[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/