Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: "Carlos E.R." Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design Subject: Re: The Spanish Grid Drop-out - recently released information. Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 12:29:03 +0200 Lines: 69 Message-ID: References: <7kmcflxsfb.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> <3lj92kth9m1cjjib8peq04tta6fecer0bv@4ax.com> <023a2k1v735395t0crgdfq36acujgn24gq@4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net 1CB461pzMtcfmxu08bb5mwPb2Z1vxw3EoI7e3YBwz1a85hX3yy X-Orig-Path: Telcontar.valinor!not-for-mail Cancel-Lock: sha1:xYOEzRgWJXHszCmnh9WZ3ObCb6c= sha256:05jOLcWkBpmWUHJ8s07B7qFANqtM2Smd/kLcpN2H5Yg= User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: es-ES, en-CA In-Reply-To: <023a2k1v735395t0crgdfq36acujgn24gq@4ax.com> On 2025-05-14 23:37, john larkin wrote: > On Wed, 14 May 2025 21:10:06 +0200, "Carlos E.R." > wrote: > >> On 2025-05-14 19:19, john larkin wrote: >>> On Tue, 13 May 2025 22:28:23 +0200, "Carlos E.R." >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On 2025-05-13 18:14, Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>> On 13/05/2025 11:48 pm, john larkin wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 13 May 2025 12:57:47 +0200, "Carlos E.R." >>>>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>> Nukes are great, but not if you tear them down. >>>>> >>>>> Nukes are remarkably expensive, and depressingly inflexible. Radiation >>>>> damage to the structure means that you do have to tear them down after a >>>>> few decades of use, and the radioactive waste starts off very >>>>> radioactive, and the longer-lived isotopes have to be managed for a few >>>>> hundred thousand years. >>>> >>>> And the investors building the stations do not consider the cost of >>>> managing the waste for centuries. They leave that part to the >>>> government. In Spain, we don't have any long term nuclear waste storage. >>>> I think we rent storage in France, so the waste has to be transported >>>> there. We have some storage at each station, a large water pool. >>> >>> The best thing to do with used fuel rods is reprocess them into more >>> fuel. >> >> Something that is expensive and not every country can do. > > A couple of very remote places in the world could do that. And we'd > get lots of fun isotopes too. Can't leave hot rods in a zillion pools > forever. Transporting nuclear waste long distances is dangerous. Pools are a temporary solution till someone develops a permanent solution. Nobody has, in decades. >>> When that's not feasible, dig a deep hole and dump it in. Or drop >>> barrels of junk into an ocean subduction zone. >> >> That's simply wrong. >> >>> It's irrational to store nuclear waste locally. Nuke policy is mostly >>> fear driven. And nukes are unpopular in some quarters by people who >>> really don't want us to have affordable, safe energy. >> >> I have a very rational and studied fear of nuclear power. > > Why? It's very safe when done carefully. Everybody does it carefully, yet there are accidents with consequences. Fukushima, Chernobyl, and many others. And close encounters or near misses. > > The little modular reactors sound cool. > > > -- Cheers, Carlos.