[cyberax]

So it's a regular reactor BUT IN A MINESHAFT!! The reactors yearn for the mines!

It's even _more_ stupid!

[UltraSane]

No. Being at the bottom of a mile deep hole in bedrock makes a very effective isolation.

[cyberax]

Isolation from _what_? If you reactor melts down, it will contaminate the water column above it. And by having it inside the shaft, you won't be able to do any maintenance on it.

It's a stupid idea designed to filter out investors who are stupid enough to fall for it.

[consensus1]

How does your reactor melt down if it is submerged in coolant?

[cyberax]

It boils off the coolant, creating a vapor lock, then water-zirconium reaction happens. Then it explodes and ruins the shaft. So you'll have to drill a rescue well, and then defuel the reactor to avoid any possible contamination.

Again, this is a monumentally stupid idea for no reason whatsoever.

And modern reactors are already passively safe. Even if the core melts down, it'll be contained in a core catcher: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Core_catcher

[consensus1]

It boils off a 1 mile deep water column? And you don't need a core catcher when you are already 1 mile deep in bedrock. It just goes to the bottom of the hole.

[cyberax]

> It boils off a 1 mile deep water column?

Yes?

> And you don't need a core catcher when you are already 1 mile deep in bedrock.

Yes, you do. Because if the shaft explodes or gets blocked near the top, the fission products can travel up the water column.

[UltraSane]

actually you just pump the water into a tank. You can also pull the reactor up on a cable if needed.