SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Strictly: Drilling and oil-field services -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Webster Groves who wrote (80034)11/26/2000 12:44:46 PM
From: Think4Yourself  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 95453
 
Webster,

You are right about the shipping, at least in California.
It is illegal to transport spent fuel through the state so they store the spent rods on site. They can add more space if they get the permits.

I believe they are stored in a Boron solution to absorb the nuetrons. with 30+ years of spent fuel stored at some sites I would hate to think about the consequences if that solution ever drained due to a leak in the storage facility. There is a reactor site (San Onofre) between San Diego and LA that could make Southern California uninhabitable if that happened.



To: Webster Groves who wrote (80034)11/27/2000 1:44:09 AM
From: Douglas V. Fant  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 95453
 
Webster, I need to check, but the nukes I follow produce electricity at the 1.5 cents/kWh range. Hydro power is cheaper, about 0.9 cents/kWh on average, and lignite coal surface mined is cheaper around 1.2 cents/kWh....

But a lot of these nukes depreciated and with many stranded costs recovered, have gotten pretty cheap to operate. Re spent fuel rods. Do they go to SE New Mexico or Yucca Flats Nevada?


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News