Re: GEOLOGISTS LEARNING URANIUM CONTAINMENT FROM NATURE

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>]

BEEN THERE , DONE THAT!

    Several years ago, various studies were performed that compared the

relative hazard of a hypothetical underground nuclear waste repositiry with

that of natural uranium ore formations. Generally these studies indicated

that the repository would pose a relatively lower risk than the ore body.

One such study that I conducted was sponsored by DOE/Yucca Mtn. project.

To make a long story short, the study revealed that: [1] The radionuclides

in the spent fuel/waste were significantly less available for dissolution,

release, and migration to the environment than those in natural U ore,

 [2] within a few centuries, the hazard index (inherent radiotoxicity) of

the waste became less that of an equivalent quantity of uranium ore and [3]

in the overall scheme of things, the repository would not pose much of a

problem to the environment or to public health.

Of course, these conclusions were clearly the WRONG answer, since everyone

knows what a horrendous threat nuclear waste is. Accordingly, the results

were

ignored and the study was terminated. Lesson learned: if you want to succeed

in

 government sponsored research, you would do well to find out what the

right answer is before you begin the study.











- ----- Original Message -----

From: Susan Gawarecki <loc@ICX.NET>

To: RADSAFE <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>

Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2001 9:59 AM

Subject: GEOLOGISTS LEARNING URANIUM CONTAINMENT FROM NATURE











************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.



------------------------------