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. Answers...
Thu May 3, 2012, 01:08 PM
May 2012

All that is needed for the scheme I outlined is to have a reprocessing plant.

The French have a reprocessing plant at LaHague. That plant also reprocesses fuel for Sweden, and anyone else that contracts for services.

The British have a reprocessing plant at Sellafield.

The Japanese used to have the French reprocess their fuel; until they built their own reprocessing plants at Rokkasho.

The USA has a reprocessing plant at the Savannah River National Lab in South Carolina. We don't use it for commercial fuel.

The scheme I outlined above is being done in countries other than the USA.

The part of my scheme where you need to refuel the reactor with 4 tons of fuel in which you use the Plutonium from the spent
fuel and you mix it with some new Uranium to make the new fuel. Do you know what they call that mixture?

It's called MOX. You know that MOX is being used in other countries, right?

The only thing that sours financiers is the uncertainty. If we can get rid of the uncertainty of the politics, they'd love it.

PamW

Recommendations

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

Nuclear waste has to be contained for a million years bananas May 2012 #1
Good post! nt ladjf May 2012 #2
Thanks, ladjif RobertEarl May 2012 #15
Another good post. ladjf May 2012 #32
Reprocess/Recycle for short lived waste PamW May 2012 #3
THE MYTHOLOGY AND MESSY REALITY OF NUCLEAR FUEL REPROCESSING kristopher May 2012 #4
BALONEY!!! PamW May 2012 #5
I'm not going to argue with someone that has no regard for the truth kristopher May 2012 #6
FAILED UNDERSTANDING, AGAIN!!! PamW May 2012 #7
OK RobertEarl May 2012 #8
Answers... PamW May 2012 #9
Nope kristopher May 2012 #10
FAILED AGAIN!!!! PamW May 2012 #11
I know the difference between bullshit propaganda on the internet kristopher May 2012 #12
STRIKE THREE - YOU'RE OUT!!! PamW May 2012 #13
Arjun proved NOTHING!! PamW May 2012 #19
The determination that it increases waste is not made by Dr. Makhijani kristopher May 2012 #25
NOT FALSE PamW May 2012 #26
That was just two answers RobertEarl May 2012 #14
Whose fault is that? PamW May 2012 #17
You are so right RobertEarl May 2012 #18
That's for the Japanese to call... PamW May 2012 #20
That is your answer? RobertEarl May 2012 #22
WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! PamW May 2012 #27
What real scientists say about reprocess/recycle: It's a "goofy idea". bananas May 2012 #16
What is the Alternative?? GreenWin May 2012 #21
Renewable energy sources are more than capable of meeting modern society's needs. kristopher May 2012 #23
WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! PamW May 2012 #29
Wrong way Pam/Gregory strikes again... kristopher May 2012 #30
Accusing other people of being sockpuppets and calling other people liars XemaSab May 2012 #31
WRONG AS ALWAYS!! PamW May 2012 #33
Yes, you were. Thank you for repeating my correction of your error kristopher May 2012 #34
FOUL!!! PamW May 2012 #35
A hero!! RobertEarl May 2012 #24
BS- that it is "illegal" PamW May 2012 #28
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Future of America's Nucle...»Reply #9