[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Cherynobl and groundwater radionuclide transport...
J.R.
Preisig wrote:
Hello radsafers.....
From:
jpreisig@aol.com
<snip>
When compared
to fission, fusion still wins readily. The major
radio-nuclide in
fusion is tritium, with its relatively innocuous half-life
of 12 years.
Maybe George W. should funnel some of the particle-beam
money to
places doing Fusion research, like Princeton U.
<snip>
Well...... When I was a student, there was a bit of folklore
to the effect that nothing works better than a paper
reactor.
With regard to producing electricity day in day out with
Homer Simpson at the controls, fusion is very much a paper
reactor.
It has been twenty years away from engineering
feasibility for 50 years now.
It has been several years since I looked at the issues in any
detail, but I suspect that the inner lining of the plasma
containment vessel still would have to be
replaced fairly frequently (every 2-4 years?) due to activation of its materials
by the 14 Mev neutrons. It might reasonably be described as part of the
"fuel". Of course, it will also have to be disposed of as high/low/some
level of radioactive waste.
I do agree that tritium is about as close to not being
a radionuclide as a radionuclide can get.
Someone more current can correct me, if I'm
wrong.
Best regards.
Jim Dukelow
Pacific Northwest National
Laboratory
Richland, WA
These comments are mine and have not been reviewed
and/or approved by my management or by the U.S. Department of
Energy.