[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: DOE plans to "burn-up" nuclear waste
A couple of years ago the Clinton Administration announced a plan to reduce
of our stockpile of weapons grade Pu partially by using it as fuel for power
reactors. It was barely covered in the media and there wasn't a peep from
the anti crowd. What if a conservative administration had proposed this??
Harry Reynolds
303-966-2708
DP 303-212-5376
130TB #47
Harold.Reynolds@RFETS.gov
> -----Original Message-----
> From: H.B. Knowles [SMTP:hbknowles@hbknowles.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 16, 2000 12:28 PM
> To: Multiple recipients of list
> Subject: Re: DOE plans to "burn-up" nuclear waste
>
> --=====================_5511832==_.ALT
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
> At 07:01 03/14/2000 Tuesday, you wrote:
> >I saw this in passing. It looks like DOE is looking for another mission.
> Can
> >one assume that the politics in the use of plutonium will be a "hurdle?"
> >
> >-- John
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: ArcaMax [mailto:ezines@arcamax.com]
> >Sent: March 14, 2000 12:27 AM
> >To: Jacobus, John (OD)
> >Subject: ArcaMax Science News for March 14, 2000
> >. . .
> >
> > BURNING NEPTUNIUM, AND AMERICIUM, TOO
> > By 2015, according to Los Alamos National Laboratory, the U.S.
> nuclear
> >power industry will have created about 70,000 tons of high-level nuclear
> >waste. One expensive, yet attractive way of treating it would be to
> >transform much of it, using "accelerated transmutation of wastes," or
> ATW.
> >ATW could potentially take that amount of uranium, plutonium, americium,
> >neptunium and curium, and convert it into a small amount that needs
> >disposal, and much more material that is stable. 95 percent of reactor
> >waste is uranium, which does not require long-term storage. Using a
> >waste-burner powered by the plutonium and containing a proton beam, the
> >more radioactive parts of the waste would capture neutrons and be
> converted
> >into stable, non-hazardous materials, the lab says. And the weapons-grade
> >plutonium would be destroyed in the process, too. Los Alamos would like
> to
> >create a prototype facility in the next five years, if cost and other
> >hurdles can be overcome.
> >. . .
> >--
> >Copyright 2000 by United Press International.
> >All rights reserved.
> >--
> >
> >
> >"Man does not live by words alone, despite the fact that sometimes he has
>
> >to eat
> >them. "
> >Adlai Stevenson
> >
> >John Jacobus, MS
> >Health Physicist
> >National Institutes of Health
> >Radiation Safety Branch, Building 21
> >21 Wilson Drive, MSC 6780
> >Bethesda, MD 20892-6780
> >Phone: 301-496-5774 Fax: 301-496-3544
> >jjacobus@exchange.nih.gov (W)
> >jenday1@email.msn.com (H)
> >************************************************************************
> >The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> >information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
>
> The ATW (Accelerator Transmutation of Waste) seems to have caused so much
>
> merriment among people uninformed about it, that a few references to the
> now-ongoing work might help to clear up some misunderstandings.
> First, the idea has been around for a long time: indeed, when
> LANSCE (then called LAMPF) first was turned on in the 1970s, I was only
> one
> of the visiting faculty who tried to promote a few related experiments.
> Second, there was a burst of interest in the mid 1980s, as
> someone
> pointed out. When future waste disposal sites appear to be plentiful and
> cheap, there isn't much enthusiasm for devising a replacement. Moreover,
> the rapid demise of the USSR was not forseen, and the associated need to
> literally destroy a lot of fissile material.
> The current design can be found in a number of documents from Los Alamos
> National Laboratory, in a Report to Congress dated September 1999," A
> roadmap for developing ATW Technology " ( the Accelerator Technology
> section is LA-UR-99-3225; the more comprehensive document is DOE/RW-0519,
> October, 1999; both are available on the web). There are a lot of very
> competent people working on this project.
>
> The present reference design is as follows:
>
> Two (approximately 1 GeV accelerators, probably linear) would
> each
> drive four subcritical assemblies, each of the four at a level of 840 MW
> th. At an assumed thermal-electric efficiency of 0.38, for a total of 2554
>
> MWe of power. The accelerators require a total of 380 MWe to operate, so
> 2174 MWe can be sent to the grid.
>
> For those unfamiliar with recent developments in accelerator technology,
> new designs make it possible to produce and handle beam powers of up to 1
> GWe without excessive component activation (not required here) so the
> major
> technical difficulty is in the design of the "burners" and the
> radiochemistry of the partially transmuted waste. But the idea is not new
> ;
> indeed , when the first model of LAMPF was being designed at Yale
> (1960-64), it was determined that a subcritical assembly could be
> installed at the beam stop that would produce sufficient power to run the
> accelerator (not done because it was obvious that there would be lots of
> cheap electrical power for a long time).
>
> The accelerator structure will cost more than a reactor to do the same
> thing. But it can be built without all the paperwork that a new reactor
> requires (it is not subject to NRC regulation) and onre really can close
> it
> off with a switch. The assemblies will of course remain highly radioactive
>
> but that is what one can expect. It is somewhat surprising that there is
> so
> little enthusiasm shown for this technology.
> H.B. Knowles, PhD, Physics Consulting
> 4030 Hillcrest Rd, El Sobrante, CA 94803
> Phone (510)758-5449
> Fax (510) 758-5508
> hbknowls@ix.netcom.com (until 1/31/00)
> hbknowles@hbknowles.com (new)
> <www.hbknowles.com>
> --=====================_5511832==_.ALT
> Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
>
> <html>
> <font size=3>At 07:01 03/14/2000 Tuesday, you wrote:<br>
> <blockquote type=cite cite>I saw this in passing. It looks like DOE
> is looking for another mission. Can<br>
> one assume that the politics in the use of plutonium will be a
> "hurdle?"<br>
> <br>
> -- John <br>
> <br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: ArcaMax
> [<a href="mailto:ezines@arcamax.com";
> eudora="autourl">mailto:ezines@arcamax.com</a>]
> <br>
> Sent: March 14, 2000 12:27 AM<br>
> To: Jacobus, John (OD)<br>
> Subject: ArcaMax Science News for March 14, 2000<br>
> . . .<br>
> <br>
> BURNING NEPTUNIUM, AND AMERICIUM, TOO<br>
> By 2015, according to Los Alamos National Laboratory, the
> U.S. nuclear <br>
> power industry will have created about 70,000 tons of high-level nuclear
> <br>
> waste. One expensive, yet attractive way of treating it would be to
> <br>
> transform much of it, using "accelerated transmutation of
> wastes," or ATW. <br>
> ATW could potentially take that amount of uranium, plutonium, americium,
> <br>
> neptunium and curium, and convert it into a small amount that needs
> <br>
> disposal, and much more material that is stable. 95 percent of reactor
> <br>
> waste is uranium, which does not require long-term storage. Using a
> <br>
> waste-burner powered by the plutonium and containing a proton beam, the
> <br>
> more radioactive parts of the waste would capture neutrons and be
> converted <br>
> into stable, non-hazardous materials, the lab says. And the weapons-grade
> <br>
> plutonium would be destroyed in the process, too. Los Alamos would like
> to <br>
> create a prototype facility in the next five years, if cost and other
> <br>
> hurdles can be overcome.<br>
> . . .<br>
> --<br>
> Copyright 2000 by United Press International.<br>
> All rights reserved.<br>
> --<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> "Man does not live by words alone, despite the fact that sometimes
> he has to eat<br>
> them. " <br>
> Adlai Stevenson<br>
> <br>
> John Jacobus, MS<br>
> Health Physicist<br>
> National Institutes of Health<br>
> Radiation Safety Branch, Building 21<br>
> 21 Wilson Drive, MSC 6780<br>
> Bethesda, MD 20892-6780<br>
> Phone: 301-496-5774 Fax: 301-496-3544<br>
> jjacobus@exchange.nih.gov (W)<br>
> jenday1@email.msn.com (H)<br>
> ************************************************************************<b
> r>
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and
> subscription<br>
> information can be accessed at
> <a href="http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html";
> eudora="autourl">http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html</a>
> </font></blockquote><br>
> The ATW (<u>A</u>ccelerator <u>T</u>ransmutation of <u>W</u>aste)
> seems to have caused so much merriment among people uninformed about it,
> that a few references to the now-ongoing work might help to clear up some
> misunderstandings.<br>
> <x-tab> </x-tab>First, the
> idea has been around for a long time: indeed, when LANSCE (then called
> LAMPF) first was turned on in the 1970s, I was only one of the visiting
> faculty who tried to promote a few related experiments.<br>
> <x-tab> </x-tab>Second,
> there was a burst of interest in the mid 1980s, as someone pointed out.
> When future waste disposal sites appear to be plentiful and cheap, there
> isn't much enthusiasm for devising a replacement. Moreover, the rapid
> demise of the USSR was not forseen, and the associated need to literally
> destroy a lot of fissile material. <br>
> The current design can be found in a number of documents from Los Alamos
> National Laboratory, in a Report to Congress dated September 1999,"
> <i>A roadmap for developing ATW Technology</i><font size=3> " ( the
> Accelerator Technology section is LA-UR-99-3225; the more comprehensive
> document is DOE/RW-0519, October, 1999; both are available on the web).
> There are a lot of very competent people working on this project.<br>
> <br>
> The present reference design is as follows:<br>
> <br>
> <x-tab> </x-tab>Two
> (approximately 1 GeV accelerators, probably linear) would each drive four
> subcritical assemblies, each of the four at a level of 840 MW th. At
> an assumed thermal-electric efficiency of 0.38, for a total of 2554 MWe of
> power. The accelerators require a total of 380 MWe to operate, so 2174 MWe
> can be sent to the grid. <br>
> <br>
> For those unfamiliar with recent developments in accelerator technology,
> new designs make it possible to produce and handle beam powers of up to 1
> GWe without excessive component activation (not required here) so the
> major technical difficulty is in the design of the "burners" and
> the radiochemistry of the partially transmuted waste. But the idea is not
> new ; indeed , when the first model of LAMPF was being designed at Yale
> (1960-64), it was determined that a subcritical assembly could be
> installed at the beam stop that would produce sufficient power to run the
> accelerator (not done because it was obvious that there would be lots of
> cheap electrical power for a long time).<br>
> <br>
> The accelerator structure will cost more than a reactor to do the same
> thing. But it can be built without all the paperwork that a new reactor
> requires (it is not subject to NRC regulation) and onre really can close
> it off with a switch. The assemblies will of course remain highly
> radioactive but that is what one can expect. It is somewhat surprising
> that there is so little enthusiasm shown for this technology.</font><br>
> <div>H.B. Knowles, PhD, Physics Consulting</div>
> <div>4030 Hillcrest Rd, El Sobrante, CA 94803</div>
> <div>Phone (510)758-5449</div>
> <div>Fax (510) 758-5508</div>
> <div>hbknowls@ix.netcom.com (until 1/31/00)</div>
> <div>hbknowles@hbknowles.com (new)</div>
> <<a href="http://www.hbknowles.com/";
> EUDORA=AUTOURL>www.hbknowles.com</a>>
> </html>
>
> --=====================_5511832==_.ALT--
>
> ************************************************************************
> The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
> information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html