Re: Fw: Russian Waste Repository

[Susan Gawarecki <loc@ICX.NET>]

I've been following the discussion with much interest.  A few

observations of my own:



1. The Russians have a terrible environmental record, and for that

reason alone I would be reluctant to have the world's nuclear waste sent

there.



2. Deep sea burial is a great *idea*, but I think the key technical

problem would be to engineer a container that could withstand the

crushing weight of water at the depths in the trenches.  You especially

would want to prevent premature release of the waste on the way down. 

It's a much more daunting task than most people realize, as the public

would insist on 100% reliability in this regard.  This alone could drive

the cost up too high to make deep ocean disposal cost effective.



3. For long-term use of nuclear power, the US will need to begin

reprocessing waste or breeding fuel.  We can't continue to burn up mined

uranium, as there are limited reserves.  In the long term, it would be

foolish to permanently dispose of our waste in the deep sea or to send

that potentially valuable resource to Russia.



4. With the political change in the Senate, Harry Reid (D-NV) is the new

chair of the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee of the 

Appropriations Committee.  In this position, he can continue to delay,

and possibly kill, the Yucca Mountain project.  Let's get past disposal

as an option and put R&D efforts into clean, safe, and economical

reprocessing for that spent fuel.



My own opinions only,



Susan Gawarecki

--





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

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.