Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by function_seven on Thursday November 24, 2022 @04:11AM
(#33729213)
Why would you assume untrained personnel? These would still be regulated by the DoE.
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by jimnotgym on Thursday November 24, 2022 @05:28AM
(#33729704)
What about security? In the UK nuclear installations are under 24/7 armed guard from a special police force. That would be expensive to maintain in a remote region, although I guess they already have security at diamond mines, or instance
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by inglor_cz on Thursday November 24, 2022 @05:53AM
(#33729863)
Vastness of rural US is a security factor on its own. Plenty of military installations in the desert aren't even fenced.
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by Swenrekcah on Thursday November 24, 2022 @06:21AM
(#33730080)
They’re perhaps not fenced but presumably they’re full of armed military personnel?
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by bell-cot on Thursday November 24, 2022 @07:03AM
(#33730353)
You've never really been out in the American West, have you?
Just one example - the Nevada Test and Training Range alone is a bit over 4,500 square miles.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada_Test_and_Training_Ran...
Vs. Wikipedia says the entire U.S. Army (active duty) has ~485,000 personnel.
Divide...and that's ~0.17 Army people per acre, even if the US Army had NO job except holding down the NTTR. (Which is actually US Air Force, BTW.)
[Edit: But +1 - because in the bigger picture you make a valid point. However vast the open spaces, at the spots where the cool & expensive stuff sits, there does have to be some sort of "real" security. If only so dodgy locals don't swing by with a pair of bolt cutters, and start helping themselves.]
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by Swenrekcah on Thursday November 24, 2022 @09:17AM
(#33731485)
Thanks for the perspective, you are indeed right that I’ve never been “out there”.
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by inglor_cz on Thursday November 24, 2022 @07:25AM
(#33730526)
There was a German family once that might have paid with their lives for that presumption.
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by tecleandor on Thursday November 24, 2022 @06:50AM
(#33730264)
I guess that comparing it to the cost of setting up a super long power line and maintaining it (sabotages, fires, whatever), maybe it's interesting.
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by bell-cot on Thursday November 24, 2022 @07:13AM
(#33730435)
Reasonable Assumption: The "remote communities", "mining sites", etc. which both qualify for a nuclear power plant, and can afford it, will be fairly select & high-budget places.
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by pharke on Thursday November 24, 2022 @08:04AM
(#33730855)
Mines aren't run with pickaxes and donkeys anymore. Take some time to educate yourself.
Re:Westinghouse sees a tech disrupter in its eVinci microrea...
by stjohnswarts on Thursday November 24, 2022 @09:12AM
(#33731436)
I would be more concerned about security than trained personnel to run it. Obviously, there will be trained people on site. You don't put a small reactor onsite and tell Cletus and Bubba to press this button to start it and that button to stop it.
Yeah, install a nuclear reactor at a remote mining site, probably without sufficiently trained personnel to take care of it. What could go wrong?