On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Andy Levy wrote:
>
> On 3/31/06, Michael Maskalans <dml@tepidcola.com> wrote:
> > > by the way, nuclear plants do not give off
> > > ANY radioactive emissions...
> >
> > spent fuel doesn't count? or is it okay just becuase it's sealed up and
> > trucked to the desert?
>
> Garbage isn't spewed into the atmosphere while the fuel is being
> consumed. And the spent fuel is at least containable - it's a messy,
> messy problem to deal with the stuff, but at least it *can* be sealed
> up. But even pebble-bed reactors mitigate this issue, IIRC - the
> individual pebbles aren't terribly problematic, it's just when you
> have them in mass quantities in close quarters.
I'm not anti-nuclear by any stretch. I just don't like the fact that we
don't have a fantastic means of dealing with the waste right now. I
still think it's the best thing going. I was just pointing out that nuke
plants *do* make some unavoidable radioactive byproducts, 'cause they
can't be re-enriched forever.
Heard something interesting from a friend of mine in college - her
professor was saying that if we mixed the nuclear waste into our
nation's pavement, that it would be spread so thin that it would emit
detectable radiation. Haven't looked for any other sources on it, but i
know it was coming from a guy who knows his stuff.
-- +-- Mike Maskalans ---------------- Rochester, NY ----------+ | '98 Dakota CC, SAS on 40s '84 RamCharger 4x4, plow truck | | '02 Jetta TDI 5sp, daily '97 Intrepid, not on the road | +-------------------- <http://mike.tepidcola.com/trucks/> --+. . .------------------------------------------------------------------. | Make your plans NOW to attend the National DML Meet in Colorado! | | Date: July 15-23, 2006 - More info: http://meet.dakota-truck.net | `------------------------------------------------------------------'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 02 2006 - 18:27:16 EDT