Talk:Advanced reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel

Energy Low‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

comments[edit]

Hello! After reading your article, I have two comments that I can't fix in the text itself:

Sometimes, Pu and U are used to denote the elements, sometimes they are spelled out completely (plutonium, uranium). Is there a reasin for the different spellings? If not, maybe it can be made consistent throughout the article
Especially towards the end of the article, it gets really to understand the content of the page. I understand that comes from the fact that I don't know anything about the topic, but maybe some introductory sentences or parts could be added that describe the processes/advantages/disadvantages in laments terms.

Have a nice weekend! --Brattak27 (talk) 14:07, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review Comments[edit]

Overall, I think this article is very good. My knowledge of nuclear topic is amateur level, but even then I could understand most if not all of it. Really good job. Here are some ideas for improvements:

In the intro, the "potential key" phrase is a bit loaded... I would replace it with something more neutral, like "The advanced reproc. of sp. nucl. fuel is a technique that was proposed by <such and such> in year <such and such>...". Apart from that, though, the article does a really good job with the neutral POV, at least IMHO.
The sentence at the beginning of Managing spent nuclear fuel, where you give some numbers from the IAEA report, is not clear.
- What does it mean that spent nuclear fuel is discharged? Where it is discharged? When I think of "discharging" I think "discharging in the environment", and I'm pretty sure that's not what's happening :D
- Where is the inventory being stored? I assume in spent fuel pools at the power plants themselves, but it's not specified.
- Why are these numbers relevant? Put them in a larger picture, describing a trend (like "spent nuclear fueld continues to be produced but nobody is properly handling it" -- do not paste in this sentence it's too colloquial). Then you can use the numbers to back up the fact that there is a trend.
Do not fall to the temptation of the acronyms :D I know re-writing Spent Nuclear Fueld every time is tedious, but if the reader is not a nuclear scientist or engineer the fact that SNF means "Spent Nuclear Fuel", or that HLW means "high level waste" does not come natural and makes the article harder to read.
The table about composition of SNF is pretty but I don't get why it is there...
The paragraphs in the rest of the article tend to be really long. Break them up a bit.

Overall, nice work! Daniele3cattaneo (talk) 15:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Observations and suggestions for improvements[edit]

The following observations and suggestions for improvements were collected, following expert review of the article within the Science, Tecnology, Society and Wikipedia course at the Politecnico di Milano, in June 2020.

Mention some ongoing European and international projects on P&T, e.g., where you says ""The recent joint research projects"" ...
Add the following books among the references, where several chapters of interest, written by renowned experts in the sector, can be found on the same topic:
- K.D. Kok, Nuclear Engineering Handbook, Taylor & Francis, 2009.
- D.G. Cacuci (Ed.), Handbook of Nuclear Engineering, vol. 5, Springer, 2010.
- I. Crossland (Ed.), Nuclear fuel cycle science and engineering, Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2012.
- R.J.M. Konings (Ed.), Comprehensive Nuclear Materials, vol. 5, Elsevier, 2012.
Indicate the source of the figures and tables in the relative captions.
Check if all acronyms are defined: for example, SNF (spent nuclear fuel) is not defined in the body of the text.
Fix in the text:
- "Which inclusion in an advanced closed fuel cycle could lead" ----> "whose inclusion ……"
- Time-resolved fluorescence spectroscopy (TRLFS) ----> Time-resolved laser fluorescence spectroscopy (TRLFS) Gmrozz (talk) 10:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this a separate article?[edit]

Can someone explain why this shouldn't just be merged into Nuclear reprocessing? PianoDan (talk) 17:41, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]