Donna Kat on sun 17 feb 08
People still think of nuclear power as what existed decades ago. We are
now able to keep using (recycling) the nuclear 'waste' until the actual
waste left is too small to be of any more hazard than what is found in
nature. It was actually our cold war treaties that kept us from doing
this earlier. The power plants that they can make today are not dangerous
and with recycling of the fuel there is no boogie man of nuclear waste.
Donna
Steve Slatin on sun 17 feb 08
Jennifer -- Thanks, I hadn't read that article.
Every project has issues; the German
continuous reprocessing facility had a
different set from the French system, etc.
The worst accident to date was at the
Japanese facility, where the process
was so well-designed that it took serious
boneheadedness to create a criticality --
but somehow the workers managed to
do it.
It's always something!
-- Steve Slatin
Jennifer Boyer wrote:
Here's an interesting article outlining the challenges:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891
Clearly it's not so simple....
Jennifer
Steve Slatin --
History teaches us that there have been but few infringements of personal liberty by the state which have not been justified ...
in the name of righteousness and the public good, and few which
have not been directed ... at politically helpless minorities.
-- Harlan Fiske Stone
---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
Steve Slatin on sun 17 feb 08
Donna --
I suspect you are referring to the Argonne recycling
plan? If so, it's interesting and full of promise, but
there are major unresolved issues with it -- among
things already worked out are a superior method
of converting oxides back to metals; among the
things not worked out are the development of the
Gen-4 reactors that will provide neutron bombardment
of the appropriate intensity to alter the most dangerous
isotopes to low-hazard, useful fuel.
We may see some Gen-4's in 2040 or so (the first
our lined out to be built in 2030, and there are always
delays).
-- Steve Slatin
Donna Kat wrote:
People still think of nuclear power as what existed decades ago. We are
now able to keep using (recycling) the nuclear 'waste' until the actual
waste left is too small to be of any more hazard than what is found in
nature. It was actually our cold war treaties that kept us from doing
this earlier. The power plants that they can make today are not dangerous
and with recycling of the fuel there is no boogie man of nuclear waste.
Donna
Steve Slatin --
History teaches us that there have been but few infringements of personal liberty by the state which have not been justified ...
in the name of righteousness and the public good, and few which
have not been directed ... at politically helpless minorities.
-- Harlan Fiske Stone
---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.
Jennifer Boyer on sun 17 feb 08
Here's an interesting article outlining the challenges:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891
Clearly it's not so simple....
Jennifer
On Feb 17, 2008, at 11:31 AM, Steve Slatin wrote:
> Donna --
>
> I suspect you are referring to the Argonne recycling
> plan? If so, it's interesting and full of promise, but
> there are major unresolved issues with it -- among
> things already worked out are a superior method
> of converting oxides back to metals; among the
> things not worked out are the development of the
> Gen-4 reactors that will provide neutron bombardment
> of the appropriate intensity to alter the most dangerous
> isotopes to low-hazard, useful fuel.
>
> We may see some Gen-4's in 2040 or so (the first
> our lined out to be built in 2030, and there are always
> delays).
>
> -- Steve Slatin
>
> Donna Kat wrote:
> People still think of nuclear power as what existed decades ago.
> We are
> now able to keep using (recycling) the nuclear 'waste' until the
> actual
> waste
*****************************
Jennifer Boyer
Thistle Hill Pottery
Montpelier, VT
http://thistlehillpottery.com
*****************************
Craig Rhodes on tue 19 feb 08
And therein lies the most serious problem re: nuclear...Human error. No
matter how safe the plants are touted to be, we can never eliminate the
potential for human error for so dangerous a process.
Also, it bears noting that, contrary to what industry says, nuclear energy
is fossil fuel dependent and as such a significant contributor to greenhouse
gases. I live near the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant at Paducah Ky,
which enriches the uranium used in the nation's nuclear power plants. The
enrichment process requires more electricity daily than the city of St.
Louis and this electricity is produced by huge coal fired plants throughout
the Ohio Valley Region. Most of the greenhouse gases produced in the Ohio
Valley and beyond come from these plants.
And that doesn't even take into account that when CFC's were banned the only
exception was for CFC's produced for the enrichment of uranium. It is
estimated that 95% of the CFC's being produced are a result of enriching
uranium.
When the whole process rather than just the end result involving nuclear
energy is taken into account including the intractable problem of the waste;
the mining of uranium; the timeline and expense for new reactors coming
online as opposed to more viable solutions offered by alternative energies
that are available now...one cannot help but conclude that nuclear power is
obsolete.
Craig
www.jcrhodes.com
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:08:46 -0800, Steve Slatin wrote:
>Jennifer -- Thanks, I hadn't read that article.
> Every project has issues; the German
> continuous reprocessing facility had a
> different set from the French system, etc.
>
> The worst accident to date was at the
> Japanese facility, where the process
> was so well-designed that it took serious
> boneheadedness to create a criticality --
> but somehow the workers managed to
> do it.
>
> It's always something!
>
> -- Steve Slatin
>
>Jennifer Boyer wrote:
> Here's an interesting article outlining the challenges:
>
>http://spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891
>
>Clearly it's not so simple....
>Jennifer
>
>Steve Slatin --
>
>History teaches us that there have been but few infringements of personal
liberty by the state which have not been justified ...
>in the name of righteousness and the public good, and few which
>have not been directed ... at politically helpless minorities.
>-- Harlan Fiske Stone
>
>---------------------------------
>Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>Clayart members may send postings to: clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
>You may look at the archives for the list, post messages, change your
>subscription settings or unsubscribe/leave the list here:
http://www.acers.org/cic/clayart/
>
>Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots2@visi.com
| |
|
