Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

PamW

(1,825 posts)
9. ACTUALLY...
Sat Mar 3, 2012, 08:22 PM
Mar 2012

If a new plant is more efficient, uses (sterilizes) less water and produces less waste then we shouldn't allow a 40-year old plants continue to operate.
======================================

Actually the reactor internals are completely replaceable and can be updated, and ARE; as new technology is available.

It's like engines for airliners. As more efficient engines become available, the airlines can drop the old engines off their airliners and replace with newer, more efficient turbofans. That's one of the reasons we see plenty of 40 year old airliners flying our skies.

You do the same with nuclear power plants. As new fuels and fuel technology become available, the reactor core itself is replaced with newer technology. So you can keep a 40 year old reactor running the same way an airline keeps a 40 year old airliner running with new technology.

Back in the '70s, our nuclear power plant fleet was burning fuel to a burnup of 45,000 Mw-Days/tonne. Today, the same plants burn to 55,000 to 60,000 Mw-D/tonne; which makes the spent fuel even more unusable as bomb fuel.

PamW

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Is the Era of Nuclear Pow...»Reply #9