We are not disagreeing. I agree 100% that if it is more viable...

We are not disagreeing. I agree 100% that if it is more viable for the energy production process (including waste disposal) to build PRISM style reactors only, that is what they will do. I am simply highlighting that there is a case that they may continue to build both similar to what is happening in China now by building a number of LWR as the cheaper / simple power generation AND build CANDU reactors to use the waste of teh LWR. The model I am suggesting is already being rolled out there. Now PRISM may be more efficent than the LWR to completely negate the need for them (I simply don't know if that is the case). The reason however that China are building both LWR and CANDU is that one is cheaper / simpler for power generation and that other (whilst still producing power) has the purpose to treat waste (it is a system).  

To assist my explanation please see the below link of the combined use of LWR and CANDU in China.

"But Candu has been tweaking the reactors at Qinshan so they can recycle the spent fuel from China’s light water reactors.
“The more light water reactors they build, the more fuel there is to recycle through Candu,” Hopwood said in an interview Tuesday. “That’s why we see such a huge opportunity in China.”

China currently has 21 light-water reactors, and could double that number over the next 20 years, he said.
“The ideal ratio is about one Candu reactor to every four light water reactors,” he said. “We see the potential for a significant fleet of Candus in China.”

http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/04/08/candu_energy_seeks_to_be_nuclear_blue_box.html

See the above however replace CANDU with PRISM is what I am talking about. I hope that better explains what I am referring to you Big Moose*

*said in an endearing, tongue in cheek way

I am the Iceman!