Radioative Waste

Radioactive Nuclear Waste (Spent Fuel Rods)

A by product of Nuclear reactors is nuclear waste why don't we construct a propulsive device to be powered by it. Has anyone heard of any research into this?How could the machine be designed?

Could we not dump our nuclear waste on to the MOON or MARS.
Or we could leave it there for storage until it is fully decayed and use space vehicles to transport it back and forth.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Back when they were touting all the wonderful uses of atomic energy I believe they did investigate the propulsive aspect - and decided it wasn't the best idea around, along with using atomic explosions to move earth. Too, too many contamination problems.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

no waste on the moon or somewhere else in universe!!!

It is a shame, we are polluting our own planet, and that is already a shame.
We can't go dumping around some trash in space;

Space has always been some mysterious, a miracle.
Every culture has always admired the moon and the universe at his own way.
When we landed on the moon, we were proud to plant a flag on the moon!! (actually, you were, I liked it more if it was a dutch flag

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

)

And now you want to pollute it...it's the worst thing I can imagine.
We never heve been on mars ourselves, but we want to pollute it already.

It is just like the stupid bush-rocket-shield.

Imagine we find a planet with a life-form, and the first thing we discover is a whole polluted area around it and weapons to kill each other...we won't like it.

Our universe and space must be something where you can look at with admiring of his beauty and without thinking about nuclear waste and war.
Keep it clean.

THANK YOU

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Waste Disposal

Agree with your sentiment, KneD.

But, if it weren't so impractical, would you object to dropping it into the Sun?

 

Glowing in the Dark

I had long thought the best solution to the radioactive problem was just that, drop it ito the sun. Right behind that came the weight and expense problems. If we ever develop a linear accelerator or mass driver that could handle the weight, it would be a fine solution to the problem.

In line with KneD's desire to prevent pollution on a pristine surface (from man's pollution aspect) I have often wondered if leaving trash behind might one day nuture life given a proper enviroment. Wouldn't that be a trip! Some life form figures out it was seeded sometime in the past.

Though most likely, all you would get would be the unforgiving sight of piles of trash as a monument to man's breif presence.

 

Polute or die?

I share the desire to not polute worlds which are not our own, but wonder how many of us would choose society slipping into oblivion as the alternative. Suppose our energy demands continue to grow, environment continues to decline in a uncontrollable downward spiral and humans are faced with a decision: begin lobbing waste into the heavens in a desperate attempt to stabalize the immediate environment, or allow human life to perish.

 

Moon ?

Hi all,

I was lucky enough to visit a nuclear powerplant (on a more or less personalized tour) just a few months ago. The issue of radioactive waste was ofcourse also brought up.

First of all, the reason why sending radioactive waste to the sun (which is ofcourse the best way "to get rid of it") is that several things can go wrong during the launch of the carrier vehicle. I suppose nobody wants to have a glitch somewhere and spray radioactive dust over a large area.

Secondly, the current measures for storing radioactive waste are not that bad after all - the tour included a visit to the bunkers 200 meters underground

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

. Basically radioactive waste is stored in stable underground layers (stable to provent earthquakes or shifting layers to destroy containers), preferably in clay. This is because clay has a very slow migration speed (even if a container would burst open, the radioactive waste would progress to the surface at a speed of 1 cm / year or similar, so it would take a long time to travel those 200m to the surface).

Concerning the nuclear waste problem, this seems to be one of the best alternatives we have on earth...

Bye!

Crisp

 

Yes, I think I could live with the fact of dropping nuclear waste on the sun.
But it is to expensive and dangerous etc. etc.

And about the clay thing...it is a good solution for now, but we should store the waste somewhere else one day when there is no space left under the ground.

I think we could better invest in green-energy instead of nuclear generated energy.

In the Netherlands we can choose our own energy/water company.
Some companies deliver only green-energy, their energy costs a little more, but we have the option!!
And because of this, all companies want to deliver cheap green-energy, so they will go searching for good solutions.
(we can choose on 1-1-2002)

I think that's the perfect solution.
Sorry, it doesn't have anything to do with the topic....

 

NUCLEAR WASTE SOLUTIONS:

The ultimate solution to nuclear waste would be to get cold-fusion to work, but we're decades off. We can't shoot it into space because of expense, right now its about $30,000 per pound to put anything into orbit. That over one thousand times its worth in gold. Expense aside, too dangerous. Though there are few airplane accidents or rockets for that matter one would be too many. God forbid this radioactive waste falls into the Pacific Ocean, there would be a mass extinction and ecological disaster that would make the Exxon Valdez look like a glass of spilled milk on the kitchen floor.

"Treat others as you would want to be treated," -- God