Nuclear waste disposal idea
- Thread starter farmkid
- Start date
Create a Moonbase and store it on the Far side of the moon...
(Hey it kinda worked for these folks..)
http://video.google.com/videosearch?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLR_enUS245US246&q=Space%201999&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv#sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLR_enUS245US246&q=Space%201999&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&start=0
(Hey it kinda worked for these folks..)
http://video.google.com/videosearch?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLR_enUS245US246&q=Space%201999&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv#sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GGLR_enUS245US246&q=Space%201999&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv&start=0
All Seeing Eye
Admiral
Look, dude, if getting it into space wasn't a problem why store it on the Moon instead of shooting it into the Sun?
Look, dude, if getting it into space wasn't a problem why store it on the Moon instead of shooting it into the Sun?
Seriously, it's much more difficult to shoot stuff to the Sun than to the Moon. Hell, it's more difficult to shoot stuff to the Sun than to Pluto, too! When going inward, you have to essentially kill all of Earth's 30 km/s orbital speed, while going outward you only need to add a little bit to it.
The best way to send stuff to the Sun would probably be to rig a sail to it, and tilt it for a slow inward spiral.
Then again, just sending the stuff to empty space and letting it orbit there would be simpler and cheaper. You'd just need to remember where you parked it. Or perhaps not even that. The odds of it hitting anything, or your great-grandchildren hitting it, would be too low to be seriously considered.
Timo Saloniemi
All Seeing Eye
Admiral
Please don't flame me, thanks.
That time he was quoting HAL from 2001.
Are you sure you're a science fiction fan?
All Seeing Eye
Admiral
That time he was quoting HAL from 2001.
Are you sure you're a science fiction fan?
I can't stand that film.
That time he was quoting HAL from 2001.
Are you sure you're a science fiction fan?
I can't stand that film.
Not enough booms?
Stop me if I'm wrong, but aren't there already techniques to transmute uranium into higher elements like plutonium and other elements that don't normally occur naturally? I'm pretty sure this is some kind of fusion-like process (almost certainly endothermic), which is basically the exact opposite of the fission reaction that occurs in the power plants. The fuel elements could probably be "recharged" in such a way; the only thing to figure out is how to make this economical.
Maybe shoot spent fuel rods into space to have them "recharged" in gigantic solar-powered fuel stations? After all a given fuel rod will last five to ten years in a reactor, so I doubt anyone would loose any sleep if the fuel rods spent five or ten years in orbit being recharged from "Waste" back into "fuel."
Maybe shoot spent fuel rods into space to have them "recharged" in gigantic solar-powered fuel stations? After all a given fuel rod will last five to ten years in a reactor, so I doubt anyone would loose any sleep if the fuel rods spent five or ten years in orbit being recharged from "Waste" back into "fuel."
Any disposal involving space would be outrageously expensive. Even worse would be the risk of a spill in the eventually inevitable failure of a launch vehicle.
I do believe there will eventually be some practical and economical use for the higher level waste.
I also believe any effort at encapsulating the higher level waste stands a good chance of deteriorating to the point of leaking before the material decays (radiologically) to the point that it will be safe for ground water to circulate through the containers.
For the reasons above I believe it would be prudent to design a facility where the containers could be monitored over the LONG term so that the containers could be maintained or replaced (probably with remote operated equipment). The ability to easily access the containers would also reduce the risk of any recovery should an economical use for them be developed in the future.
Of couse the containers and storage vault would need some really scary (probably graphical based) language independent markings to make sure nobody tries to handle the stuff that doesn't know about the risks.
I do believe there will eventually be some practical and economical use for the higher level waste.
I also believe any effort at encapsulating the higher level waste stands a good chance of deteriorating to the point of leaking before the material decays (radiologically) to the point that it will be safe for ground water to circulate through the containers.
For the reasons above I believe it would be prudent to design a facility where the containers could be monitored over the LONG term so that the containers could be maintained or replaced (probably with remote operated equipment). The ability to easily access the containers would also reduce the risk of any recovery should an economical use for them be developed in the future.
Of couse the containers and storage vault would need some really scary (probably graphical based) language independent markings to make sure nobody tries to handle the stuff that doesn't know about the risks.
Similar threads
