Comments on: Well, this could get awkward: Liveblogging MDS Nordion at Natural Resources

By: Maria Cziraky

Maria Cziraky — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:04:03 +0000

MDS "s objective was to corner the isotope market – with expenses billed to the Canadian taxpayers and profits to the corporate elite – a la Enron etc – except this one even has a Russian connection . So they cry crocodile tears on television over the fate of the cancer patiens while suing them for one and a half billion dollars of lost profits! And trying to bully the goverment into exposing the country to flaved and potentially fatal technology.Nice work if you can get it!

By: Wascally Wabbit

Wascally Wabbit — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:57:52 +0000

In an interview on CBC Radio's As It Happens – West made some interesting statements..
To be taken with a lot of scepticism because of MDS' involvement – he reckons that experts have told him that the core in the Maple Reactors could be replaced – at a cost of $10's of millions – NOT EVEN hundreds of millions – because of all the sunk funds in the infrastructure that is in place already. Time line also short a year or two.

He contrasts that with starting with a new reactor – in the billions of dollars – and time line from 8-12 years.

By: Harbles

Harbles — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:59:13 +0000

There is good item at CBC on this.

By: Harbles

Harbles — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 21:26:14 +0000

Problem being HEU is a prime target for terrorist types to acquire. This is also the problem with MOX (mixed oxide reactor fuel). The link is about a program to test mox using decommissioned Russian bomb plutonium. You have to transport the stuff around with all the inherent risks.

By: austinso

austinso — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:53:36 +0000

Clearly, if Maple goes back on line, it would pay the salaries of West and MDS for a few…decades…? So yeah…I can see why it is such a good idea for them…

I suppose they could use the funds that they would sink into restarting the MAPLE reactors into building a gia-normous cyclotron like was planned a number of years way back if I recall correctly…

By: IanBC

IanBC — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:49:48 +0000

To be honest, if there is going to be highly-enriched uranium anywhere in the world I'm happy for it to be in Canada. CANDU reactors can take uranium (and plutonium I believe) and make electricity and isotopes. So that would actually assist in non-proliferation, wouldn't it? You have to do something with those old bombs – this way you might argue they're helping to save lives.

By: Harbles

Harbles — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:25:39 +0000

Another factor is nuclear non proliferation. The targets that are irradiated to make moly-99 are highly enriched uranium (~90%) which is the stuff that's relatively easy to make a bomb out of. There are proposals to use low enrichment uranium targets but they are only used in Argentina and Australia at the moment. I don't think the NRU design could use LEU targets but it has been proposed that Maple could be modified to use LEU targets.

By: M_A_N

M_A_N — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:23:55 +0000

Careful out there, liveblogger…protractors can hurt…

By: Harbles

Harbles — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:22:16 +0000

By: Geiseric

Geiseric — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:12:43 +0000

These guys are way too civilized. Can we get Baird to make a cameo just to perk things up?

By: Harbles

Harbles — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:08:54 +0000

The problem with the reactivity is that no one understands why it is not what was predicted. The design and simulations said slightly negative and the tests came back slightly positive. They sent the design plans to a bunch of nuclear boffins in the States and elswhere and they agreed that the design should have a negative coefficient and have no clue why it is not. Reactors can operate with a positive coefficient of reactivity if the control system is up to the task but passive control is always better if the control system malfunctions. Chernobyl's graphite reactors had a positive coefficient of reactivity.

By: Bonnie N

Bonnie N — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:06:12 +0000

Oh for heaven's sake…

Just build a reactor based on the NRU. It lasted 50 years.

Don't build a Ferrari when all you need is a Honda Civic.

By: Harbles

Harbles — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:00:13 +0000

The Triumf proposal involves using a linear accelerator to produce moly-99 instead of a reactor. Nordion and Triumf have also recently agreed to collaborate on finding new diagnostic agents.

By: IanBC

IanBC — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:57:57 +0000

TRIUMF? Perhaps the particle accelerator at UBC: http://www.triumf.ca/research-highlights/experime... I don't know how scalable it is but using an accelerator to make Mo99, instead of a fission reactor, might be more palatable for a lot of reasons.