Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Krowbar who wrote (46729)	7/23/1999 10:22:00 PM
From: Jacques Chitte	Respond to of 108807

Low-level waste? Do you mean short half-life waste, like biomedical? This is usually tritium or shorter isotopes. That does not require deep burial. Tanking it for a few decades will do. The real hard nut is high-level transuranics from reactors. These are very radioactive and very persistent. These require some sort of stable deep burial. (The old Soviet Solution of pumping it into the Barents is probably not such a hot idea.) The burial site would need to be "guaranteed" to be solid and dry for (tens of?) thousands of years. The geology of the Nevada test site has been roto-tilled by all those underground tests. So digging around in that terrain would expose the engineers to all sortsa low-to mid-level bomb residue. I wouldn't want to work in all that warm dust; would you? There was once a fellow here called David Chanin. He had lots of knowledge surrounding the nuke waste issue. Too bad I can't pick his brain now. Dave - unlurk?