation in the middle or end of the 2030s – raises doubts. Flamanville, in France, and Hinkley have shown that deadlines in projects of this type are usually wet paper, As Critica Nils Pratley in his column for The Guardian. It is very complex. It is more complex than it seems to the naked eye. EPR are nuclear reactors of generation III+, the result of Franco-German collaboration between EDF and Siemens. According to World Nuclear Associationare designed to offer a net electrical power of between 1,600 and 1,650 MW, although they can reach 1,770 MW. In addition, they incorporate advanced security measures: double containment, four independent cooling systems, a Core Catcher to catch the nucleus in case of merger, and structural capacity to resist impacts and earthquakes, in addition to diesel generators and backup batteries that guarantee operability to multiple failures. They also stand out for greater energy efficiencyconsuming up to 17% less fuel than old reactors and producing up to 14% more energy. All this with a projected life of 60 years. This technical complexity is, at the same time, a strength in terms of safety and efficiency, and a challenge for the delays and costs that it has shown in its construction. The invoice reaches the British pocket. The cost of the central already exceeds twice the first estimates, According to BBC. The majority (36.6 billion) will be covered with public debt through the National Fund of Wealth. While the financing is distributed among the State (the largest shareholder with 44.9%), followed by the Canadian Caisse (20%), Centrica (15%), EDF (12.5%) and Amber Infrastructure (7.6%). The great novelty is the “Regulated Assets Base” model (Rab) in which households will begin to pay £ 1 per month in their electrical invoices for at least a decade, Julia Pyke explained to the BBC. This scheme mainly protects investors, As Nils Pratley recalled in The GuardianCentrica ensures returns of more than 10% even if the costs reach 47.7 billion pounds; Any excess will be assumed by taxpayers. France already tried. Although with problems. The first French EPR reactor, Flamanville 3, in Normandy, connected to the network In December 2024 after 12 years of delays and with a final cost of € 13.2 billion, four times budgeted. As explained in Financial Timesthe French experience forced to redesign the concept, so EDF no longer prioritizes the EPR, but the EPR2, a simplified and cheaper version that hopes to build in six units here to 2038. Meanwhile, in China they have shown that its Taishan center that has operated for years with an EPR of 1.75 GW, is one of the most powerful reactors in the world. A continent that turns nuclear. The British bet arrives in a contradictory European context. Germany He closed his last central in 2023 and Spain plans to close them in 2027. France, on the contrary, Maintain nuclear as a pillar (70 % of its electricity) and accelerates new EPR2 projects. The board moves: under Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Germany has stopped blocking France and accepts that the nuclear receives the same treatment as renewables in EU legislation. The agreement includes giving “green” status to pink hydrogen and opens the door to European financing, although Austria continues against and countries such as Belgium and the Netherlands reevaluate their policies. In the midst of this continental debate, the United Kingdom, outside the EU, advances alone with Sizewell C: an EPR that even EDF has relegated in favor of the EPR2, while in Europe the SMR and nuclear fusion gain space. … Read more

install a nuclear reactor on the moon before China and Russia create its exclusion zone

by

The Space race has warm upthis time in the heat of a nuclear reactor on the surface of the moon. And as already happened in the 60s, the urgency is not scientific, but fundamentally geopolitical. The Duffy directive. The break between Elon Musk and Donald Trump trunciated Jared Isaacman’s career as future NASA administrator. The current acting administrator of the Space Agency, Sean Duffy, is in turn Trump’s Secretary of Transportation, faithful to the priorities of the White House. In a movement that will mark the priorities of the agency, Duffy has launched an accelerated plan to build a small nuclear power plant on the moon. The directive urges NASA to have a satellite functional reactor by 2030. Why 2030. The main motivation is get ahead of the Chinese and Russia Alliance to build your own lunar reactor. “We are in a race towards the moon, a race with China. And to have a base on the moon, we need energy,” Duffy explained In a later press conference. The fear of Washington is explicit in the directive itself: “The first country to do so could declare an exclusion zone, which would significantly limit the United States for establishing the Presence of Artemis If I will not arrive first. “ A new plan. NASA was already working on a project called Fission Surface Power (FSP) with the intention of installing a 40 kW reactor on the surface of the moon at the beginning of the next decade. The new directive, published entirely By NASA Watch, raise the bet to a more efficient Bryton cycle turns and a minimum power of 100 kW. The dates are also more ambitious. The United States government requires NASA to be installed for the first 2030 quarter using a launch system of at least 15 tons of capacity. The reactor and all transportation logistics and installation will be open to the American private industry through a future public tender. More astronauts, less science. Nuclear energy will be crucial for any manned lunar base. The moon has a day and night cycle of approximately 29.5 terrestrial days, which means that any type of lunar colony faces two weeks of icy darkness. Solar energy is unfeasible to feed the life support equipment and heating that will keep astronauts alive. A fission reactor, on the other hand, would provide a constant and reliable source of energy. This Directive is the first important movement of Sean Duffy as an acting administrator, and reflects the change of course that began the 2026 Budgets of the White House: an increase in the funds for human exploration of deep space, especially if they can prevent China from getting to Marsand cuts of up to 50% in purely scientific areasincluding many of the probes that study the solar system. In Xataka | The United States was going to send the first woman to the moon. China is getting it more and more difficult

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.