[ RadSafe ] Plutonium from Power Reactors
ograabe at ucdavis.edu
Thu Apr 10 17:04:22 CDT 2008
At 11:23 AM 4/10/2008, Brennan, Mike (DOH) wrote:
>Another factor is ease of separation. It is way easier to separate
>elements than isotopes, which is one of the reasons that Pu-239/240 is
>more widely used in weapons than U-235 (there are other reasons, too).
>There are ways of constructing fuel and designing and operating reactors
>that produce more of the desired Pu isotopes and fewer of the undesired
>isotopes. Commercial reactors, particularly ones that have to be shut
>down to have fuel rods removed from them, and tend to burn the fuel for
>a couple years, produce more of the undesirable Pu isotopes that are
>very difficult to remove from the desirable ones.
April 10, 2008
Electricity of France recycles nuclear fuel. (Apparently "recycle"
sounds more environmentally friendly than "reprocess".) They seem to
have worked out all the problems. Before Jimmy Carter shut down most
of our nuclear programs 30 years ago, we were well on way to
recycling fuel and even having a breeder reactor. Can't we get back on track?
We have plenty of relatively cool old fuel rods being stored at
nuclear plants around the country and I think we should not be
burying them in Yucca Mountain or anywhere else.
In addition to recycling nuclear fuel, I believe that we should be
constructing 400 new nuclear electrical generator stations since
nuclear power is environmentally sound and we need to move away from
With plentiful nuclear electricity we can produce hydrogen by
electrolysis for use in electrical motor vehicles powered by fuel
cells. That will get us off foreign oil and clean up our air
pollution as well.
Sadly, our elected leaders are driven by widespread apprehension
about nuclear power.
Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D., CHP
Center for Health & the Environment
University of California
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
E-Mail: ograabe at ucdavis.edu
Phone: (530) 752-7754 FAX: (530) 758-6140
More information about the RadSafe