Comment Re:We are SOO doing this wrong (Score 1) 249
First, new reactors are added regularly to sites. In fact, in america, all of the current construction is doing just that.
Secondly, a number of sites have already Benn decommissioned and were done in less than 10-15 years. For example, ft. St. Vrain along with Zion plant took less than 10 years.
Third, it makes good economic sense to continue the sites with new fail-safe reactors, esp if they can use the 'waste' and convert it into a fraction of volume and years being dangerous.
It is far far better for these companies to keep the sites open, running safe nuclear, while cleaning up the old mess.
In addition, just as we are looking to build new safe reactors, it would be useful to come up with a rail-road based plant that will take the old nuke waste, and convert it into fuel for reactors like transatomic's, or flibe's. Upon converting a bunch, or perhaps all, then the plant is simply moved to another site that is being decommissioned, OR, is itself sent to be decommissioned (too old; better tech; or perhaps just too contaminated).