Almost waste free Nuclear reactors.

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

Heres the full story;
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/news/areva-develops-new-nuclear-reactors-that-destroy-atomic-waste/story-e6frg90o-1225843555348

I was intrigued by this article, if the research works out then the number one reason for not building new reactors would be 99% obsolete. Its almost like reinventing Nuclear Power all over again.

 

[SnootyEnglishman]

This sounds like an advancement in producing renewable sources of energy..i approve

 

[Jackalb]

Awesome will they get rid of all the barrels scattered around the globe they've just thrown in a hole though?

 

[mikecoulter]

Hmm, looks good. But I wonder how expensive the new reactors are...

 

[WestMountain]

Yay!!

 

[dekkarax]

And even if that does not work, there are hybrid reactors, which can use nuclear waste as fuel

 

[Pandalisk]

Now all we need is to change peoples fear of Nuclear power, Have more saftey procautions and some common sense. Seriously, check in the back for some, I've read of a reactor in Japan thats in serious trouble, ontop of a goddamn fault line.

Then their what remains of the Chernobyle reactor, didn't they just cement the thing? Its just a temporary solution.

 

[gellert1984]

Of course if they just used thorium instead of uranium there'd be almost no nuclear waste anyway, but our dear governments do so love there nuclear weapons.

 

[Good morning blues]

Awesome will they get rid of all the barrels scattered around the globe they've just thrown in a hole though?

This is dumb. Nuclear waste is not a green sludge that is stored in a barrel like you see on The Simpsons. It is more like a big sheet of glass, very small amounts of it get produced (if the average north american had all of their power needs for their entire life supplied by nuclear power, it would only produce one kilogram nuclear waste), and it is physically incapable of affecting anything outside of its container, let alone anything that is not also sitting in an underground cavern.

People really need to get over their irrational and unfounded fear of nuclear power. Nobody's afraid of the waste produced by coal power, despite the fact that nuclear waste is considerably less radioactive.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

If we recycled our waste now, we could destroy 90% of our waste. America still won't accept that Nuclear energy is safe, reliable, or useful. For most of the American public, just the word 'nuclear' is a way to immediately put a big fat no on anything. It's absolutely ridiculous. I cannot wait for a president who will strong arm it in, and force us to realize that there's better ways of doing things.

 

[ma55ter_fett]

Hmm, looks good. But I wonder how expensive the new reactors are...

I think the cost of new reactors was actually a larger obstacle (They are insanely expensive, 2.5-5 billion dollars before cost overrides at a minimum) than the issue of what to do with the waste ever was.

 

[The_Decoy]

Then there's what remains of the Chernobyl reactor, didn't they just cement the thing? Its just a temporary solution.

I remember reading somewhere that the hotspot will remain radioactive until long after the human race is likely to have died out. Scary stuff.

 

[Aerodynamic]

Holy Shit.

Hope this works.

 

[Nincompoop]

Interesting.
However, I think we should devout all our resources to fusion energy instead of fission energy. We are currently building the first productive fusion reactor, ITER, and it (if everything goes as planned) will be 100% clean and give 10 times the power used to sustain it. The Sun works on the same principle. The difference is that the Sun uses Hydrogen and Helium, and the matter used in the ITER is derived from common sea water, so it is practically an inexhaustible resource.

It will be the key to our energy needs.

 

[Valksy]

Fascinating read, thanks for posting.

As a species we are going to have to accept that the burning of fossil fuels needs to stop. Alternate energy is desperately needed and the nuclear bogeyman needs to be removed from public consciousness as it is a nonsense.

Being a cynical bastard I do wonder by what degree alternate energy sources are being suppressed or concealed by countries who live and breathe by fossil fuel income. But if what the article says about france gaining 80% of power by nuclear is true then it has to be seen as viable and desireable.

In the meantime I will continue turning stuff off that I am not using (off, not stand by), exclusively buying energy saving bulbs, turning the thermostat down a bit and driving my oh-so-tiny car on the off chance that I am not just pissing in the ocean (and in the knowledge that although I shall leave no progeny it would be nice if the earth wasn't a smouldering cinder).

 

[Orcus The Ultimate]

well! this is good news for all our Green Escapists! also i heard there's a 500GB dvd being in development since last year...

 

[mornal]

And even if that does not work, there are hybrid reactors, which can use nuclear waste as fuel

Do those hybrid reactors produce uranium as waste product? Thus creating a never ending cycle of energy?

Cuz, you know, that'd be pretty cool.

 

[riskroWe]

'Almost' won't be good enough for these hippies.

 

[Contun]

If it provides me with power and helps the environment, it's a win-win. I approve!

 

[zpaceinvader]

An average nuclear reactor takes about 20 years to pay itself of, a wind turbine takes 2. The only reason that people belive in nuclear power is that it seems futuristic, bullshit

-edit-
not to mention that a nuclear powerplant can take up to 15 years just to get built