Intended start of operation in 2050, followed by approx. 40 years of operation
Good for them, but for a second there I thought that they were developing a nuclear bomb as Russian deterrent.
Storing nuclear waste for decades is bad, even if done safely. That waste still has a lot of energy in it, so burning it in a closed cycle fast neutron reactor would have been a far better option.
Yeah Olkiluoto 3 is delayed for 13 years and simultaneously its price tag has increased from 3.2 billion euro to 8.5. Its successor is Hanhikivi, which is currently being built by Rosatom, a Russian nuclear company that produces nuclear goods such as nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons.
They should go for the nuclear weapon next, one should help them.
5 comments
The German storage for used fuel will take still a very long time (and will be funny when the NIMBY’s will start protesting in the regions that are looked at. The regions so far are still very big [https://www.bge.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Pressemitteilungen/2021/Gebiete_zur_Methodenentwicklung_555x370.jpg](https://www.bge.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Pressemitteilungen/2021/Gebiete_zur_Methodenentwicklung_555x370.jpg) )
Location decision targeted for 2031
​
Intended start of operation in 2050, followed by approx. 40 years of operation
Good for them, but for a second there I thought that they were developing a nuclear bomb as Russian deterrent.
Storing nuclear waste for decades is bad, even if done safely. That waste still has a lot of energy in it, so burning it in a closed cycle fast neutron reactor would have been a far better option.
Yeah Olkiluoto 3 is delayed for 13 years and simultaneously its price tag has increased from 3.2 billion euro to 8.5. Its successor is Hanhikivi, which is currently being built by Rosatom, a Russian nuclear company that produces nuclear goods such as nuclear power plants and nuclear weapons.
They should go for the nuclear weapon next, one should help them.