Re: Nukes in Space...

[maury <maury@WEBTEXAS.COM>]

Awwww, Jaro, surely you jest .....    (g)    I can see it now; salem

unplugged has just come unglued like a kid with a new toy - the

prospects of vastly expanded warnings over what mankind (and women, too)

is going to do to the person in the moon. Greenpiece is frantically

cutting down rubber trees to mold their new inflatable (with helium)

interceptors to board (and sink - if they can decide which way is down)

our nuclear trash haulers en route to the sun .... sigh ....

Cheers anyway,.

Maury Siskel   (one elevator too far and a tether too long)

maury@webtexas.com

======================================

"Franta, Jaroslav" wrote:



> Thanks Ruth -- but I think that Norm already explained that he wasn't

> thinking about rocket launches. The idea he did mention - the elevator

> to space - is an old one, perhaps best popularized by the great sci-fi

> author, Arthur C. Clarke (I believe that the elevator manufacturer

> Otis is already hyping this as their long-term goal; see also

> http://www.tethers.com/  for more on a similar, more near-term topic

> ). Needless to say, its a far-future type of concept -- perhaps for

> the 22nd or 23rd centuries (because it requires almost perfectly

> defect-free structural materials, with strength properties close to

> theoretical values). Moreover, it would not be built specifically for

> nuke waste or any other special cargo transport, but for general

> Earth-to-GEO transportation of both people & cargo.But the idea of

> disposing of nuke waste in the Sun is ridiculous for many other

> reasons.Hopefully, by the 22nd or 23rd century people will smarten up

> enough to realise that (or maybe not -- maybe Norm will succeed beyond

> his wildest expectations and people will get more & more paranoid, and

> start shipping to space everything even slightly radioactive --

> including all naturally occurring radioactive materials.... rocks,

> soil, plants, people, the ocean, you name it).Just recently (Nov 16,

> 2001) journalists reported that "Scientists say they've discovered a

> method using nuclear waste to attack cancer cells without harming

> healthy tissue.... Human trials to start in the next few months" ( see

> http://www.cbc.ca/cgi-bin/templates/view.cgi?/news/2001/11/16/cancer011116

> and also http://www.pharmactinium.com/  ).Maybe Norm can tell us all

> which of the many different kinds of isotopes in nuclear "waste" must

> be disposed of, because they will never-ever have any use for humans.

> Failing that, I see no reason to spend gazillions of dollars to

> dispose of it irretrievably.Besides, even if you could get thousands

> of tonnes of the stuff into space in perfect safety, the antis would

> no doubt tell you that it wouldn't actually go INTO the sun, but it

> would vaporise in its super-hot corona or on its surface, and then be

> blown out into space along with the solar wind & contaminate the

> entire solar system and, eventually, all its Galactic neighbours !

> .....quick - get Sternglass or Bertell to calculate the projected

> collective dose to all human & alien species, and calculate a truly

> astronomical number of deaths based on LNT........

>

> Jaro

> -----Original Message-----

> From: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM [mailto:RuthWeiner@AOL.COM]

> Sent: Tuesday December 04, 2001 9:43 AM

> To: ncohen12@HOME.COM; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> Subject: Re: Nukes in Space...

>

> I too am thoroughly sick of this mindless anti-nuke gibberish, but I

> can't resist answering this one.  A small but significant fraction of

> launches intended to go far enough away from the e



------------  snipped  ----------------------------



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

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.