|
|
|
|
|
by atomicalchemy
2636 days ago
|
|
Another thought--one of my biggest challenges with speaking to investors is the fixation on the regulatory process because it can be onerous. Interestingly enough, because this project is much smaller and simpler than a power plant, it is actually a much more straightforward process than it is perceived to be. The NRC has two guides for licensing non-power reactors: NUREG-1537 Parts 1 and 2. Part one lays out the format and information required in a license application, and part two is the review guide that the NRC uses to evaluate the application. So really, all of the questions AND answers are published. A prospective applicant just needs to say what they're doing, show how it meets safety criteria, and prove they're doing what they said they'd do when they build the thing. It's obviously much more complex than that, but that's the gist of it. |
|
* existing facilities
* already funded 50m+
* existing staff
* ironed out ideas
Were unable to get NRC clearance for a variety of things for an extended amount of time. Granted, this was an accelerator based method, not reactor-based. However, this leads me to my second point.
What kind of fuel are you planning on using for these reactors? From my understanding, the NRC has expressed interest in removing reactor-based methods for mediso generation and instead aiming for domestic accelerator-based production. Companies like North Star, Nordion, and the Mallinckrodt nuclear spinoff are aiming for similar goals and seem to have expectations aligned with mine. If it were truly as easy as getting a reactor designed, a couple million dollars, and six years, don't you think these massive DoE/DoD contractors would have done it by now? As you said yourself, the market is limited but the potential for growth is massive if we can get a stable supply.
Again, sorry for all the questions, take the time you need. I don't mean to come off as arrogant or inflammatory, just curious.