Skip to comments.
Nuclear Power: Lighting the Future
Townhall.com ^
| 7/24/2008
| Rebecca Hagelin
Posted on 07/24/2008 2:44:26 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-26 last
To: threeoeight
You do have a point. The nuts have a lot of resources at their disposal.
The lead intervenor for the plant I was working in requested the records for all the safety related welds in the plant, including the names of the welders. That cost a couple million to provide.
21
posted on
07/24/2008 6:45:36 AM PDT
by
wolfpat
(If you don't like the Patriot Act, you're really gonna hate Sharia Law.)
To: neb52
Out of curiosity, I checked the STP website. I was wrong. They’re going with the General Electric ABWR design for the new reactors.
When I get home from running errands, I’ll check out Comanche Peak’s site.
22
posted on
07/24/2008 7:00:53 AM PDT
by
wolfpat
(If you don't like the Patriot Act, you're really gonna hate Sharia Law.)
To: wolfpat; rlmorel
The NRC does not have the staff or the regulations needed by the staff to evaluate a proposal to site/build a pebble-bed style reactor. It is the same reason that Dominion switched to the GE design for their new reactor once it became clear that the first try with the Canadian design could not be licensed by the NRC in a reasonable time. The AREVA design, e.g., for Calvert Cliffs, is an evolution of the Westinghouse design and is thus more straightforward for the NRC staff to evaluate.
23
posted on
07/26/2008 6:09:29 PM PDT
by
sefarkas
(Why vote Democrat Lite?)
To: sefarkas
I am talking about moving forward.
We do not have a working design right now...nobody really has a working design that could meet the needs we have right now.
But I think we should start right now, and this is something I would not mind seeing my tax dollars being spent on...get money into R&D.
The concept is not difficult. It is solving the technical problems such as the manufacturing of the pebbles.
We should take the initiative on this away from the Chinese, because as it stands, they are likely to do it before us.
We need this technology developed. It is safe by design and can be made modular.
RIght now, build what we can, but we should work towards the next level.
24
posted on
07/26/2008 8:00:28 PM PDT
by
rlmorel
(Clinging bitterly to Guns and God in Massachusetts...:)
To: rlmorel
Not pebble bed but the same TRISO fuel type. Burn up the wastes and make a decent profit doing it too. Look at the burnup values 700 GWD/T thats just amazing. This system would solve the Yucca Mt. problem.
http://www.aie.org.au/syd/downloads/DB-MHR%20Presentation.ppt
25
posted on
07/29/2008 5:12:46 PM PDT
by
JDinAustin
(Austinite in the Big D)
To: clee1
...you cant go back to the past without alot of people dying.That's what they truly want, IMO.
26
posted on
07/29/2008 5:15:40 PM PDT
by
stboz
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-26 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson