Scientists Say Advanced Nuclear Reactors Not Safer Than Conventional Plants

By | March 22, 2021

  • March 22, 2021 at 1:31 pm
    Dave says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 26
    Thumb down 12

    Not to worry. The solution for climate change will be for all of us to live in caves and reduce our standards of living by 50-80%. The destruction of wealth and opportunity and the food supply should kill billions more further alleviating climate issues. Except of course for the elite like John Kerry who will continue to fly around in private jets, be driven around in big limos and live in multiple huge mansions spewing tons and tons of carbon into the atmosphere. But us mere minions will pick up the slack.

    • March 22, 2021 at 2:44 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 10

      Your rant failed to mention: ““In many cases, they are worse with regard to … safety, and the potential for severe accidents and potential nuclear proliferation,””

      Can’t we just use nuclear power that is safer, can’t be as easily proliferated, and when it fails doesn’t cause as severe of accidents as this “advanced” type?

    • March 29, 2021 at 2:32 pm
      Caldude says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 0

      You forgot to cite Fox News or OAN for your insightful take…

  • March 22, 2021 at 2:47 pm
    John says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 3

    Scientist have spoke the science of Advance Nuclear reactors is unsafe. Science has spoken. No disputing the need to scrap the Advance Nuclear systems.

  • March 22, 2021 at 3:00 pm
    Bond says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 0

    “The hydrogen-moderated self-regulating nuclear power module (HPM), also referred to as the compact self-regulating transportable reactor (ComStar),[1] is a new type of nuclear power reactor using hydride as a neutron moderator.” Though current nuclear power is safe (if all safe guards and protocols are followed), the option with HPM looks promising.

    • March 23, 2021 at 7:55 am
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 0
      Thumb down 3

      A Wikipedia citation? They’re not known as the bastion saint of accuracy or scientific knowledge.

  • March 23, 2021 at 11:46 am
    John R Redding says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 1

    The Nuclear Regulatory Commission and all the supporting information, including the results of Probabilistic Risk Assessments, say otherwise. The Union of Concerned Scientist would be more appropriately named as the Union of Scientists for Hire.

    • March 23, 2021 at 12:15 pm
      Rosenblatt says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 2

      You may be right, John. Can you post a link to one of the Risk Assessments from the NRC that covers the fact that these advanced reactors DO NOT use fuel that has to be enriched at a much higher rate than conventional fuel, which increases the likelihood of proliferation of its fuel and more severe accidents?

      The only thing I could find from the NRC is how to get a license for one of the reactors. Nothing here about safety compared to the other types of reactors we can use.
      https://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/regs-guides-comm.html



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*