View Single Post
Old 08-29-2019, 11:55 AM   #27 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,431

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD
Thanks: 4,206
Thanked 4,387 Times in 3,361 Posts
I wonder if a reactor could be designed so that as fuel is spent, the rods are placed closer together, or perhaps a design where new rods are added on the outside, while aging rods are moved closer to the center over time, thereby maintaining the same power output but extracting more of the fissile material?

I'd never design something that utilizes only 5% of the available fuel.

Considering our power plants are based on 60s technology, it seems likely there is a lot of potential for making fission plants more cost effective and safe. There would be an initial outlay of engineering costs associated, but once that's done, the plans could be applied to any number of generators, amortizing the development costs.
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to redpoint5 For This Useful Post:
Xist (08-29-2019)