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: Bob Fairchild who wrote (37931)	4/10/2007 10:39:15 AM
From: russet	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78419

Candu's have an automated replacement of rods when the reactor is live. The reactor does not shut down to replace fuel rods. I think your assumption that a spent rod from a light water reactor gives a shorter commercial lifespan in a candu may or may not be true but does it matter? Clearly the initial burn did not use up all the fissionable material. Candu reactors must be more efficient in this way. As the cost for U rises, processing the fissionable remains of spent fuel rods becomes commercially viable, which I would say is the main take home point of the article. Both Canada and the South Koreans have active research programs devoted to processing spent fuel rods, and there is millions of lbs of them out there waiting.