From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,60e2922351e0e780 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-11-17 15:33:29 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail From: dmytrylavrov@fsmail.net (Dmytry Lavrov) Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: OT: Nuclear Waste (Was Re-Marketing Ada) Date: 17 Nov 2003 15:33:28 -0800 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <49cbf610.0311171533.2324e885@posting.google.com> References: <3FB22125.1040807@noplace.com> <3FB3751D.5090809@noplace.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.248.15.75 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: posting.google.com 1069112009 3247 127.0.0.1 (17 Nov 2003 23:33:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:33:29 +0000 (UTC) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:2598 Date: 2003-11-17T15:33:28-08:00 List-Id: Jeffrey Carter wrote in message news:... > Warren W. Gay VE3WWG wrote: > > > There are pools all over the place just gathering more nuclear > > waste. They keep gathering it, leaving it to the next generation > > to figure out what to do with it. I think this is criminal. What > > active research has there been to deal with the problem? How much > > do they spend each year in working on this problem? Where are the > > results? > > > > Don't be fooled. The next generations will be the ones stuck with > > the problem and the economic costs of dealing with it. > > In the 1850s, distilling petroleum to make kerosene for lamps produced a > volatile, highly flammable, undesirable waste product that was burned > immediately because it was good for nothing. Today we call that waste > product gasoline (or petrol) and use it to power our vehicles. What > makes you think that nuclear waste is any different? We have no use for > it today, but it may be very valuable in 100 years. 100 years? Idiotism. Complete idiotism. They _was_able_ to completely burn petrol without significant damage to biosphere!For 100000 years or more technology of burning something was avaliable!!! For last 100 years we truing but can't do something with radioactivity(say,with some gramms of waste) to remove radioactivity(at least to uranium ore level it was),and so there's all chances that for next 100 years it still be waste. Some waste are spreaded,all chances that in next 200 years (if our civilisation will surrivee),we will not have something for it,for next 100 years for sure! It's absolutely inpossible to clean all Earth by some Z-Rays that will remove radioctivity. So we need to collect waste back,there's needed lots(to fill dirt+dust+water+anything where will be waste) of small robots(bio-robots?) that will collect radioactive atoms.They can't know if atom is raddioactive or not with geiger counter,because atom emmit particles only several times.Need to measure weight and look into table of stable isotops.Also(and that's main problem ;-) all robots needed to move to some region where we want to put collected waste.There's needed atom sised robots to conglomentrate into bigger,to conglomentrate to big enought to move to that location.It's seems to be more impossible than,for example,transferring alive human via radio. Pertrol wasn't nearly as hazarous as nuclair waste are.How someone can even compare that things? If we will spread all waste,it will be more bad than nuclear war because all plutonium for bombs was produced in plants and waste have bigger radioactivity than result of explosion. Evein if there's small chance that we will not become able to do something with it for 200 years ,that chaces should be taken into account. Today's price of nuclear energy are extremely big because we can't do something with waste except waiting while radioactivity expires to level of uranium was used to produce that waste.It's throusands of years. We need to CAREFULLY mantain waste for all that time,not to drop it somewhere. Also,there are really big chance that our civilisation could fall for some time:all history shows that.There could be total destruction via nuclear weapons.Bot some small chance left that only small portions weapons will be used.When we have waste and plants,there's NO chances to survive. Why not think that tomorrow we will have better energy-saving technologies? And bio-fito-electrical plants... we need clean Earth,or we will die. With or without nuclair plants,today strategy of doing things will turn our world into hell. Regards, Dmytry Lavrov. p.s. It's TOMORROW prices _may_ become low,TODAY they are extremely high!!!!!!!