AW: [ RadSafe ] Fast neutron reactors

Brent Rogers at
Thu Dec 4 00:32:17 CST 2008

I'm a little bit confused as to why the marker would be "since the Carter
presidency".  Isn't there a "rest of the world" that does research, or is
all criminal negligence owned by the USA?  Or perhaps you're implying the
whole world has been criminally negligent on this issue since 1980 but were
just fuzzy on the dates?  

Brent Rogers
Sydney Australia

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at [mailto:radsafe-bounces at] On Behalf
Of chris.hofmeyr at
Sent: Thursday, 4 December 2008 3:37 AM
To: Rainer.Facius at
Cc: radsafe at
Subject: Re: AW: [ RadSafe ] Fast neutron reactors

Rainer and others,
I agree that research on fast neutron reactors and also the Th cycle have
been criminally neglected since the Carter presidency.  Huge sums have
been spent on fusion research, although people in the field know full well
that early generations of such a concept, if they are at all realised,
will at best be copious (fast) neutron sources to be used for breeding -
you guessed it - Pu from e.g. DU, to be used in more conventional fission
reactors.  So much for the promise of 'clean' ans 'safe' fusion energy.
The availability of uranium at a reasonable cost is rather limited, so the
future of fission energy in the medium to longer term is dependent on
breeder technology to unlock the presently unused vast potential in
nuclear fuel.  We really need resources for the best brains to be able to
focus on an economic breeder programme with sufficient security
(preferably inherent) to prevent pilfering of fissile material that can be
used for nefarious purposes.  This is a tall order, but surely much more
achievable than an economic fusion reactor.

Chris Hofmeyr

chofmeyr at

Rainer Facius wrote:

> Jaro,
> it is agreed that many loose ends need to be fixed before the promises
> which fast neutron reactors hold can be reaped. But imagine how many of
> these problems might have been solved already in the last 25 years or so,
> which saw a total stalemate in the advancement of nuclear power
> technologies - or even regression as e.g. in case of the THTR-300 reactor
> in Hamm-Uentrop, Germany. And imagine the state of technology if the money
> allocated to the fusion reactor had been available instead for such more
> realistic R&D.
> Best regards, Rainer
> ________________________________

South Africas premier free email service - 
For super low premiums, click here

You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the
RadSafe rules. These can be found at:

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit:

More information about the RadSafe mailing list