view the rest of the comments
Nuclear
Focus on peaceful use of nuclear energy tech, economics, news, and climate change.
From r/nuclear
Looking for moderators
Useful links:
IAEA PRIS - The Database on Nuclear Power Reactors: https://pris.iaea.org/pris/home.aspx
NRC US reactor status: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/event-status/reactor-status/index.html
US Nuclear Plant Outage Status: https://www.eia.gov/nuclear/outages/
Milestones in Advanced Nuclear: https://www.airtable.com/universe/expnrIMohdf6dIvZl/milestones-in-advanced-nuclear
What about the waste? http://whataboutthewaste.com/
What about the cost? https://zionlights.substack.com/p/what-is-the-true-cost-of-energy
How long will nuclear fuel last? https://whatisnuclear.com/blog/2020-10-28-nuclear-energy-is-longterm-sustainable.html
Global Energy Footprint https://energy.glex.no/footprint/
Low Carbon Power Nuclear page: https://lowcarbonpower.org/type/nuclear
IAEA PRIS - Under Construction Reactors: https://pris.iaea.org/PRIS/WorldStatistics/UnderConstructionReactorsByCountry.aspx
Is it actually radioactive water, or is it just water a nuclear power plant used for some purpose and now people think it's radioactive?
Apparently its 1.3 million gallons of water, which includes tritiated water, so yeah this is more fallout from anit-nuke propaganda...
I have a sneaking suspicion this is another situation where the tritiated water is actually a lower concentration than the river, but because we know about the phenomenally low levels, people are afraid of the nuclear boogeyman. In reality, I'll bet that the overall tritium concentration in the river would go down as a result of discharging those 1.3 million gallons of water into it.
They dumped into the Hudson for years during operation, leaving it onsite to leak undiluted into ground water is a far far worse Idea.
Whatever it is it's perfectly good water for a nuclear power plant and we need a replacement for Indian Point anyway. Sending it down the Hudson is just a waste.