Plutonium 239 is not waste, it is the main thing that a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant is aiming to extract from the "spent" fuel (which is not in fact totally spent but has to be taken out of the reactor before it distorts or ruptures and can no longer be removed). It is used in new nuclear fuel (or in nuclear weapons, hence Washington's dislike of countries not under its control carrying out nuclear reprocessing). Some other substances, such as americium 241 which is used as an alpha-particle source in domestic smoke alarms, are also extracted. Other substances that are in the spent fuel are also radioactive but have no practical use, and these are the problem waste. I believe that in the long term we must stop using nuclear power, but until then why not use the heat from the radioactive waste for heating homes where the weather can be very cold in winter? This could be by district heating plants that distribute warm water by pipe, or by giving people each a lump of the waste (sufficiently encapsulated to prevent dangerous radiation escaping from it) that will give a few kilowatts of heat for the next few decades. These lumps with their encapsulation would probably weigh some tonnes, so collecting numbers of them for misuse would be impractical. Using the waste in this way would avoid the risk of it being stored or abandoned in a way that could lead to large amounts of it escaping into the general environment, since it becomes something useful that people will lo
Re: nuclear waste
by American Indian on Feb 02, 2013 04:27 AM
Hi Cedric, Your info on nuclear waste composition/reprocessing is fairly accurate, but the sugestion for inhouse heating by nuclear waste is not feasible. Nuclear waste has extremely high radioactivity(and heat) for few days/weeks after coming out of reactor. This cant power household heating for years. Subsequently all highly radioactive elements have decayed off and the longer life products maintain a moderate radioactivity for years/decades. This is enough to be a radiological hazard/risk but not enough to heat houses. Also publicaly distributed nuclear waste can be a security risk despite the shielding. Terrorists can easily strip shielding to steal radioactive cores and use a few of them in a dirty bomb. Our nuclear regulatory authorities are not able to keep track of the radio isotopes in X-ray machines in hospitals(as they are legaly required to). If we start having lots more radioactive material in private houses, tracking theft would be impossible.
Re: nuclear waste
by American Indian on Feb 02, 2013 04:29 AM
Hi Cedric, Your info on nuclear waste composition/reprocessing is fairly accurate, but the sugestion for inhouse heating by nuclear waste is not feasible. Nuclear waste has extremely high radioactivity(and heat) for few days/weeks after coming out of reactor. This cant power household heating for years. Subsequently all highly radioactive elements have decayed off and the longer life products maintain a moderate radioactivity for years/decades. This is enough to be a radiological hazard/risk but not enough to heat houses. Also publicaly distributed nuclear waste can be a security risk despite the shielding. Terrorists can easily strip shielding to steal radioactive cores and use a few of them in a dirty bomb. Our nuclear regulatory authorities are not able to keep track of the radio isotopes in X-ray machines in hospitals(as they are legaly required to). If we start having lots more radioactive material in private houses, tracking theft would be impossible.
Re: nuclear waste
by American Indian on Feb 02, 2013 04:30 AM
Hi Cedric, Your info on nuclear waste composition/reprocessing is fairly accurate, but the sugestion for inhouse heating by nuclear waste is not feasible. Nuclear waste has extremely high radioactivity(and heat) for few days/weeks after coming out of reactor. This cant power household heating for years. Subsequently all highly radioactive elements have decayed off and the longer life products maintain a moderate radioactivity for years/decades. This is enough to be a radiological hazard/risk but not enough to heat houses. Also publicaly distributed nuclear waste can be a security risk despite the shielding. Terrorists can easily strip shielding to steal radioactive cores and use a few of them in a dirty bomb. Our nuclear regulatory authorities are not able to keep track of the radio isotopes in X-ray machines in hospitals(as they are legaly required to). If we start having lots more radioactive material in private houses, tracking theft would be impossible.
Re: nuclear waste
by American Indian on Feb 02, 2013 04:30 AM
Hi Cedric, Your info on nuclear waste composition/reprocessing is fairly accurate, but the sugestion for inhouse heating by nuclear waste is not feasible. Nuclear waste has extremely high radioactivity(and heat) for few days/weeks after coming out of reactor. This cant power household heating for years. Subsequently all highly radioactive elements have decayed off and the longer life products maintain a moderate radioactivity for years/decades. This is enough to be a radiological hazard/risk but not enough to heat houses. Also publicaly distributed nuclear waste can be a security risk despite the shielding. Terrorists can easily strip shielding to steal radioactive cores and use a few of them in a dirty bomb. Our nuclear regulatory authorities are not able to keep track of the radio isotopes in X-ray machines in hospitals(as they are legaly required to). If we start having lots more radioactive material in private houses, tracking theft would be impossible.
