I am a proponent of nuclear energy based on what I’ve learned on the latest technology and designs. Restarting an old plant however raises a lot of questions.
What about the waste products?? There is no disposal protocol that takes into account the sheer quantity of waste that is still stored on site of old plants still operating.
Furthermore, the intense gamma radiation erodes the structure, weakening the steel and cracking the concrete containment.
Closed fuel cycle reactors solve all the issues with nuclear and even uranium waste.
You put your waste fuel rods plus some depleted uranium in a fast neutron reactor and more new fuel is created than is spent by the reactor.
You know who already has a production fast neutron sodium reactor and facilities to process the mixed fuel to create more fuel? Russia. The only country in the world to have one. They are also building an even newer test reactor using molten lead instead of sodium cause it would be way safer (molten sodium is a bitch to work with without it lighting on fire).
And India is working on a similar idea, but using Thorium (cause India has the world's largest Thorium reserves). China as well.
Everyone is at least a decade ahead on this new generation of reactors. The actual and only viable new energy revolution.
I've heard that what was previously categorized as "waste material" is actually still viable material to produce power. There was a privately funded program that was determining the cost effectiveness of returning "waste material" to service. I'm certain the DS elites don't want this happening, though.
I mean ... radioactive material has a half life of 500 or so years, if I recall correctly.
Plutonium (a byproduct of reactors), unlike diamonds, ARE forever. I fear the technology of reusing waste products has a appalling consequence of processing, atorage and shipment potential of accidents.
I am a proponent of nuclear energy based on what I’ve learned on the latest technology and designs. Restarting an old plant however raises a lot of questions.
What about the waste products?? There is no disposal protocol that takes into account the sheer quantity of waste that is still stored on site of old plants still operating. Furthermore, the intense gamma radiation erodes the structure, weakening the steel and cracking the concrete containment.
Closed fuel cycle reactors solve all the issues with nuclear and even uranium waste.
You put your waste fuel rods plus some depleted uranium in a fast neutron reactor and more new fuel is created than is spent by the reactor.
You know who already has a production fast neutron sodium reactor and facilities to process the mixed fuel to create more fuel? Russia. The only country in the world to have one. They are also building an even newer test reactor using molten lead instead of sodium cause it would be way safer (molten sodium is a bitch to work with without it lighting on fire).
And India is working on a similar idea, but using Thorium (cause India has the world's largest Thorium reserves). China as well.
Everyone is at least a decade ahead on this new generation of reactors. The actual and only viable new energy revolution.
But aoc told me wind is the way to go lol
I've heard that what was previously categorized as "waste material" is actually still viable material to produce power. There was a privately funded program that was determining the cost effectiveness of returning "waste material" to service. I'm certain the DS elites don't want this happening, though.
I mean ... radioactive material has a half life of 500 or so years, if I recall correctly.
Plutonium (a byproduct of reactors), unlike diamonds, ARE forever. I fear the technology of reusing waste products has a appalling consequence of processing, atorage and shipment potential of accidents.
I'm not certain the details of those issues, but I agree that there will need to be failsafes.
I would rather re-use existing material than continue mining and processing new material, though.