Why did the US abandon a lead in reactor design?
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/news/10.1063/PT.5.2029
n proof of loss of lead, the vast ground too bee overcome, the difficulty wit regulators, etc. Is summed up inn the pargraph:
Development is restarting on reactor designs that were mothballed by Shaw's decision nearly 50 years ago. Thorium, liquid-salt-fueled, and liquid-metal-cooled reactors are being considered by the national labs, some universities, and startup firms. So too are more innovative, safer versions of light water reactors. None of those designs can be expected to come into use for a decade or more. Corporate research will be very focused, and we cannot expect that safety issues will be a primary consideration. Contrary to claims by some promoters of the new designs, experiments conducted through the 1960s are barely proof of concept. Regulations and available technology have changed too much for the earlier data to be reliable.
a lass....
I like the mentioning of the USS Seawolf (SSN-575). My great-uncle was on the USS Seawolf (SS-197) during WWII, now on eternal patrol.