Canadian provinces band together to develop nuclear reactor technology

Post by dsfyu404ed » Mon, Dec 02, 2019, 12:59 PM UTC

hvidgaard wrote: post #139

cf498 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the article (and hoping i didnt just read over the part), they never mention the word waste once when it comes to the cost calculation. Thats rather convenient seeing as the number of functioning deep repository sites today is rather limited. What good are small operating costs when the build costs are this expensive and we dont have a viable solution for waste management (yet?). In practice these costs are e…

Let's put some numbers to the initiation of this. The entire fleet of reactors in France will after 50 year of operation have produced 5300m3 of high-level waste (the kind you need to store long term). That amounts to less than 400 boxes able to contain a Tesla Model S. 50 years of operation generating 300-400 TWh yearly. I'm not saying it's not problematic, but it's minuscule compared to all forms of power. Even win…

Post by ptaipale » Mon, Dec 02, 2019, 1:05 PM UTC

natmaka wrote: post #142

ptaipale wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And Fukushima was built to the requirements of 1970's, not those of today (which are much stronger).

The plant was active and very well-maintained, and its operator even planned to extend it (2 more reactors). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_Nuclear_Powe...

Post by bwood » Mon, Dec 02, 2019, 1:15 PM UTC

ghomrassen wrote: post #89

dghughes wrote: post #40

Those not up on Canadian politics may not see what a Canadian would see here. These are three politically conservative premiers (think US state governor) that are often aggressive in their policies; cuts to social programs, anti-environmental, no carbon tax. Knowing their policies it makes this out-of-the-blue project seem suspicious. I'm all for nuclear power especially if it's using CANDU reactors and thorium. But…

Or they have a better working relationships because they same similar goals. Conservatives aren't evil bogeymen who want to destroy the environment wholesale, they want to find a realistic solution to the problem. Add to the fact that Ontario has a history of failed green projects in wind power that have eaten billions of dollars. If these conservative premiers can throw some money together, cut some red tape and get…

Post by thepete2 » Mon, Dec 02, 2019, 1:41 PM UTC

trasneoir wrote: post #166

Support for nuclear power has become my acid-test. If somebody is serious about making urgent and effective change, fission has to be on the table. Volume is the key to price - we need an internationally-vetted medium-sized design, with a supply chain that can crank out hundreds of complete "just add concrete" systems per year. As well as improving up-front costs, a ubiquitous design makes training and maintenance ea…

Post by londons_explore » Mon, Dec 02, 2019, 2:17 PM UTC

lizknope wrote: post #158

reacweb wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it very hard to imagine that a 74 years old technology remains complex enough to be available only to governements.

It's not. Nuclear fission reactors are built by large corporations like General Electric and Hitachi. If these companies wanted to they have the expertise to build a nuclear bomb but why would they unless their governments asked them to?