4 ms·
>with some processing Weasel words. Reprocessing spent nuclear fuel introduces a MASSIVE regulatory boondoggle.
by omegaworks 12y ago
>with some processing
Weasel words. Reprocessing spent nuclear fuel introduces a MASSIVE regulatory boondoggle.
- pjscott 12y agoTrue, but you can always use a once-through fuel cycle at first. EDIT: It turns out that the article was inaccurate, and they won't be reprocessing. Consider this comment happily retracted!
- donttrustatoms 12y agoGreat, great call to point out. The author very unfortunately did not understand that there is NO "reprocessing" necessary for our reactors to reuse fuel. Why, oh why, don't we get to preview what they write. Wording is so important in such a massively misunderstood space. It is a proven process utilized previously in fuel manufacture, and simply adds a little new fuel to existing used fuel. It does not involving isolating any portions of the fuel as done in reprocessing (which is the main "proliferation hazard" of reprocessing). -COO UPower
- beefman 12y agoCan you be a little more descriptive here? I suspect you really are reprocessing, and shouldn't be afraid to say so.
- donttrustatoms 12y agoIn the fuel manufacture for redeployment, it's more or less as simple as melting down and recasting. The distinction is reprocessing is generally way more complicated, frequently involves chemicals, and could separate out plutonium which gets people worried.