View Single Post
Old 06-04-2014, 08:57 AM   #181
SeeGeeWhy
#1 Goaltender
 
SeeGeeWhy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nik- View Post
Additionally, Canada, especially on the relatively seismically stable Canadian shield, should be leading in nuclear energy.

Can we look at Breeder reactors or IFRs?
The impetus to build breeders isn't all that high now that we understand uranium reserves aren't as low as they once were thought to be. That and I really don't think we need reactors that produce weaponizable isotopes. We are past that. My preference is for burners that can consume existing waste and weapons stockpiles along with any "-ium" fertile fuel isotopes. My opinion, of course.

IFRs still have a significant meltdown risk despite what guys like Charles Till claim. 2/3 of the IFRs built in the US had partial meltdowns. Suriving a power outage is nice, but one single flow blockage and the thing melts. Another reason I love the MSR - liquid fuel means zero meltdown risk. Heck, that's the secret to how they consume so much of the available fuel and leave such little waste behind.
SeeGeeWhy is offline   Reply With Quote