• cecilkorik
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    CANDU is one of the best reactor designs currently running, in my opinion. The problem is that it’s expensive to build, and requires expensive maintenance, and in a world that loves to cut corners and find efficiencies that is not popular. But it is solid, it is safe, and I support many more of them being refurbished, maintained and built in this country despite the cost.

    Advanced CANDU on the other hand, had little in common with CANDU despite the name, and bowed to all of the previously mentioned pressure to cut corners and find efficiencies resulting in a dangerous and ultimately non-viable design that basically killed Canada’s nuclear industry. It was a classic boondoggle, and while I was and am infuriated with the way Harper killed it and put it out of its misery, the real mistake had been pursuing it down that path in the first place which was a decision that came well before his time and was based on global circumstances that made it simply impossible to justify.

    I would love to see even more advanced reactors being researched, designed and built here, modular, pebble bed, sodium, thorium, all of it. But sadly I think that is mostly unrealistic given the current state of our nuclear industry. CANDU is however at least one proven technology that we can and should continue to take advantage of. Even if we will probably never be nuclear leaders again thanks to the mismanagement and sabotage of our nuclear industry, at least we can cling to its legacy.

    • nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      The oldest of the Pickering CANDUs has been running for fifty years, if I’m not mistaken, albeit with some gaps for refurbishment. If that isn’t a safe design, I don’t know what is.

      In other words, I agree, let’s build more of those.

      • Sir_Osis_of_Liver@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’ll repeat a brief history of Pickering:

        At Pickering A plant, two units (A2 &A3) have been decommissioned. Units A1 and A4 were refurbished in the early 2000s. The refurbishments were supposed to cost $670M, but ended up costing over $2B. The 4 units of B plant were commissioned from 1983-1986. They’ve had life extension work to maintain their licensing to continue operations, but they need complete refurbishment or decommissioning. The Ford government has been dragging its feet. If a decision isn’t made soon, the federal regulator will order them shut down.

    • Grimpen
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I know that other countries have created knock-off CANDU reactors, but I’m not sure how much different they are.

      The initial cost of construction for CANDU reactors is higher because of the heavy water requirements as I understand, and that once built the substantially lower fueling costs do have an eventual ROI. Also, the ability to derive power from raw unrefined Uranium allows heavy water reactors to reuse spent fuel from light water reactors. I think this would alleviate some of the (overblown) nuclear waste problems.