Three Mile Island Nuclear Plant to Reopen?

[UNCatTech]

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.

Yes, he's also on record saying that the existing plants use very old designs and that we can greatly reduce the risk. I would hope that if they bring this back online they are planning on retrofitting it with the best possible cooling systems and backups.

And, no pepsi allowed in the control room.

 

[05C40]

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.

Long-term nuclear waste warning messages - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The stupidest plan I ever heard actually discussed was the creation of an hereditary priesthood who mission was to warn our descendants to stay away from certain designated areas. Think about Christ's message. Now think about what St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago represents is Christ's message. Nuclear waste is dangerous for way longer than the time period between Christ and St. Donald of Mar-a-Lago.

 

[gtyellowjacket]

On site storage is what we currently do with all nuclear waste. As you surely know, there are huge risks with onsite storage.

I wouldn't call the risks huge. I'd call them tiny in well regulated western countries and certainly much less than the risks associated with global warming or the early deaths associated with air pollution.

 

[05C40]

. . .. And, no pepsi allowed in the control room.

So, you're saying, "Coke, no Pepsi"?

 

[Calheel]

I wouldn't call the risks huge. I'd call them tiny in well regulated western countries and certainly much less than the risks associated with global warming.

Right, but nuclear is not the only alternative to fossil fuels. The question isn't whether nuclear is a lesser risk than global warming but whether nuclear is a lesser risk than all other alternatives. Given the half-life of certain nuclear isotopes, you are essentially making cost-benefit decisions not just for your children, but for the children to come over the next hundreds to millions of years.

 

[gtyellowjacket]

Right, but nuclear is not the only alternative to fossil fuels. The question isn't whether nuclear is a lesser risk than global warming but whether nuclear is a lesser risk than all other alternatives. Given the half-life of certain nuclear isotopes, you are essentially making cost-benefit decisions not just for your children, but for the children to come over the next hundreds to millions of years.

Agreed. I would advocate for renewables first, and where that isn't feasible nuclear then natural gas as the next alternative.

 

[Zoo_View]

So, you're saying, "Coke, no Pepsi"?

Nope.

No colas. Sprite, Mountain Dew, 7-Up, etc. are fine.

 

[05C40]

Nope.

No colas. Sprite, Mountain Dew, 7-Up, etc. are fine.

What about, "Cheezburger!"

 

[UNCatTech]

Right, but nuclear is not the only alternative to fossil fuels. The question isn't whether nuclear is a lesser risk than global warming but whether nuclear is a lesser risk than all other alternatives. Given the half-life of certain nuclear isotopes, you are essentially making cost-benefit decisions not just for your children, but for the children to come over the next hundreds to millions of years.

The way humans are I see no possible chance that we are not extinct well before our species sees a million years of existence.

 

[Zoo_View]

The way humans are I see no possible chance that we are not extinct well before our species sees a million years of existence.

I hated liking that post.

 

[farce©]

Any proposals as to where we should store the additional nuclear waste?

‘
“Although some countries, most notably the USA, treat used nuclear fuel as waste, most of the material in used fuel can be recycled. Approximately 97% – the vast majority (~94%) being uranium – of it could be used as fuel in certain types of reactor. Recycling has, to date, mostly been focused on the extraction of plutonium and uranium, as these elements can be reused in conventional reactors. This separated plutonium and uranium can subsequently be mixed with fresh uranium and made into new fuel rods.

Countries such as France, Japan, Germany, Belgium and Russia have all used plutonium recycling to generate electricity, whilst also reducing the radiological footprint of their waste. Some of the by-products (approximately 4%), mainly the fission products, will still require disposal in a repository and are immobilized by mixing them with glass, through a process called vitrification.”

 

[ColdBlueSteel]

Didja know that refurbished equipment from Three Mile Island is in use at the Harris nuke plant just south of Chapel Hill?