From: Chuck Kuecker (ckuecker@mcs.net)
Date: Wed May 30 2001 - 09:35:22 MDT
Remember the Argonne IFR project! This would have eaten up its' own high
level wastes on site, making the disposal problem a whole lot easier to handle.
As far as environmental dangers go - why is nuclear waste any worse than
hundreds of commonly used industrial chemicals - that if released into the
biosphere, will surely ruin your day, and that of succeeding generations?
Spills of either can be cleaned up with the proper technology. I think that
adding "radioactive" to waste is just pushing a hot button for people
programmed by bad sci-fi movies in the 1950's...
Chuck Kuecker
At 07:21 AM 5/30/01 -0700, you wrote:
> >From: James Rogers <jamesr@best.com>
>
> >I can't really accept the waste disposal problem as an argument
> >against modern fission power, when replacing existing power
> >systems with fission would vastly *reduce* the total amount of
> >radio-isotope waste produced.
>
>My fault for not being clear, I see the problem as a political
>problem as far as the byproducts are concerned. NIMBYISM to be
>specific.
>
>Everyone wants the benefits of nuclear power without the costs
>involved. Placing the reactor as far away from the nearest
>elementary school as possible is preferred. The 91.4-94.5 million
>mile distance to the sun is acceptable for example. Locating a
>nuclear plant outside a biosphere is a good idea.
>
>I agree with the protests we are likely to see from the residents
>of the state of Nevada on this issue.
>
>
>Brian
>
>Member:
>Extropy Institute, www.extropy.org
>Adler Planetarium www.adlerplanetarium.org
>Life Extension Foundation, www.lef.org
>National Rifle Association, www.nra.org, 1.800.672.3888
>Ameritech Data Center Chicago, IL, Local 134 I.B.E.W
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:50 MST