Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant to Reopen?

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 31
  • Views: 342
  • Politics 
I didn’t read the NYT article but in another article it mentioned that the power generated from the restarted reactor would be all sold to Microsoft. It’s incredible that data centers need that much electricity!
 
Yeah, I should have added that key point:

“The infamous plant, closed since 2019, is getting a new lease on life after Microsoft agreed to buy its electricity to supply a growing fleet of data centers.”

——
So centuries of nuclear waste to feed data centers and AI.
 
Fantastic news. I really think using renewables where you can , nuclear where you can't and natural gas for standby power is the way to go right now to lower our carbon footprint.

Safety is an issue and we should start updating designs, even though it's going to cost a whole lot, but nuclear waste as an issue is very much overblown.
 
TitanNC said:
I didn’t read the NYT article but in another article it mentioned that the power generated from the restarted reactor would be all sold to Microsoft. It’s incredible that data centers need that much electricity!
Click to expand...
Interesting considering Gates has pledged $1 Billion to a new nuclear reactor in Wyoming.
 
nycfan said:
Yeah, I should have added that key point:

“The infamous plant, closed since 2019, is getting a new lease on life after Microsoft agreed to buy its electricity to supply a growing fleet of data centers.”

——
So centuries of nuclear waste to feed data centers and AI.
Click to expand...
The AI will figure out how to used the waste.
 
"I don't want to upset you lady, but he's big... He could have an affair wit the Lincoln tunnel... you know what I mean..."



Reddit links weird, but I couldn't find it on YouTube.
 
gtyellowjacket said:
Fantastic news. I really think using renewables where you can , nuclear where you can't and natural gas for standby power is the way to go right now to lower our carbon footprint.

Safety is an issue and we should start updating designs, even though it's going to cost a whole lot, but nuclear waste as an issue is very much overblown.
Click to expand...
Any proposals as to where we should store the additional nuclear waste?
 
UNCatTech said:
Interesting considering Gates has pledged $1 Billion to a new nuclear reactor in Wyoming.
Click to expand...
The design he is supporting uses a different medium than water for absorbing and transferring heat. The idea is that even if the nuclear reaction can't be stopped, the pressure can't build up to a point that a pressure explosion happens which is what would have happened at three mile island if they hadn't released some radioactive steam.
 
Serious question: why can’t we just launch nuclear waste into the sun? Cost?
 
Paine said:
Serious question: why can’t we just launch nuclear waste into the sun? Cost?
Click to expand...
I think the issue is not every rocket makes it into space. If one carrying nuclear waste were to explode I assume that would be catastrophic.
 
Enigma94 said:
I think the issue is not every rocket makes it into space. If one carrying nuclear waste were to explode I assume that would be catastrophic.
Click to expand...
There is no safe way to transport nuclear waste - hence why Yucca Mountain was NIMBY-ed to death. If you could solve the waste storage problem, nuclear would be a viable interim transition option.
 
Calheel said:
There is no safe way to transport nuclear waste - hence why Yucca Mountain was NIMBY-ed to death. If you could solve the waste storage problem, nuclear would be a viable interim transition option.
Click to expand...
Correct. The waste and what to do with it is the quandary. Well that and meltdowns. I do think France has gotten pretty good at recycling the waste but there is no current process to eliminate all radioactive byproduct.
 
Calheel said:
There is no safe way to transport nuclear waste - hence why Yucca Mountain was NIMBY-ed to death. If you could solve the waste storage problem, nuclear would be a viable interim transition option.
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the discussions/theories surrounding how to mark waste for future generations to countinue understanding what it is and how dangerous it is.

en.wikipedia.org

Long-term nuclear waste warning messages - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Calheel said:
Any proposals as to where we should store the additional nuclear waste?
Click to expand...

On site. It's almost nothing, it's already in a secure location and you don't need to transport it across the country.

This is 25 years of nuclear waste at two older style reactors. The newer ones make even less waste.

1726863912626.png
 
gtyellowjacket said:
On site. It's almost nothing, it's already in a secure location and you don't need to transport it across the country.

This is 25 years of nuclear waste at two older style reactors. The newer ones make even less waste.

1726863912626.png
Click to expand...
On site storage is what we currently do with all nuclear waste. As you surely know, there are huge risks with onsite storage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top