Re: The Spanish Grid Drop-out - recently released information.

On Thu, 15 May 2025 12:29:03 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

On 2025-05-14 23:37, john larkin wrote:

On Wed, 14 May 2025 21:10:06 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:
 

On 2025-05-14 19:19, john larkin wrote:

On Tue, 13 May 2025 22:28:23 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> 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."
<robin_listas@es.invalid> 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.

Not as dangerous as transporting gasoline or chlorine, and we do that
all the time.

>
Pools are a temporary solution till someone develops a permanent
solution. Nobody has, in decades.

Of course we have, but public fear keeps the things from happening.

>
>

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.

Why?

>

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 Fukushima and Chernobyl messes were caused by stupid design. Stop
doing that.

A dam or a grain elevator or a parking garage will kill people if they
are designed by idiots.