Comments on: Nuclear Cannibals http://www.sciscoop.com/2008-3-4-45115-58227.html Scooping up science news and dropping it on your desk Tue, 16 Mar 2010 10:14:53 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: http://www.sciscoop.com/2008-3-4-45115-58227.html/comment-page-1#comment-2632 Mon, 17 Mar 2008 13:57:56 +0000 http://localhost/~arielschwartz/wordpress/sciscoop/?p=3063#comment-2632 Yes, I think the researchers were considering how nuclear might work to solve the acute energy problem and suggesting that in the timescales being discussed for mitigating climate change we would not see a payback. As to fast-breeder reactors, are we in a position to use fuel from those without rebuilding and decommissioning legacy plant? db Yes, I think the researchers were considering how nuclear might work to solve the acute energy problem and suggesting that in the timescales being discussed for mitigating climate change we would not see a payback. As to fast-breeder reactors, are we in a position to use fuel from those without rebuilding and decommissioning legacy plant?

db

]]> By: SEWilco http://www.sciscoop.com/2008-3-4-45115-58227.html/comment-page-1#comment-1695 SEWilco Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:59:10 +0000 http://localhost/~arielschwartz/wordpress/sciscoop/?p=3063#comment-1695 What does "only by a factor of 12. This means that if nuclear power were taken as the major option over the next forty years or so" mean? Does that mean that nuclear power plants are 12 times better, but not during a forty year massive construction period? What about after that forty year period? <p> The summary also only mentions ore and separation. So it's based upon the U.S.'s present fuel cycle habits and ignores technologies such as fuel breeding? What does “only by a factor of 12. This means that if nuclear power were taken as the major option over the next forty years or so” mean? Does that mean that nuclear power plants are 12 times better, but not during a forty year massive construction period? What about after that forty year period?

The summary also only mentions ore and separation. So it’s based upon the U.S.’s present fuel cycle habits and ignores technologies such as fuel breeding?

]]>