3 ms·
This is the 1990's view on the subject. There were several projects to address the fission leftover problem. Some of these: - Method to Reduce Long-lived Fissi
by StreamBright 5y ago
This is the 1990's view on the subject. There were several projects to address the fission leftover problem. Some of these:
- Method to Reduce Long-lived Fission Products by Nuclear Transmutations with Fast Spectrum Reactors https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14319-7 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-14319-7
- Fast-neutron reactor
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast-neutron_reactor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast-neutron_reactor
- Evolution of transuranium isotopic composition in power reactors and innovative nuclear systems for transmutation
https://inspirehep.net/literature/1243003 https://inspirehep.net/literature/1243003
And few other things. It is possible to have nuclear power with shorter byproducts than thousands of years.
- Kirby64 5y agoGiven that the US has only 1 reactor that was commercially put into operation after 1990s [1], it's a pretty realistic way to look at it in the US. Newer reactors and spent fuel reprocessing are definitely ways to solve the issue, but the fact is you still create those nasty byproducts in the traditional reactors today. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_the_United_St...
- AtlasBarfed 5y agoWell if you're talking about a in-development fusion reactor, then it's fair to use in-development fission reactors for comparison.