Radioactive Beer? - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 03:48:10 pm
content: http://sourceable.net/ex-pm-backs-nuclear-storage-in-australia/Former PM Bob Hawke says that he thinks other countries should store their radioactive waste in Australia. Perhaps normal beer doesn't quite have the charm that it used to?Fosters! Australian for radioactive!Lol.

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 03:57:38 pm
content: Nothing wrong with that - waste storage and processing will be a big business.With its vast land and small population, it makes more sense to do it in Australia.The key is to price that risk and get the populace behind it.

author: GEuser
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 03:58:33 pm
content: I remember that joker (Hawke) , I recall on tv when he saw a young kid with partly green dyed hair it said something like "That kid has a problem" in a real vicious way and also as if it was a prophecy , then not long after that was its lets say 'eccentric' (Blanche d'Alpuget) partner was doing large circles with its hand and arm in a church , cases of nut!

author: Stonent
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 04:23:32 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on May 23, 2014, 03:57:38 pmI'd love to see reprocessing become an industry. France does it but we don't in the US because it was banned by the Carter administration. Less than 10% of nuclear waste generated is unusable. If you can separate the it, you can then put the other part back into a reactor and keep it out of other places. Until then it just gets buried in a remote location.The last estimates I read 10+ years ago were that an average plant that uses reprocessed fuel would generate enough waste to fill 1 truck per year vs numerous rail cars full per year.

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 04:35:34 pm
content: QuoteIt's worst then that, because the U.S. Federal Government controls and regulates the waste, they are responsible for the long term storage of it. However even though the have spend the funds and build a national storage in Yucca mountain, political pressure has not allowed them to utilize the facility for it's intended function. All waste now is still stored on-site at the Nuclear reactor sites in so called 'short term storage'.The environmentalist is this country cry about the non-CO generating nuclear reactors being unsafe because the lack of proper solution to the 'spend fuel' problem, but the same lobby is the one preventing the already build and payed for facility from being used. Nucs are going no where in this country not because of any technical problem, but rather just because of political pressure.

author: mamalala
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 04:53:33 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on May 23, 2014, 04:23:32 pmAlso, by picking up where research left 60 or so years ago, much of that "spent" fuel can be burned much further (todays reactors only burn a few percent of the fuel). Stuff like MSR, LFTR and TWR reactors, for example. They are not new by any means. It's just that back then the decission to use the now common reactor types was made. In part for rather obvious reasons, what with the cold war and stuff, wanting to have nukes, etc.Ah, but then look at the greens. They have a different idea for what to do with all that "waste":http://www.greens.org/s-r/35/35-08.htmlYes! It should be vitrified, so that it never, ever, can be re-used or recycled. Funny how on one side they complain about the current "waste" needing such a long storage, but on the other side demand that it stays just that way, instead of making the most use of what we already have. Hippocrites.Greetings,Chris

author: Tinkerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 05:20:27 pm
content: And ironically, all the push against things like natural gas and nuclear is causing the coal industry to expand alot more than it otherwise would. I am sure I dont have to explain the problem with that.In recent news, apparently a type of cat litter is now being blamed for radioactive waste barrel leaks.(they switched from non-organic to organic apparently without any testing once so ever)

author: dannyf
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 05:22:15 pm
content: QuoteQuoteI think if they environmentalists wised up, they would see that they are the worst enemy of the environmental causes they claim to champagne for.

author: iRad
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 06:26:42 pm
content: Quote from: dannyf on May 23, 2014, 05:22:15 pmI'll drink to that

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 06:46:03 pm
content: We want that waste in South Africa, where we already have the repository for it. Seeing as it has not rained in the location for geologic ages it is a perfect location as well.

author: magetoo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 09:47:11 pm
content: Quote from: Stonent on May 23, 2014, 04:23:32 pmAs I understand it, reprocessing isn't usually done mainly because the fuel is so cheap that it just isn't profitable to go through the messy process of doing so. (I'd guess France's reprocessing is at least partly because of their nuclear weapons program.)

author: magetoo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 09:50:32 pm
content: Quote from: SeanB on May 23, 2014, 06:46:03 pmDoesn't much of the uranium mined in the world come from SA as well?

author: Tinkerer
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2014, 11:48:22 pm
content: Quote from: magetoo on May 23, 2014, 09:47:11 pmWell cost isnt that big an issue, politics, "scary terrorists", and people being afraid that an accident could happen are.

author: magetoo
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2014, 02:18:46 am
content: Yeah, when I say "messy process" I meant that sort of thing. The usual way of doing it involves some pretty horrid chemicals IIRC, and with that comes all the environmental regulation and bad PR..Somebody get the LFTR built already.

author: iRad
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2014, 02:25:35 am
content: Quote from: Stonent on May 23, 2014, 03:48:10 pmRadiation and Beer. O0 Ok, you got my attention.

author: FrankenPC
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 24, 2014, 02:56:06 am
content: Quote from: magetoo on May 23, 2014, 09:50:32 pmAustralia. 40% of the worlds demand.

author: Harvs
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 24, 2014, 06:08:15 am
content: Quote from: FrankenPC on May 24, 2014, 02:56:06 amWell you got the right acronym. It comes from the state of South Australia (SA).