Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: Basic Choices and Constraints on Long-Term Energy Supplies



1) The concepts behind "reactors" destroying
their own waste are summarized at my website:

<http://blake.montclair.edu/~kowalskil/waste/index.html>

in case somebody is interested. Those familiar
with existing nuclear machines should skip the
introductory sections and start with the section
named merging two technologies.

2) I never learned C+ (etc.) programming. Is
it worth requiring offering when Basic is sufficient,
and when time is needed to learn physics?

3) In my variant of Basic comments begin with
the exclamation sign. That is why I did not
recognize the //, in JohnD's reference, as
comments. Assuming that others know what
we know is a common cause of failure in
communication.

4) People should try to avoid using acronyms
in Phys-L messages. Assuming that all
Phys-L-ers know them is a mistake. Figuring
out what acronyms are takes some of us away
from contents of messages.
Ludwik Kowalski


On Thursday, Jul 29, 2004, at 06:53 America/New_York, John Denker wrote:

Bernard Cleyet wrote:

If France can do it, why not "us"?

Based on the following, I assume "it" refers to generating
electrical power using breeder reactors.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nucene/fasbre.html#c6

That cites the French "Super-Phenix" as an example of a
breeder reactor.

But it is so in name only. According to
http://lpsc.in2p3.fr/gpr/introener/node10.html
and many other sources,

The large, 1200 MWe Superphenix reactor was plagued
by sodium leaks and administrative imbroglio until
it was decided to stop it undefinitely.

That is, there were insurmountable safety problems with
this plant, even _without_ considering the weapons
proliferation issues.

So if the suggestion is that everybody build plants like
this ... let's not.