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
Environment & Energy
In reply to the discussion: Russia Unveils Detailed Plans To Build 21 New Nuclear Power Units By 2030 [View all]FBaggins
(28,705 posts)13. Do you really not get it?
How exactly are the highly unstable atoms that are the source of the radioactivity suddenly rendered radioactively stable?
Who said that they are? The most "unstable" elements (that is... the ones with the most activity) a seperated from the rest. See your next error.
The point of reprocessing is to remove some of the most unstable and long lived isotopes
Those are contradictory cases. Try again please.
then concentrate and immobilise them in a matrix that can be "safely" stored
Well... no actually. The point of reprocessing is to recover usable fissile material to use as fuel, and then break out the bulk of the material that is not the "most unstable" (because that's easy to deal with)... leaving a small amount of the dangerous waste. Then some paths involve trying to immobilise that remaining waste... but most of the goal of reprocessing is achieved even if they never do that. Far less waste needing storage and fuel available for the next cycle.
As to reactors lasting for decades you will be aware that all reactors have problems with metal failure, both welds and bulk metal, due to the high levels of radioactivity altering the structure of the metal itself.
Actually... I'd bet that she knows a great deal more about it than you appear to. Neutron embrittlement is reversible and is certainly not a problem for all parts of a reactor.
You will also be aware that the pumps and turbines of all power stations have to be replaced at regular intervals because because they cannot be guaranteed to work for decades.
That's a normal part of plant maintenance and is assumed in the longer lifespan estimates.
Who said that they are? The most "unstable" elements (that is... the ones with the most activity) a seperated from the rest. See your next error.
The point of reprocessing is to remove some of the most unstable and long lived isotopes
Those are contradictory cases. Try again please.
then concentrate and immobilise them in a matrix that can be "safely" stored
Well... no actually. The point of reprocessing is to recover usable fissile material to use as fuel, and then break out the bulk of the material that is not the "most unstable" (because that's easy to deal with)... leaving a small amount of the dangerous waste. Then some paths involve trying to immobilise that remaining waste... but most of the goal of reprocessing is achieved even if they never do that. Far less waste needing storage and fuel available for the next cycle.
As to reactors lasting for decades you will be aware that all reactors have problems with metal failure, both welds and bulk metal, due to the high levels of radioactivity altering the structure of the metal itself.
Actually... I'd bet that she knows a great deal more about it than you appear to. Neutron embrittlement is reversible and is certainly not a problem for all parts of a reactor.
You will also be aware that the pumps and turbines of all power stations have to be replaced at regular intervals because because they cannot be guaranteed to work for decades.
That's a normal part of plant maintenance and is assumed in the longer lifespan estimates.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
105 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Russia Unveils Detailed Plans To Build 21 New Nuclear Power Units By 2030 [View all]
FBaggins
Nov 2013
OP
Do they have any detailed plans about how they are going to dismantle them in 20 -50 years?
intaglio
Nov 2013
#2
So you are saying that long lived radio-isotopes are not present in nuclear waste.
intaglio
Nov 2013
#16
Nope... I'm not saying that. Nor most of the rest of your imagined statements.
FBaggins
Nov 2013
#20
And how does the fluid in the primary cooling circuit move through that circuit?
intaglio
Nov 2013
#62