On 14/08/2019 15:24, Pancho wrote:
On 14/08/2019 15:14, wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 August 2019 15:11:01 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Diversity for its own sake is meaningless. You need to examine how many
single points of failure there are.

and how often it happens

With wind, it is the wind itself.

very frequent

With solar, it is the daylight.

every day

With Hydro, it is the rain

less frequent

With fossil fuel, it is the fuel supply

rarely

There is no single point of failure for nuclear power, except political
interference.

you can stockpileÂ* 100 years of fuel easily and with no huge expense.

A potential single point of failure with nuclear is a flaw to a single
design, requiring shut down for remedial action, due to risk of failure.
Reactor cracks etc.


But it isnt a single point of failure is it?

Reactor crcks are expected and normal and are ultimately what brings a
reactors working life to a close.

You dont shut down a whole fleet just because one is cracjed unless
there is a political fuss kicked up by activists.


This is why earlier posts to the thread advocate multiple reactor designs.

That is a reasonable sane position, but incerases costs.

This risk obviously becomes smaller as the technology matures and hence
becomes better understood.


--
Those who want slavery should have the grace to name it by its proper
name. They must face the full meaning of that which they are advocating
or condoning; the full, exact, specific meaning of collectivism, of its
logical implications, of the principles upon which it is based, and of
the ultimate consequences to which these principles will lead. They must
face it, then decide whether this is what they want or not.

Ayn Rand.