Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New restart delay of Canada's Chalk River reactor

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-10-10 11:39 PM
Original message
New restart delay of Canada's Chalk River reactor
It was shut down in May 2009 by a leak of "heavy water" -- a.k.a., tritium. (Technically, it's "tritiated water".) The same kind of tritium leak(s) led to the recent shut-down of Entergy's Vermont Yankee reactor.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1017831320100311">New restart delay of Canada's Chalk River reactor

VANCOUVER, March 10 (Reuters) - Restart of the Chalk River medical isotope-producing nuclear reactor has been delayed until at least May because of the complexity of ongoing repairs, Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd said on Wednesday.

The aging reactor in eastern Ontario, which supplies a third of the world's medical isotopes, was shut down in May 2009 by a small heavy water leak and the date of its return to service has been pushed back repeatedly.

...

Officials had initially speculated when the more than 50-year-old reactor broke down last year that they could have it running again in three months. The leak did not pose a risk to the general public.

...

The shortage of isotopes has forced doctors around the world to reschedule or cancel medical procedures and sent companies such as Canada's MDS Inc (MDS.TO) (MDZ.N), whose Nordion division depends on Chalk River for the bulk of its isotopes, to scramble for new supply sources.

...

Read the entire article at http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1017831320100311">Reuters US Edition.


--d!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NNadir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 01:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. It's really a shame that they had to rely on a 50 year old reactor built with 1950's technology for
this purpose.

It's not surprising though, given the appalling ignorance of people who oppose all nuclear reactors based on the fact that they can't think, don't know shit, and don't give a fuck who dies because of their indifference and stupidity.

I hope the reactor can be repaired quickly and go back to its job of saving lives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 08:50 AM
Response to Original message
2. Heavy water is not tritium
Edited on Thu Mar-11-10 09:34 AM by Statistical
Heavy water is water with higher that natural concentration of Deuterium (which is very low at 154ppm).

Deuterium is naturally occurring in all water although is is rare. Only one in 6500 hydrogen atoms is deuterium.

Deuterium is not tritium
Deuterium does not emit radiation (is not radioactive).
Deuterium does not have a half-life

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterium

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium

"Normal" Hydrogen = 1 proton
Deuterium = 1 proton + neutron
Tritium = 2 proton + neutrons


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dogmudgeon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. You learn something new every day!
Well, *I* do, anyway.

(Cue Carson impression)

"I did not know that."

:hi:

--d!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Statistical Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-11-10 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. No problem.
Edited on Thu Mar-11-10 11:16 AM by Statistical
Always good to learn something every day. I learned yesterday that the brakes on a Prius work fine even with engine turned off (when someone schooled me on the the runaway Prius thread). Which now that I think about it makes perfect sense because a hybrid turns the engine on and off as needed.

Canada is one of the few countries who's reactors use heavy water. Not because of any increased health danger but rather economics. Making heavy water (or more technically concentrating since there is billions of gallons of D20 in the ocean) is expensive. The flip side is that heavy water absorbs less neutrons than "normal" water so uranium doesn't need to be enriched.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Jan 04th 2025, 08:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC