[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GAO Report on Spent Nuclear Fuels
How about: reusable nuclear fuel (rnf)
Maury maury@webtexas.com
================================
"Otto G. Raabe" wrote:
> August 14, 2003
>
> The terminology "spent nuclear fuel" is really misleading to Congress and
> the general public. It sounds as if used fuel is expended and useless. In
> fact, there is as much or more fissile material in used fuel rods as in new
> fuel rods. Most U.S. used nuclear fuel could be re-used without processing
> in a CANDU reactor.
>
> Anyway, the fact that used fuel should be reprocessed is not understood by
> most, especially when it is called "spent nuclear fuel".
>
> Can we change the terminology?
>
> Otto
> **********************************************
> Prof. Otto G. Raabe, Ph.D., CHP
> Center for Health & the Environment
> (Street Address: Bldg. 3792, Old Davis Road)
> University of California, Davis, CA 95616
> E-Mail: ograabe@ucdavis.edu
> Phone: (530) 752-7754 FAX: (530) 758-6140
> ***********************************************
************************************************************************
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.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/