Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: a nuclear energy topic



Hi all-
**********************************************************
Burying spent nuclear fuel underground is the national policy of all
coutries; it was considered "the best possible" solution about ten years
ago. In addition, reprocessing of spent fuel from civilian reactors, as far
as I know, is still illegal in the U.S. (Since 1977, President Carter). Los
Alamos scientists (as well as those from CERN and from JAERI) argue that
what used to be reasonable is no longer "the best possible appraoch". But
they will not be able to accomplish anything without financial and moral
support. The current administration is not promoting new nuclear technology.
Look what happened to IFR (Intergral Fast Reactor); the project was killed
on September 29, 1994. Why?

Ludwik Kowalski
*************************************
According to the Los Alamos guy who spoke at Argonne (last year, I
think it was), the "accelerator" idea for converting nuclear waste is essentially
an IFR under a politically correct name. Processing the waste to get into the
"accelerator" (to grossly oversimplify the process) is non-simple. I don't think
that there is unanimity as to a "best" solution, although Garwin, as I recall, is
a major and influential supporter of burial.
I can best sum the present concensus of all sides as:
1. Nothing is simple.
2. There ain't no free lunch.
I add my own:
There's no black-hat conspiracy.
Regards,
Jack