Slashdot Mirror

You can ship it. And we have. Thousands of times. There's casks that have been made specifically for doing it, and tested by ramming a diesel-electric train into it at 160 kph, having it strapped to the back of a truck that rams into a 600-ton block of concrete at full speed, as well as shooting a missile into the side of it at over 600 mph.

The damage was superficial, and in all certified flask designs there was no loss of containment in these far more extreme scenarios than the fucking fender bender you describe. These things are designed to be completely engulfed in flames, dropped in water over a hundred meters deep, and survive impacts that practically liquefy the vehicle carrying it.

Your "one truck accident will render an entire region radioactive and uninhabitable" is ignorant alarmist pap. There have been literally tens of thousands of shipments of nuclear waste with zero incidents of what you describe. It's not like they just throw the shit in the back of a Ford F-350 and pull it onto the Interstate - there's actual thought that goes into this, from engineers way smarter than you are.

Please don't be an idiot.

This is the exact same recommendation the EPA has made since 1992, and we're seeing the exact same response now as it got the first time it was suggested.

It took me like two minutes to find a nuclear power plant under construction in the USA.
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2017...

I will concede that they've had some troubles in the past, and are likely to have more in the future, but saying that nuclear power is dead in the USA is provably false.

Obama had a lukewarm at best attitude towards nuclear power. It seems Trump is actually committed to seeing nuclear power succeed. Once one is built there will be a lot of people from that project that would then be experienced builders of a nuclear power plant. So long as we keep them working they can keep their skills fresh, train more people, and costs will go down.

The disaster at Fukushima set the industry back by a decade as political and popular support for nuclear energy evaporated. The economy is growing again and people are looking for ways to get jobs. They want cheap energy. Reliable energy. Domestic energy. They want to... make America great again.

The greatest advantage that the French nuclear program has enjoyed is lack of organized opposition and the endless delaying tactics that you activists use in other countries to increase costs through endless legal delays. Any targeted energy program can be made to cost too much by imposing delay after delay.

Some illumination on the fossil industry's ownership of the antinuclear movement:
http://atomicinsights.com/esso...
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2013...
In contrast, the French oil giant Elf-Aquitaine (now Total) has always been a refiner and distributor, rather than owning the production it takes to be a sponsor against competing forms of energy

Some choice general commentary from a leading environmentalist on your endless stream of lies:
http://www.theguardian.com/com...

I predict that one of the more interesting byproducts of today's low oil prices will be the antinuclear movement running out of money.

It is common practice in Germany.

No.

if you knew what you were talking about

Unlike you. Mr change the laws of physics just like code in software, I do.

you'd have know that even nuclear is used for load follow in France

It's starting to look as if you need to look up the definition of load following. Clue #1 it is not about running units at full capacity. It's about running a unit at less than full capacity and it dramatically reduces life of anything where you have to frequently vary temperature to do it. Bringing full units on or off line is not load following.

You say things, but don't check them;

Here is just one of many sources that discuss Germany's load follow use of coal: http://cornerstonemag.net/the-...

Here is just one of many sources that discus Frances use of nuclear for load follow: http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2014...

Of course, you will find some reason to dismiss this real world information because it does not fit your imagined world scenarios. You will find your personal excuse to deny it, as you have in the past when I have presented sources, and you will in turn present no sources that back up your contentions. Why you will do this I don't know.

He said 'short term' ... that means for me in hours or less.
Current reactors don't do that. If you power a reactor a bit down it gets difficult to power it up again, due to different characteristics of moderation (waste products).

The difficulty is due to xenon, which can limit the magnitude of the load follow. However, trust me there are reactors that can follow. History of load following reactors from the American Nuclear Society

I've been following the American Nuclear Society's page:
http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2011/03/11/media-updates-on-nuclear-power-stations-in-japan/

In addition, this second link contains a concise summary and background about this accident:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/03/13/ans-japanese-nuclear-power-plant-update/
(I received the latter in pdf form from an ANS emailing, initially, and it's been the easiest* to read piece that I've seen so far)

*where easy means doesn't make me cringe, and IAAANE (I am almost a nuclear engineer)