At 09:14 AM 1/20/2000 -0800, you wrote:
>Paul wrote:
>> > 1. Fossil fuels forever (don't confuse me with facts)
>> > 2. Nuclear power (science can solve the problems)
>> > 3. Balanced use of solar, wind, and conservation. (cultural change)
>>
>> I pick "all of the above," with the provision that as fossil fuels do
>> become rarer agro-based fuels will replace them, at least in part.
>>
>> All of the scientific problems of nuclear power have been solved. The
>> only remaining problems are political and the threat of contractors
>> cheating.
>
>All solved? Have I missed something, Paul. What do we do with the waste?
>And aren't you assuming that a major "accident" will never happen?
>
>Eric
>
After Three Mile Island, the DOE started a major program to develop
truly safe nuclear power plants. The design they came up with is
a breeder reactor that can actually use the wastes from older plants
as fuel. It's also accident proof. It does produce so low-level
radio-active wastes, but the net radiation output is about the same
as a coal-fired plant.
To test the accident proofness' of the design they built a scaled
working model. They brought the reactor up to full power and
deliberately cut off the cooling water: just about the same as what
happened accidentally at TMI. They also shut off all of the control
systems. The plant safely shut itself down.
Yes they had a partially melted core to deal with, but it was fully
contained. There was no radiation leakage outside of the normal
containment chamber.
Why wasn't this reported more? Why aren't any new plants being built
with this design? The answer is quite simple: The above test took
place just weeks after the Chernobyl disaster. Even the people who
performed the tests new at the time that there was zero chance of any
reactor being built in the USA in the foreseeable future.
Assuming that the reactor was built as designed, it would produce the
cleanest' electricity we can produce.
==>paul
