News and Discussions > History & Trivia
High level burial
Marlin:
After all the good answers to the question on uranium abundance I thought a question without any one right answer is in order. I have an answer in mind and will post it in one week, until then here goes:
The answer should be a short and clear response(cracker barrel wisdom) .
Q: There is an ongoing debate on the stability and safety of burying high level waste. Opponents claim that the water table many miles away is in danger. The time period makes predictions difficult, so if you were to defend the burial of High level (Grater then Class C) material as safe what would be your argument be (again mine in one week). (No multipage thesis please)
alphadude:
boy is that a loaded question- chemical form, nuclide mix, geological data, all figure into this one-anybody that makes general statements needs to look long and hard before opening the ole pie hole......
the ole anti-terrorism excuse should be eliminated from this debate...
My feeling is this.. if your state produces nuclear power.. thats where it should be taken care of.. STATES RIGHTS
Marlin:
NIMBY, NIMBY, NIMBY, and most states do not have water tables hundreds of feet from the surface. 8)
alphadude:
sorry but the last time we entered into a compact the south got the short end of the stick... only to rise latter :P
nimby- oh thats soooo sad- hear my tiny violin playing a sad gypsy melody-NOT!!! so the rest of us have to feel their burden- welllllll its gonna cost ya real big time, no more fancy cars and big cigars for you- are you one of them socialist, union lovin, long islanders???
as you know the waste issue is the choke hold on nuke power- don't build until you have a solution.. and the example here is just one of the convoluted problems that faces the nuke revival-
the rich will dump it on the poor...
Marlin:
--- Quote from: alphadude on Feb 19, 2007, 04:53 ---sorry but the last time we entered into a compact the south got the short end of the stick... only to rise latter :P
nimby- oh thats soooo sad- hear my tiny violin playing a sad gypsy melody-NOT!!! so the rest of us have to feel their burden- welllllll its gonna cost ya real big time, no more fancy cars and big cigars for you- are you one of them socialist, union lovin, long islanders???
as you know the waste issue is the choke hold on nuke power- don't build until you have a solution.. and the example here is just one of the convoluted problems that faces the nuke revival-
the rich will dump it on the poor...
--- End quote ---
What I was trying to get to is that there are limited areas that are suitable for long term burial unless you are proposing processing to reduce the class of the waste. The original question is aimed at the suitability of burial of the waste not nessasarily the location or socioeconomic impact.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version