News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Study identifies reasons for soaring nuclear plant cost overruns in the U.S.. Parent comment

Re:Study identifies reasons for soaring nuclear plant cost o... by zamalek on Friday November 20, 2020 @02:54PM (#25164222)
> There are too many caveats and assumptions made in what the level of radioactivity in coal ash means to meaningfully compare it to fissionable radionuclides.

If the reactor is passively safe, the amortized level of radioactivity is zero, especially if the waste is "burned" in secondary reactors (such as TWR).

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Study identifies reasons for soaring nuclear plant cost o... by cratermoon on Friday November 20, 2020 @05:11PM (#25165686)
"if" and "amortized" are just different forms for caveats and assumptions. The level of radioactivity amortized over how long? Long enough time scales and the level of radioactivity is 0 for everything in the entire universe.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Study identifies reasons for soaring nuclear plant cost o... by zamalek on Friday November 20, 2020 @06:00PM (#25166135)
Way to needlessly misrepresent the argument.

Amortized over the duration where we are typically seeing meltdowns in gen1 reactors. 10-50 years?

> "if"

The article talks about modern designs. It is an aspiration, not an assumption. The central argument is that adopting modern reactor designs eliminates meltdown concerns (in addition to reducing costs as the article suggests). That isn't an assumption, that is a suggestion.

[ Parent | on HN ]