Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: russet who wrote (37841)	4/10/2007 7:30:53 AM
From: Bob Fairchild	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78418

Yes but how does this compare to the cost of replacing spent rods in a reactor which I would guess would be at a greater rate compared to replacing non-spent rods to produce the same amount of Megawatt hours. If one factors in the cost of labour and the cost of increased down time for the reactors, my opinion is that this would offset the savings. Wouldn't using spent rods, which would have a shorter commercial lifespan, also end up creating more waste product to dispose of (albeit less toxic)which would require more costs to the bottom line of a utility ?