![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 3 June 2015. The result of the discussion was keep. |
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. |
Note that the image from the LLNL article could be placed in this article, as S&TR is a government publication. 216.164.138.57 17:24, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
The first New Scientist article says "Alerts will be sent over secure satellite radio channels to the DoE or to an international agency overseeing the reactors." Of course, this presumes the US is the manufacturer. Simesa 08:41, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I just had a little edit-war fight squabble :) with Simesa over how to express the unlikelihood of any country buying this. I have tried to keep it encyclopedic this time. But what I would really like to point out is that the whole idea is ludicrous (instead I now leave it to the readers' imagination to figure that out). Who would buy this? Why would a country want to buy a plant that can be remotely shut down by another country? (it would have to be done from another country, because they're obviously not going to do it themselves) There would have to be considerable advantages to buying it, but none of those are mentioned in the article.
DirkvdM 05:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Information provided in the article is outdated and (now) incorrect. SSTAR now means Small Secure Transportable Autonomous Reactor, and together with STAR-LM and STAR-H2 forms STAR reactors group. Due to this split into three reactors from SSTAR described in the article, parameters of the current SSTAR are different (for example electric power is 20 MW). One can verify this information in IAEA document IAEA-TECDOC-1536 (available online) (for a quick reference - subsection 6.6.6., paragraph under title "Lead cooled small reactors"). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.222.228.65 ( talk) 15:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)