[ RadSafe ] Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future

[gelsg at aol.com]

Jaro:

I agree with the commentator.  The liquid sodium fast reactor should be considered.  The technology has many advantages over thermal reactors.

Jerry Gels
Cincinnati, OH






-----Original Message-----
From: Jaro Franta <jaro-10kbq at sympatico.ca>
To: multiple cdn <cdn-nucl-l at mailman.mcmaster.ca>; RADSAFE <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Sent: Fri, Jan 29, 2010 6:42 pm
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future


Interesting anouncement......
 
http://www.energy.gov/news/8584.htm 
January 29, 2010
Secretary Chu Announces Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future 
<SNIP>
 
.......which includes a list of Commission members.
 
As one commentator noted, the names on the list are as significant as the
ames NOT on it:
 
<quote>
......having no sodium-fast-breeder guys on this commission is really
ignificant.... This may be the biggest thing to ever happen to the
rospects for thorium and the liquid-fluoride reactor. The DOE's announced
heir commision, and Per [Peterson is] on it. ...... Per [Peterson] is a
uge supporter of fluoride reactors and he understands their inherent
dvantages over LWRs and IFRs.
<end quote>
(for more see http://www.energyfromthorium.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=63
http://www.energyfromthorium.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=63&t=2148> &t=2148 )
 
 
The scope of the Commission is outlined in President Obama's memo:
 
 
Presidential Memorandum on the Blue Ribbon Commission (pdf - 10k)
http://www.energy.gov/news/documents/2010nuclearfuture_memo.pdf 
 
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release January 29, 2010
January 29, 2010
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF ENERGY
SUBJECT: Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future
 
<SNIP>
The Commission should conduct a comprehensive review of policies for
anaging the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, including all alternatives
or the storage, processing, and disposal of civilian and defense used
uclear fuel and nuclear waste. This review should include an evaluation of
dvanced fuel cycle technologies that would optimize energy recovery,
esource utilization, and the minimization of materials derived from nuclear
ctivities in a manner consistent with U.S. nonproliferation goals.
.....
In performing its functions, the Commission should consider a broad range of
echnological and policy alternatives, and should analyze the scientific,
nvironmental, budgetary, economic, financial, and management issues, among
thers, surrounding each alternative it considers. Where appropriate, the
ommission may also identify potential statutory changes.
<SNIP>
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
ou are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the 
adSafe rules. These can be found at: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/radsaferules.html
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: 
ttp://radlab.nl/radsafe/