🚀 go-pugleaf

"Ross Bradley" <ross@tarms.com> wrote:

>Hi,

>After joining this thread (and suggesting the idea of subduction zone
>internment for N waste) I actually got around to doing a web search for the
>idea and found:

>http://www.law.fsu.edu/transnational/issues/7-1/wacz.html

>It appears that the idea of a "torpedo-shaped metal "penetrometers," " has
>been examined already.  The article says that the US dropped funding for the
>study in 1986 due to budget cuts and a leaning towards land based disposal.
>The article also raises the legal implications of this type of disposal
>given current international treaties.

>Anyway... there are very few new ideas.  I suppose that it pays to look (or
>at least search) before putting finger to keyboard.  The questions stills
>remains though.  What are the best ways to store the waste (not in order of
>priority or seriousness).

>1. Dump it in the local land fill.
>2. Dump it in the ocean.
>3. Vitrify and store in a subterranean repository.
>4. Vitrify & dump sub-sea.
>5. Recycle and burn (in the nuclear sense).
>6. Feed it to whales (do whales beach themselves because their bodies have
>an actinite/transuranic deficiency? :-)
>7. Store it above ground in leaky drums.
>8. (This idea from Jerry Pournelle I think - or was it Larry Niven).  Turn
>it into currency.  Then your coins could literally burn a hole in your
>pocket.
>9. Bank on future technology helping out.  We can't easily burn/recycle much
>of the waste now, but in a few decades this may be possible.  Look at
>storage that will last for 100s of years.  Assuming that in the future
>society will be at least technologically advanced as we are then they should
>also be able to store it for 100s of years.
>10. Convert a decommissioned nuclear power plants to storage facilities.
>The containment/reactor buildings should be strong, water-proof and secure
>already.
>11. Decommission the NORAD facility in Colorado (if that's where it is) and
>put the stuff in there.  You already have a big hole in a mountain that
>should be reasonably secure.
>12. Go to an underground nuclear testing site. Drill a hole to where a bomb
>was exploded.  Pour the waste down.  Plug the hole. Forget about it.  The
>site is already hot.  The bomb cavity should be essentially lined with
>glass. It would be very hard for a terrorist to recover any of the material.

>Any other suggestions?

>As I see it, we have (at least) two responsibilites to the future:
>1. Don't leave too big a mess for them to clean up.
>2. Don't deprive them of a potentially valuable resource.  They are going to
>be really pissed off with us that we used all the oil/gas, don't annoy them
>of putting a valuable resource like plutonium where it can't possibly be
>recovered.


>Another question.  How much waste is there to store at the moment? I see
>quotes in the form of '000s tons but can't visualize this.  Assuming average
>density of 1000kg/m^3 (ie water) then 1000 tonne of waste is about 10m^3.
>So, how big is the hole in the Yucca mountains?


The US already has more than 4 times the amount of waste that Yucca
Mountain can store due to thermal limits.