You are not logged in.
There is a simple place we can dump our nuclear waste. If it's dumped in a solid mantle the heat should start to reheat the mantle and get it flowing again. A possible place is the asteroid 4 Vesta.
Use what is abundant and build to last
Offline
Like button can go here
There is a simple place we can dump our nuclear waste. If it's dumped in a solid mantle the heat should start to reheat the mantle and get it flowing again. A possible place is the asteroid 4 Vesta.
Vesta the asteroid is only about 300 miles across. A better use of that nuclear waste would be to reprocess it and use it again in nuclear power plants. Rather than throwing it away, the would be the best way to deal with those fuels. We could also use them in different kinds of Breader plants to continue to use those spent fuel a little longer.
Larry,
Offline
Like button can go here
There is a simple place we can dump our nuclear waste. If it's dumped in a solid mantle the heat should start to reheat the mantle and get it flowing again. A possible place is the asteroid 4 Vesta.
It would be cheaper and safer simply to bury it in repositories within the Earth. Most of the highly radioactive fission products have half-lives less than 30 years, so it really isn't difficult to design a repository that will keep them safe for 10 half lives.
Also, the decay heat generated by the waste is far too small to be worth the investment needed to carry it all the way to ceres. If we need a nuclear heat source on Ceres, a small fission reactor would do the job far more effectively.
Offline
Like button can go here
Hi Antius, everyone.
Antius, I agree totally with what you said. There is a further reason why we would not want to ship them to the asteroid belt. They are wildly valuable. Nuclear wastes are filled with rare earths, and material that can be processed (using breeder reactors) into more nuclear fuel.
Assuming humanity does not lose technology, I will bet anyone who cares to, that the nuclear wastes will be dug up within a hundred or two years and USED.
Imagine a fission reactor on Titan. With that giant heat sink, a heat engine will be 80% efficient. Even low grade radioactives will produce plenty of power.
If I had my way, Canada would take responsibility for every gram of nuclear waste on the planet, with the sole proviso that we get ownership of it. Sigh, not likely to happen in the current media climate.
Warm regards, Rick.
Offline
Like button can go here
Hi Antius, everyone.
Antius, I agree totally with what you said. There is a further reason why we would not want to ship them to the asteroid belt. They are wildly valuable. Nuclear wastes are filled with rare earths, and material that can be processed (using breeder reactors) into more nuclear fuel.Assuming humanity does not lose technology, I will bet anyone who cares to, that the nuclear wastes will be dug up within a hundred or two years and USED.
Warm regards, Rick.
This is certainly true of actinides from spent fuel, which is why some countries (France, UK) reprocess spent fuel to recover them. The other part of spent fuel (fission products) are more problematic. The cost and difficulty of dealing with them and their effects is generally out of proportion to the value of any heat that they provide. Also, most fission products decay very rapidly, so it would only be the relatively long lived ones that would be useful in things like RTGs.
The vast bulk of nuclear waste is not spent fuel, but Intermediate Level Waste (such as irradiated materials, fuel cladding, primary circuit components, retired fuel transport flasks, reprocessing equipment, filters, etc) and Low Level Waste, which is everything from contaminated/irradiated concrete to contaminated clothes. Generally we are talking contaminated or irradiated materials rather than concentrated isotopes.
Much of the concern over nuclear wastes is OTT. Firstly, if we do suffer economic collapse and lose all of our technology, nuclear waste will be the least of our concerns. A large part of the population will starve to death and infectuous diseases will be epidemic amongst the weakened population. Secondly, whilst nuclear waste is a toxic material, it is no more toxic than a lot of other things that we produce, like mine talings, lead, mercury, etc. We really do need a more informed and proportionate approach in handling this issue.
Offline
Like button can go here