🚀 go-pugleaf

Hi,

During WWII a bomb called 'GrandSlam' was designed by Barnes Wallis.
Basically a 10 ton bomb constructed to penetrate 20+ feet of concrete.
So.... resurect the design.  Instead of explosive insert a few ton of waste
and drop it in very deep water (several km) with a muddy bottom.  Assuming
that it can be aerodynamically (or is that hydrodynamically) designed it may
be possible that it could get up enough speed to safetly bury itself in the
sea floor.

BTW.  I'm not serious about this sort of disposal.  I think that plutonium
should be viewed as the sort of stuff that you get rid of when you clean out
your house.  You find a need for it the next day :-)


Bullwinkle J. Moose <mcx2@tcac.net> wrote in message
news:39186F24.9D1EBB6A@tcac.net...
> The bigest technical dificulty to overcome would be how to place a large
object
> very deep with in a subduction zone.  A potential asset would be that the
> devivery vehicle could be thought of as 'disposable', so if the journy
eventualy
> destroyed the vehicle, that would not be a prolem.  If some sort of
'motor' or
> engin could be devised, that were in some way powered by water pressure,
so that
> going deeper would inturn propel the vehicle further, a sort of
sub-oceanic
> ramjet, it would be possible to get the object sufficently deep (several
> kilometers).  At this depth, it is concivable that the surounding water
would
> never come with in so much as a kilometer or two of the surface.  Flow
paterns
> of water at extreme depths would need to be studied to ensure this.  If,
infact
> the water at such depths esential stays there, then it would be practicle
to
> deposit nuclear waste there.  Security would be provided by placeing the
> material so deep, that it would be imposible to retreave.  It is a ideal
> soloution, and a friendly one, as it is in effect placeing the material in
as
> close to a natural habitat as radioactive material has available.
>
>
> indigo wrote:
>
> > --
> >
> > "Ross Bradley" <ross@tarms.com> wrote in message
> > news:957754941.595999@server.tarms.com...
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > A similar idea, but use a former uranium mine as the repository.  Bind
the
> > > waste into a glass/ceramic base (e.g.. Synrock (sp?)) and inter it at
the
> > ex
> > > mine.  If it is diluted enough with the binding agent then the waste
could
> > > actually be less radioactive than the extracted ore, i.e. the dump
would
> > > actually reduce the amount of radiation in the environment.  Also if
> > > plutonium (half life 24,000 years?) and replaced the U238 (half life
4.3
> > > billion years?) then you could argue that the site would be safer
sooner
> > > :-).
> > >
> > > How fast to sub-sea subduction zones (if that is the correct term)
move.
> > > i.e. drum of waste was buried where one part of the crust moves under
> > > another part a few km underwater, how long would it take the waste to
move
> > > under the crust.  For that matter, aren't most sub-sea oil wells
stable?
> > If
> > > they weren't stable for a geological age then the oil would leak out.
> >
> > The idea of using subduction zones has been well studied. It would be
> > impossible to implement (my opinion) because of environmental concerns,
even
> > though it is near/at the top of the methods for permanent disposal.
>