Q-

Thanks for the update you've harvested from NHK News. That's more information than I've been able to find today.

I do owe apologies to several Forum members that I've jumped all over in my hurry to present my new information or point of view. Sandy certainly had a valid point to make about the difference between a nuclear bomb and a nuclear explosion at a power plant. Both would be horrible events but the nuclear bomb is designed to be more devastating.

I'm not sure where they store the "spent nuclear fuel" in the CANDO reactors after it is removed. But it has to be some place that is safe and secure because it remains highly radioactive (as is all high-level nuclear waste) for thousands of years. The advantage of "dry cask storage" that is being using at the old Maine Yankee site is that it's a passive system that requires no liquid coolant. That's not true of the "spent fuel pools" at the Fukushima reactors and that's another reason why units 4, 5 and 6 are of increasing concern.

I'll see what I can find out about spent fuel storage at the LePreau Nuclear Power Plant.

Charley Noble