home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: talk.environment
- Path: sparky!uunet!pmafire!russ
- From: russ@pmafire.inel.gov (Russ Brown)
- Message-ID: <1992Dec26.050351.21353@pmafire.inel.gov>
- Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 05:03:51 GMT
- Organization: WINCO
- Subject: Re: Run! I think the Power Plant's Gonna Blow!!
- Summary:
- References: <725228747snx@sound.demon.co.uk>
- Followup-To:
- Distribution: world
- Organization: WINCO
- Keywords:
- Lines: 35
-
- In article <725228747snx@sound.demon.co.uk> Jimgw@sound.demon.co.uk writes:
-
- >
- > I have recently read of a fairly easy way to get rid of radioactive waste
- >permanently, which is in sight of today's technology. All you do is put the
- >waste in an accelerator ring and bombard it. It will then undergo some sort of
- >nuclear reaction - some of it will be turned into more radioactive stuff, but
- >some will be kicked into stable isotopes. You then extract the stable stuff
- >(how? I don't know - but there's sure to be a way) and put the still-
- >radioactive stuff back in the accelerator, to kick it again. That way you
- >transmute the radioactive stuff gradually into harmless isotopes - and it
- >doesn't require any radically new technology.
- >
- Easier said than done. Absorption cross-sections must be considered.
- The radioisotopes will only rarely be found in pure form, and everything
- else gets "in the way". A critical look at this would have to consider
- how much additional waste (from any method of power generation) would be
- generated to eliminate the original waste.
-
- Since safe disposal is not particularly difficult, going through exotic
- contortions may not be justified.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-