"harry" wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 11:43:07 UTC, newshound wrote:
On 11/1/2016 9:11 AM, harry wrote:
On Monday, 31 October 2016 21:37:18 UTC, newshound wrote:
On 10/30/2016 3:01 PM, harry wrote:


Noboby knows how much a reactor costs to decommission.
It's never been done.

We only need one counterexample to show that this statement is false.
Here's one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shippi..._Power_Station

They take them apart and leave most to fester and store the rest
away.
But not permanently dealt with.
No-one knows how.


Fiction.
What happened to the nuclear fuel?

You said decommission. That's what's been done.

The technology for transmuting the actinides
from reprocessed fuel is trivial.

If the technology is trivial why isn't it being done?

It is.

More bollix.

Your sig is sposed to be last with a line with just -- on it in front of it.

It's decommissioned when all components are permanently dealt with.

And that is the case with the used fuel rods.

Which no-one has yet done.

Lie after lie after lie.

On 01/11/2016 16:43, harry wrote:
On Tuesday, 1 November 2016 11:43:07 UTC, newshound wrote:
On 11/1/2016 9:11 AM, harry wrote:
On Monday, 31 October 2016 21:37:18 UTC, newshound wrote:
On 10/30/2016 3:01 PM, harry wrote:


Noboby knows how much a reactor costs to decommission.
It's never been done.

We only need one counterexample to show that this statement is false.
Here's one

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shippi..._Power_Station

They take them apart and leave most to fester and store the rest away.
But not permanently dealt with.
No-one knows how.


Fiction.
What happened to the nuclear fuel?

You said decommission. That's what's been done.

The technology for transmuting the actinides from reprocessed fuel is
trivial.

If the technology is trivial why isn't it being done?
More bollix.
It's decommissioned when all components are permanently dealt with.
Which no-one has yet done. They just stash the award bits away.
Because they don't know how to deal with them.


We keep telling you that if you leave them alone they dispose of
themselves and it doesn't take millions of years like you claim.

En el artículo , Chris Hogg
escribió:

I have to admit I was quite shocked by that!

The best laid plans of mice and men...

You have to wonder how they could get something as prosaic as
bentonite/cat litter wrong (I know it wasn't WIPP to blame, but
contractors at Los Alamos responsible for packing the waste into barrels
before transportation to WIPP)

Speaking of Los Alamos, this is an interesting read:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ty-los-alamos-
secret-town-nuclear-millionaires

But that someone somewhere should have specified 'cat litter', or even
just used the words, rather than 'bentonite' specifically, opens the
door to the sort of mistake that was made at Los Alamos

Americans are famously literal, so when the contractors ran short,
someone probably nipped down to Wal-Mart and picked up a few bags of the
stuff. And the rest is history

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

On 11/1/2016 7:19 PM, Mike Tomlinson wrote:
En el artículo , Chris Hogg
escribió:

I have to admit I was quite shocked by that!

The best laid plans of mice and men...

You have to wonder how they could get something as prosaic as
bentonite/cat litter wrong (I know it wasn't WIPP to blame, but
contractors at Los Alamos responsible for packing the waste into barrels
before transportation to WIPP)

Speaking of Los Alamos, this is an interesting read:

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ty-los-alamos-
secret-town-nuclear-millionaires

But that someone somewhere should have specified 'cat litter', or even
just used the words, rather than 'bentonite' specifically, opens the
door to the sort of mistake that was made at Los Alamos

Americans are famously literal, so when the contractors ran short,
someone probably nipped down to Wal-Mart and picked up a few bags of the
stuff. And the rest is history


A few years ago, Sellafield did a trial to find the most effective
cleaners for removing contamination from surfaces. Along with the long
established specialist products like the Decon range of detergent
solutions, they tested domestic cleaners. Cillit Bang came out better
than anything.

En el artículo , Mike Tomlinson
escribió:

Americans are famously literal, so when the contractors ran short,
someone probably nipped down to Wal-Mart and picked up a few bags of the
stuff. And the rest is history

I wrote the above with tongue firmly in cheek, but it looks like it
wasn't so far off the mark.

http://www.chron.com/technology/busi.../A-typo-and-a-
bag-of-kitty-litter-might-cost-US-9186568.php

"Investigators also discovered the trigger of the "thermal runaway
event," also known as an "explosion": a dangerous combination of nitric
acid and salts, triethanolamine, and "sWheat Scoop" organic kitty
litter"

"The "organic" part of the kitty litter in question is crucial.

"That's because wheat, which makes up the pee-absorbing bulk of organic
kitty litter, contains plant cellulose that can burn. Standard kitty
litter, meanwhile, is inorganic, since it's primarily made of clay"

"So when drum-packing workers at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)
followed instructions to add an organic variety to soak up radioactive
fluids, they were unknowingly packing up what Sarah Zhang at Gizmodo
called "the ingredients of a bomb""

--
(\_/)
(='.'=) systemd: the Linux version of Windows 10
(")_(")

On 11/1/2016 6:27 PM, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2016 20:37:08 +0000, Mike Tomlinson
wrote:

In 2014 a barrel of waste from Los Alamos packed with the wrong kind of
cat litter exploded and contaminated part of the plant.

I have to admit I was quite shocked by that! Plenty of reports here
http://tinyurl.com/hb6hfyo Bentonite is an extremely fine clay
mineral, with a very high specific surface area (760 m^2/g IIRC), and
a very high absorptive capacity, so ideal for soaking up nasties such
as cat pee on the one hand or leaks from containers of nuclear waste,
on the other. It's often mentioned when nuclear waste depositories are
being discussed, for example at the Finnish site on the island of
Olkiluoto http://www.posiva.fi/en/final_disposal/safety

But that someone somewhere should have specified 'cat litter', or even
just used the words, rather than 'bentonite' specifically, opens the
door to the sort of mistake that was made at Los Alamos, as 'cat
litter' can be a whole range of things. It's not as though bentonite
is scarce: Wyoming is full of the stuff!
http://www.wyomingmining.org/minerals/bentonite/


It was, of course, "green" and sustainable kitty litter. So that should
have been alright, then.