Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety approval

Re:Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety ... by kgabis on Friday September 04, 2020 @03:45AM (#24372690)

You don't? The volume of water in oceans is so big that this won't be a problem as long as you don't dump it in coastal waters. Keep in mind that there's plenty of reactors from sunken nuclear submarines in oceans right now.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety ... by michaelt on Friday September 04, 2020 @05:46AM (#24373396)

The kind of nuclear submarines governments are trying to raise and properly dispose of, because they're worried bioaccumulation will taint their fish stocks? [1]

[1] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200901-the-radioactive-...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety ... by kgabis on Friday September 04, 2020 @06:32AM (#24373670)

And governments are known for not over reacting to anything related to nuclear power /s

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety ... by guscost on Friday September 04, 2020 @08:11AM (#24374218)

And in this case, the government of a country whose primary export is oil.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Small nuclear reactors: tiny NuScale reactor gets safety ... by pvaldes on Saturday September 05, 2020 @05:32PM (#24387014)

Don't fool yourselves, we are talking about one of the richest extant fisheries of Atlantic cod. This is pretty serious stuff for Maine, Newfoundland or Massachusets, for example.

We are talking about trying to keep your "fish and chips" safe to eat, or maybe not.

Last time the fisheries collapsed in 90's 37.000 people lost their job only in Newfoundland and the social impact was massive. It has not recovered still after almost 30 years with a record of lowest captures registered in 2016.

[ Parent | on HN ]