[ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste

Sat Oct 23 16:44:13 CDT 2010

Jeff

Does this mean that the Hanford reactors were not related to the US defence?

John
***************
John R Johnson, PhD
CEO, IDIAS, Inc.
4535 West 9th Ave
Vancouver, B. C.
V6R 2E2, Canada
idias at interchange.ubc.ca

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Terry" <terryj at iit.edu>
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List" 
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste

> Hi Ed,
>
> WIPP accepts both contact handled and remote handled transuranic waste, 
> CH-TRU and RH-TRU, respectively.
>
> The plans for Hanford RH-TRU can be seen here:
>
> http://www.osti.gov/bridge/purl.cover.jsp;jsessionid=5022E8B898D9D609ECB173EDE4409D3E?purl=/805932-OyglGi/native/
>
> Any waste that meets the TRU requirements from a defense related source 
> can be disposed of in WIPP.
>
> Spent fuel from the Hanford reactors cannot currently be disposed of in 
> WIPP.
>
> Jeff
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Oct 23, 2010, at 5:52 PM, Edmond Baratta <edmond0033 at comcast.net> 
> wrote:
>
>> Dan:
>>
>> That's good to hear.  Will they accept waste from Washington (Hanford) 
>> and the reactors?
>>
>>
>> Ed Baratta
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Dan W McCarn" <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
>> Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 10:23 AM
>> To: "'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) 
>> MailingList'" <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>; "'Jerry Cohen'" 
>> <jjcohen at prodigy.net>
>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste
>>
>>> Dear Ed:
>>>
>>> I assure you, the WIPP receives shipments of transuranic waste all the 
>>> time!
>>>
>>> Dan ii
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dan W McCarn, Geologist
>>> 108 Sherwood Blvd
>>> Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
>>> +1-505-672-2014 (Home - New Mexico)
>>> +1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
>>> HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Edmond Baratta
>>> Sent: Saturday, October 23, 2010 12:49
>>> To: 'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) 
>>> MailingList';
>>> 'Jerry Cohen'
>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste
>>>
>>> Dear Colleagues:
>>>
>>> The idea to dump radioactive waste in the ocean was tried once and was a
>>> disaster.  The waste was dumped in Boston harbor, New Jersey and San
>>> Francisco.  Eventually the containers rusted away.  The waste was at 
>>> that
>>> time 'Low-level' radioactive waste.  We spent billions on WIPP and Yucca
>>> Mountain and now the government refuses to use them.  Meanwhile the 
>>> waste is
>>>
>>> held at the reactor sites, National Laboratories namely Washington 
>>> State.
>>> When will the politicians come to their senses.
>>>
>>> Ed Baratta
>>> edmond0033 at comcast.net
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------
>>> From: "Dan W McCarn" <hotgreenchile at gmail.com>
>>> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 7:45 PM
>>> To: "'The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) 
>>> MailingList'"
>>> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>; "'Jerry Cohen'" <jjcohen at prodigy.net>
>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste
>>>
>>>> Dear Group:
>>>>
>>>> Since I worked on both WIPP and Yucca Mountain, I'll put in my two 
>>>> cents.
>>>>
>>>> The difference between geologic vs. oceanic disposal is simple: For the
>>>> first 100+ years, the geologic repository is retrievable storage 
>>>> whereas
>>>> oceanic disposal is not.
>>>>
>>>> At-Reactor storage is only feasible to a point. If ultimately fuel is
>>>> reprocessed, then perhaps the only additional "storage" needed is
>>>> retrievable.
>>>>
>>>> Dan ii
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Dan W McCarn, Geologist
>>>> 108 Sherwood Blvd
>>>> Los Alamos, NM 87544-3425
>>>> +1-505-672-2014 (Home - New Mexico)
>>>> +1-505-670-8123 (Mobile - New Mexico)
>>>> HotGreenChile at gmail.com (Private email) HotGreenChile at gmail dot com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>>>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jim Darrough
>>>> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 15:55
>>>> To: 'Jerry Cohen'; 'The International Radiation Protection (Health
>>>> Physics)Mailing List'
>>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste
>>>>
>>>> Uranium is cheap to mine, and plentiful.
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
>>>> [mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Jerry Cohen
>>>> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 1:16 PM
>>>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing 
>>>> List
>>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste
>>>>
>>>> George,
>>>>   You are right on! Why do we continue to pursue  the dumb idea of
>>>> geologic disposal of nuclear waste? Because, as Willie Sutton put
>>>> it--Thats
>>>> where the money is! Many billions of dollars have already been 
>>>> squandered
>>>> on
>>>> the concept of geologic disposal--and the scam will likely continue 
>>>> until
>>>> whenever the money runs out. Nobody want the kill the goose that lays 
>>>> the
>>>> golden eggs.
>>>>   Oceanic disposal would simply be too inexpensive, safe,and easy for
>>>> anybody to exploit.
>>>>
>>>> Jerry Cohen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________
>>>> From: George Stanford <gstanford at aya.yale.edu>
>>>> To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing 
>>>> List
>>>> <radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
>>>> Sent: Thu, October 21, 2010 11:35:04 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Subduction Zones and Nuclear Waste
>>>>
>>>> Joe:
>>>>
>>>>   Here are some thoughts for your consideration.
>>>>
>>>>   If the "nuclear waste" consists of used fuel from thermal reactors,
>>>> deep-sea disposal is indeed a bad idea -- not because of the
>>>> radioactivity,
>>>> but because only 5% of the fuel's energy (or much less, in the case of
>>>> HWRs)
>>>> has been used, and it would be expensive to try to retrieve it.  Much
>>>> better
>>>> to put it in retrievable storage in Yucca Mountain, so that its uranium
>>>> and
>>>> fissile material
>>>> (plutonium) will be available for when fast reactors are to be started 
>>>> up
>>>> (eventually doing away with uranium mining for centuries, and with
>>>> milling,
>>>> and enrichment of uranium forever).
>>>>
>>>>   But it's a different kettle of fish if the waste consists largely of
>>>> unwanted fission products (many of which have commercial value).
>>>> I'm not qualified to say whether you're right or wrong about the
>>>> subduction
>>>> angle, but I'll point out that it doesn't matter - for two reasons.
>>>> First, the waste, packaged in suitable containers, can be dropped where 
>>>> it
>>>> will bury itself in the silt, where it will sit undisturbed for many
>>>> millennia, constituting less of an insult to the biosphere than just 
>>>> about
>>>> any other human activity you care to name.
>>>>
>>>>   Suppose, however, the waste were to start to dissolve in the sea 
>>>> water
>>>> almost immediately (which it wouldn't).  Remember that the oceans are
>>>> already appreciably radioactive (K-40, mainly).
>>>> If you do the calculation, you find that, with reasonable dispersal of 
>>>> the
>>>> waste canisters, the increment to the oceans' radioactivity would be
>>>> utterly
>>>> inconsequential.
>>>>
>>>>   Why is this not taken seriously?  Because it's so cheap that there's 
>>>> no
>>>> money to be made from it, so there's no lobby for it.  The opposition
>>>> comes
>>>> from an unholy alliance of uninformed environmentalists and interests 
>>>> that
>>>> want to be paid for researching and developing various expensive 
>>>> methods
>>>> of
>>>> land disposal.
>>>>
>>>>   -- George Stanford
>>>>       Reactor physicist, retired.
>>>>
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
>>>> the
>>>> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>>>
>>>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>>>> visit:
>>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
>>>> the
>>>> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>>>
>>>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>>>> visit:
>>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
>>>> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>>>
>>>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
>>>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>>
>>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
>>> the
>>> RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>>
>>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>>> visit:
>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>>
>>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
>>> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>>
>>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
>> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu 