How Canada Screwed Over North American Cancer Patients

Started by jimmy olsen, December 13, 2009, 06:41:45 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

saskganesh

Quote from: Barrister on December 14, 2009, 12:41:43 PM
Quote from: saskganesh on December 14, 2009, 12:32:46 PM
Quote from: BVN on December 14, 2009, 03:57:55 AM
It is true that the supply chain of medical isotopes is fragile. There are, IIRC, 5 facilities in the whole world who produce medical isotopes: one in Canada, one in the Netherlands, one in Belgium, one in France and one in South-Africa.

Last year, the one in the Netherlands and the one in Belgium went down for emergency maintenance and as a result there was a severe shortage of isotopes in parts of Europe.

The sensible solution would be to build a few extra reactors and replace the ageing ones.
The Timmay solution: invade Canada and force them to uphold their isotope deliveries.

apparently every single one of those facilities is over 40 years old. if nuclear medicine is useful (and profitable), why can't someone build a new one?

I think you have your answer.  It is enormously useful, but not profitable.

raise prices. insist Tim pay market value.
humans were created in their own image

Neil

Quote from: Grey Fox on December 15, 2009, 01:07:08 PM
The right too.
Yep.  The crazies are up in arms over a nuke plant being built near my wife's hometown.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

Sheilbh

Quote from: KRonn on December 15, 2009, 04:03:05 PM
That appears to be cheap for the US. There's probably more pork spending in many typical dysfunctional Congressional bills.   ;)
But that's still a huge up-front cost for a business to take on (and it probably doesn't include the legal costs of planning applications required to build the thing), which is why I doubt that it could work as a purely private sector project.
Let's bomb Russia!

katmai

Quote from: The Brain on December 15, 2009, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 15, 2009, 02:12:38 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 14, 2009, 11:40:00 PM
I doubt it.  There's no way this could be profitable enough to justify the sheer monumental expense of building and maintaining a nuclear site.
Brain can correct me if he decides to quit sulking in the corner, but medical/research reactors are not the same magnitude and cost as big power plants I believe.

You are correct. I am in no position to estimate the cost of building a completely new reactor for isotope production



Then what the fuck good are you!
Fat, drunk and stupid is no way to go through life, son

The Brain

Quote from: katmai on December 15, 2009, 08:38:03 PM
Quote from: The Brain on December 15, 2009, 02:26:22 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 15, 2009, 02:12:38 PM
Quote from: Sheilbh on December 14, 2009, 11:40:00 PM
I doubt it.  There's no way this could be profitable enough to justify the sheer monumental expense of building and maintaining a nuclear site.
Brain can correct me if he decides to quit sulking in the corner, but medical/research reactors are not the same magnitude and cost as big power plants I believe.

You are correct. I am in no position to estimate the cost of building a completely new reactor for isotope production



Then what the fuck good are you!

I have hidden qualities.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

BVN

Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on December 14, 2009, 03:40:11 PM
Quote from: BVN on December 14, 2009, 03:57:55 AM

The sensible solution would be to build a few extra reactors and replace the ageing ones.

indeed, but then idiots go all "omfg, nucular reactoers are teh evol!!"
Well, maybe it's best then that those people are oblivious to the fact that several universities in our country have experimental reactors and that those facilities are located in urban centers...   :P