Re: LLW status according to AP: a fair

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Franz, and all,

Bernie's point was "the best way". It's irrelevant whether some Luddite "Flat
Earth Society" wrote some ignorant piece of paper. Any piece of paper that's
contrary to physics and reason can be changed by people who know better;
physics however... :-) 

Consider the radioactivity released from deep-sea "blacksmoker" hydrothermal
vents? From volcanics? What about ground water that discharges massively more
radioactivity than released by all the rivers? 

If anybody gave a damn beyond making $$ on sticking the costs to the
public.....   Now let's see, who wrote the "London Convention"??  What's the
cash flow caused by NOT disposing of wastes in the ocean??  Who's getting it?? 
 Maybe they weren't so "stupid" after all...  ("Don't throw me in that brier
patch Bre'r Fox!") 

Thanks.

Regards, Jim Muckerheide
jmuckerheide@delphi.com
=====================

> Schoenhofer
> Habichergasse 31/7
> A-1160 Wien
> AUSTRIA
> Tel./Fax: +43-1-4955308
> Mobiltel.: +43-664-3380333
> e-mail: schoenho@via.at
> 
> > Bernard Cohen stated:
> > 
> > > Is there any chance of going back to ocean dumping? That is
> > > really the best way. If you need technical back-up on this, let me
> know.
> > 
> > While this option is probably the most realistic choice, for many 
> > applications, I seriously doubt that we will ever see this option 
> > allowed. ---------------------------------------
> 
> There is an international convention ("The London Convention"), which
> forbids ocean dumping. Unfortunately I cannot provide you with details, but
> I guess there could be information available from the IAEA.
> 
> Whether it makes sense or not, is a good way or not - it is forbidden by
> this convention.
> 
> Franz