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

Maslo55

(61 posts)
9. ...
Fri Feb 3, 2012, 06:34 AM
Feb 2012

Are they really complaining that it will take a long time to fission all the plutonium? lol.. The fact that plutonium from nuclear waste can supply our energy for such a long time is a POSITIVE, not a negative. It shows how great the energetic value of nuclear "waste" is.

The isotopes you speak of can also be transmutated by neutron radiation, they just dont produce sustainable reaction - energy (are not a fuel). Plutonium would produce enough neutrons, or energy for accelerator neutron generation, to break down all such isotopes.

Their economic calculations are also very loaded - they tried to come up with the highest sum they could, but that is additional price for 500 years of power generation - what is 8 trillion spread over 500 years, when compared to the the value of generated electricity (800 trillion KWh!)? Nothing.

Not to mention that repeating the "too cheap to meter" strawman, which has always been said in relation to fusion, not fission, casts high doubts of their knowledge about nuclear energy history.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Guardian: New generation ...»Reply #9