• 3 minutes e-car sales collapse
  • 6 minutes America Is Exceptional in Its Political Divide
  • 11 minutes Perovskites, a ‘dirt cheap’ alternative to silicon, just got a lot more efficient
  • 5 days They pay YOU to TAKE Natural Gas
  • 2 days How Far Have We Really Gotten With Alternative Energy
  • 2 days What fool thought this was a good idea...
  • 4 hours A question...
  • 5 days Why does this keep coming up? (The Renewable Energy Land Rush Could Threaten Food Security)
  • 11 days The United States produced more crude oil than any nation, at any time.
Haley Zaremba

Haley Zaremba

Haley Zaremba is a writer and journalist based in Mexico City. She has extensive experience writing and editing environmental features, travel pieces, local news in the…

More Info

Premium Content

Nobel Prize Winner Suggests Blasting Nuclear Waste With Lasers

Nuclear Waste

Many have made strong arguments for the potential of nuclear power to be the clean energy solution of the future. As the need to curb carbon emissions grows more dire, the ultra-efficient, zero-emissions energy provided by nuclear looks like a more and more obvious solution. 

There are some major drawbacks, however, to nuclear energy. Of course, there is the ever-present concern of a nuclear meltdown that has kept civilians and politicians alike extremely wary of widespread nuclear energy production in the wake of high-profile tragedies like those at Fukushima, Three Mile Island, and Chernobyl. While the death toll from nuclear disasters is actually quite low, the long-term damage from these tragedies endures. In Japan, the government has been using so much water to keep the reactors at Fukushima from overheating since the 2011 disaster that they have run out of space to store it and have even considered dumping the radioactive wastewater into the Pacific Ocean. As for Chernobyl, well...you’ve all seen the miniseries. 

And then there is the major issue of nuclear waste. As efficient and carbon-free as it is, nuclear power certainly isn’t the cleanest form of energy production, thanks to its extremely hazardous byproducts that can stay radioactive for millions of years. Making matters worse, there is still no scientific consensus on how to solve this issue. In the United States, the burden of paying to store and maintain nuclear waste deposits falls on the taxpayers, and the price tag is massive. As Oilprice reported last year in a report aptly titled “The Crushing Cost Of Nuclear Waste Is Weighing On Taxpayers,” keeping us safe from our own nuclear waste is extremely costly and will only grow more expensive the more waste we create. “Now, that price tag has reached a whopping $7.5 billion,” we reported, “and that number is only going to keep growing.” 

But now, for the first time, there may be a solution to the previously unsolvable nuclear waste issue. Nobel laureate Gérard Mourou has proposed a novel solution that smacks of science fiction and revolves around blasting nuclear waste with lasers. Morou and his research partner Donna Strickland won their Nobel Prize in 2018 for their work with Chirped Pulse Amplification (CPA), a revolutionary invention that creates extremely rapid and ultra-powerful laser pulses with lots of different potential applications. “The original research focused on applications like laser machining and eye surgery,” reports ExtremeTech, “but scientists could also use it to observe atomic processes that happen at almost unfathomable speeds. If we could speed it up a bit more, Mourou says CPA could have a use in processing nuclear waste, too.” Related: Oil Production Paralyzed As Venezuela's Electricity Crisis Worsens

According to Mourou’s hypothesis, CPA could turn even the most nuclear waste we have sitting in secure storage facilities around the world, where it will otherwise remain radioactive for millions of years, into a substance so safe you could hold it in the palm of your hand. Of course, the CPA process will require a bit of tweaking to get to this point of capability.

“Currently, CPA can produce laser pulses as brief as one attosecond — that’s a billionth of a billionth of a second. To transmute nuclear waste into something safe, Mourou says you’d need to increase the pulse rate by roughly 10,000 times,” says ExtremeTech. “That might sound like a tall order, but CPA itself was an order of magnitude increase over previous lasers. Another innovation like CPA, and we could be in the ballpark.”

The method would work by blasting nuclear waste with a laser pulse so strong and fast that it could knock protons out of the nuclei of dangerous substances like uranium 235 and plutonium 239, rendering them harmless. If this technology, which other experts agree makes sense in theory, could actually be invented and applied in the next couple of decades, it would be difficult to overstate the impact it would have on our energy sector and, indeed, the entire world. In order to avoid the fast-approaching tipping point for catastrophic climate change, we need to decarbonize fast and starting right now. Solving the problem of nuclear waste would make that a whole lot safer and more attainable. 

By Haley Zaremba for Oilprice.com


More Top Reads From Oilprice.com:

Download The Free Oilprice App Today

Back to homepage

Leave a comment
  • Mamdouh Salameh on November 05 2019 said:
    The theory is brilliant and the implications for nuclear waste staggering. However, the world has got used to brilliant scientists developing great theories which work perfectly in the laboratory but never progress beyond.

    Still, before we build great hopes on this new theory, let see if Nobel laureate Gérard and his team can in reality increase laser pulses by 10,000 times to neutralize nuclear waste and make it safe.

    Were he to succeed, he should be given another Nobel Prize and the eternal gratitude of the overwhelming majority of the peoples of the world.

    Dr Mamdouh G Salameh
    International Oil Economist
    Visiting Professor of Energy Economics at ESCP Europe Business School, London
  • Robert Godes on November 05 2019 said:
    Brillouin Energy has 4 Controlled Electron Capture Reactors (CECR) currently functioning in there lab in downtown Berkeley. We achieved this having raised just over $17.5MM as of November 2019. Parts are interchangeable between reactors showing a modularity and design machurity indicating it is close to production ready.
    So what, it is still nuclear energy. This is not the nuclear energy your parents or this zine told you about. This technology has no radioactive input, no radioactive waste, and no penetrating radiation in operation. It is electrically controlled, can’t run away and lead to any kind of environmental disaster.
    For Brillouin Energy technology to work, energy must be put into the system to cause an electron capture event that results in an ultra cold neutron. Lets round that step to -0.8MeV to create the neutron. This is why the neutron is so low energy on formation and never escapes the reactor. When another hydrogen ion tunnels in to the location where the neutron formed, because there is no longer a positive charge to keep it out, they bind and release 2.2MeV to forme Deuterium (D). D+n yields 6.2MeV forming a triton(T). T+n decays to 4He+beta+ ?e + a net of 20.6MeV.
    The manufacturing engineering Brillouin Energy is raising money for, is to increase the ratio of neutrons produced / Q-pulse(tm) issued. There is a well developed use of funds for this $30MM project to bring the technology to market. This project will also lead to all the catalyst rods producing the same results with the same pulse profile. This will increase the COP / unit length of active area. In addition, it will also allow one Q-pulse(tm) generator drive multiple catalyst rods. This then multiplies the COP by the number of rods any single Q-pulse(tm) generator can drive. Want to reduce the rate of energy production, just don't pulse it as often. T1/2 of H4 is 0.03s so with in 1 second of the last pulse issued there is no more reaction heat being generated. If you pulse it to fast the catalyst melts and everything stops. We absolutely need nuclear energy. Why not make it a non radioactive source.

Leave a comment

EXXON Mobil -0.35
Open57.81 Trading Vol.6.96M Previous Vol.241.7B
BUY 57.15
Sell 57.00
Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News