Posted on 06/10/2013 5:58:40 PM PDT by ak267
An economic analysis of what is in spent nuclear fuel.
As a nuclear reactor fissions heavy metal U235 and Pu239, the atoms are split into two randomly sized pieces. Many of these fission products are unstable and rapidly decay into other products. After nuclear reactor fuel has cooled in a pool of water for a few years, and then sat in dry cask storage for another 10--30 years, what is it made of? Is it dangerous waste that needs to be isolated from humanity for 100,000 years or is it precious material waiting to be partitioned and sold? The answer may surprise you.
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
I’m afraid that I don’t have time to watch such a long video.
But the short answer is, no, it’s not waste.
The genius who made it mandatory to bury all that nuclear waste forever was none other than Jimmy Carter. And it made about as much sense as everything else he did. The guy was a total jerk.
If not for Carter’s laws, and if not for the EPA, the Energy Department, and all the other dumb regulators, nuclear power would make a lot of sense. But unless we have some sort of major revolution in our governmental bureaucracy, it ain’t gonna happen.
Did that guy even farm peanuts right? I don’t see anyone who is successful at something like that entering politics, much less on the radical left wing of same. He apparently did live in public housing for a year.
Nuclear waste can be recycled. The French do it. The Japanese used to, don’t know if they still do. After reprocessing, the spent fuel (5%) is removed and the rest turned into new rods.
beats me whatever happened to the stuff I worked around.. way back in the 80s.. I enjoyed the ferry rides across the same river patriots once journeyed without benefit of lattes and bagels.
Well, if the liberals would not have closed a perfectly safe facility such as Yucca Mountain which the government was
required to build/have..they would have a place to store fuel rods.
Small self-contained Thorium plants are bringing electricity to remote villages. They offered them to us for use in Alaska, where they would relieve settlements from dependence upon icebreaker deliveries of fuel, which don't always make it.
NIH (Not Invented Here), to the USGOV means not used here. Not that they have any better idea, except this inane Wind and Solar mantra, which might look a little more interesting (sorta like a 6th grade science project) if we could get to 70% nuclear for electricity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.