<MSGID_1=3A387=2F22_507484aa@fidonet.org>
processed: spam filter heuristic analysis disabled)
From: "alexander koryagin" <koryagin@erec.ru>

F2EP
Hi, Roy Witt! How are you?
on Wednesday, 10 of October, I read your message to alexander koryagin
about "fuel"

 ak>>>> years. Is it possible to guarantee that nothing will have happened
 ak>>>> with these dirty boxes for thousands of years?
 RW>>> I've often wondered why we don't send spent uranium fuel to the sun,
 RW>>> for immediate depletion of all radioactivity upon arrival.
 ak>> Do you remember what a  row we have on Earth when somebody tries to
 ak>> launch a rocket with atomic generator inside?
 RW> I didn't know that was even attempted.

I heard of it many times. Almost all far space missions have Plutonium
generator inside - the Sun is too weak at great distances. The most usable
isotope Plutonium 239 beside its radioactivity (a half-decay is almost 25000
years) is a very toxic material.

 ak>> The reason is clear - there is a probability that the rocket will
 ak>> fail and we'll get a radioactive contamination.

 RW> Not necessarily.

Yes, the probability is low, but there were some precedents. For instance, one
soviet military space apparatus with atomic reactor fell in Canada and
contaminated some area. I.e. the danger is not only during the launch - nobody
can guarantee that such an apparatus will not go out of control after the
successful launch. In this case it can flop down in any place, even in New
York.

 ak>> The situation will be worse if we an accident happens with a rocket
 ak>> carrying extremely radioactive isotopes that we get after using U235
 ak>> fuel. Probably there is only one solution
 RW> Perhaps two.
 ak>> - we must build plants to restore U235 fuel; all the work must be
 ak>> done by robots capable to work in a(?) highly radioactive
 ak>> environment.

 RW> Why even store it?

Because it is almost a endless fuel. I.e. after having used a fuel U235 rod, we
 clear the fuel up and it is usable again! The problem is that in every fuel
rod we use just a few per cent of U235 that is there. Practically, it the same
situation as if we fill 100 liters of gas in a fuel tank and then throw it out
after spending just a few liters, because of the feed pipe becomes clogged.

 RW> The best solution would be to neutralize the radioactivity to a level
 RW> that can safely be handled.

If we reprocess all spent fuel from atomic plants we will reduce amount of
radioactive waste very significantly. BTW, all places where spent U235 fuel is
stored are real Klondikes if a country can clear up the atomic fuel. Western
countries spend enormous money to get rid off of spent fuel. But some country
can clear it and sell it back.

 ak>>>> [...The probabilty of crime in the country is in direct proportion
 ak>>>> to amount of the police]
 RW>>>  ...Crime is in direct proportion to the number of crooks not in
 RW>>> jail.
 ak>> in jail for life? 

 RW> Only if they're capable of working toward their own cost of keeping
 RW> them.

But how to make them to work if they don't want to? Stalin in the USSR did it
using very harsh means, but how to do it in a democratic way?

[...If a person barks at people he lives as a dog, too]
Bye Roy!
Alexander (yAlexKo[]yandex.ru) + 2:5020/2140.91
fido7.english-tutor 2012 



--- ifmail v.2.15dev5.4
 * Origin: Demos online service (2:5020/400)