Re: What Should We Do With Plutonium Once Nuclear Weapons Are

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@prodigy.net>]

Pam,
    Logically, you are correct.
    However, in the world of politics (where decisions are made), Plutonium
is EVIL, and must therefore be destroyed.


-----Original Message-----
From: Pambo1@aol.com <Pambo1@aol.com>
To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
Date: Thursday, August 10, 2000 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: What Should We Do With Plutonium Once Nuclear Weapons Are


>That is exactly what was proposed (making MOX with the plutonium) in a
report
>(Reactor Alternative Summary Report) for which I was the lead editor of
Vol.
>1 in 1996.  Vol. 1 explored the alternative of using existing light water
>reactors in the U.S. and was published by Lockheed Martin Energy Systems
for
>DOE.  The authors of Vol. 1 were S. R. Greene and B. B. Bevard.  (If you
>search on "Reactor Alternative Summary Report" at northernlight.com, hit
no.
>3 is the document I'm talking about.)
>
>The idea made sense to me:  considering all the time, money, and human cost
>that went into this plutonium, why not convert it to a form that would make
>it less of a security risk and then put it to some good use?  The chief
>problem is that I do not trust DOE and its contractors to design and manage
>such an operation.  For that matter, who CAN we trust to do it?
>
>Pam Gillis Watson
>DOE subcontractor worker
>Oak Ridge, TN
>************************************************************************
>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