This will flush any recovery!

Southern Man said:
Your argument appears to be focused on the possibility of a group of ape-like creatures borrowing several hundred feet into dense rock to happen upon something dangerous, totally at random, and the subsequent death of the individuals who get there first. Please tell me why this is important.
Click to expand...

My argument is based on the changes in language that we have seen in the last 1,000 years, the long term danger of the waste material, and the chances of unknowing persons gaining access to hazardous materials.

I am not talking about ape-like creatures, but people living in the year 2759. We have no way of knowing what will happen in the next 750 years. But we have a responsibility to prepare for the real possibilities of a societal collapse.

I have not even touched on the dangers of earthquakes to an underground storage facility.
 
If there is some sort of societal change that renders our technological progress useless, there is a very real possibility of people exploring ruins of an older civilization. The storage facility would not be solely a room underground, but would have access points at the surface.
 
WinterBorn said:
My argument is based on the changes in language that we have seen in the last 1,000 years, the long term danger of the waste material, and the chances of unknowing persons gaining access to hazardous materials.

I am not talking about ape-like creatures, but people living in the year 2759. We have no way of knowing what will happen in the next 750 years. But we have a responsibility to prepare for the real possibilities of a societal collapse.

I have not even touched on the dangers of earthquakes to an underground storage facility.
Click to expand...

WinterBorn said:
If there is some sort of societal change that renders our technological progress useless, there is a very real possibility of people exploring ruins of an older civilization. The storage facility would not be solely a room underground, but would have access points at the surface.
Click to expand...

Again, do you think that folks living 750 or 1000 years from now won't have instruments to detect radiation?

The plans for the facility call for permanent closure of the access points.
 
WinterBorn said:
The waste material is much more concentrated in terms of the radiotion it gives off. While there are natural sources of radiation, they do not come close in terms of the danger of these wastes.
Click to expand...

What sort of quantities are we talking about? tons? tens of tons? hundreds of tons?
What quantity is required to damage man? Are the effects of the toxicity fixed over time?
If I hold a handful for a week will I die? As I understand this nuclear material in the open is not hazardous but should one be surrounded by it it is.
We click onto auto pilot when this stuff is discussed with our 'oohs' and 'aaahs' and 'isn't it terribles' and then you get this ridiculous polarisation of opinions, 'Yes it is', 'No it's not'.
But as the recession has spurred us to take a few tentative steps towards greener motor cars perhaps we should invest more in possible solutions to this problem. Maybe they have already.
 
Southern Man said:
Again, do you think that folks living 750 or 1000 years from now won't have instruments to detect radiation?

The plans for the facility call for permanent closure of the access points.
Click to expand...

Again, they may have them and they may not, depending on what happens in the next 750 or 1,000 years.

The permanent closure sounds like a great idea. Does this mean that there will not be an operating nuclear power plant sometime in the future? Because as long as there is an operational nuclear power plant, there must be an open nuclear waste disposal facility.

Also, the fact that the facility is closed to not make it totally safe. And considering the serious long term hazards involved, I think some method of communicating the hazard is critical.



I started this, not as a debate about the future of society, but as a comment on whether a private company is a better choice for overseeing the disposal facility.
 
WinterBorn said:
....

I started this, not as a debate about the future of society, but as a comment on whether a private company is a better choice for overseeing the disposal facility.
Click to expand...
Then lets focus on this then. We have government run eateries and privately run eateries. All of them are subject to government regulation. Which one's are the highest quality establishments?
 
Southern Man said:
Then lets focus on this then. We have government run eateries and privately run eateries. All of them are subject to government regulation. Which one's are the highest quality establishments?
Click to expand...

Offering to actually eat any nuclear waste is a noble ideal but i don't think it would work as a long term solution.
 
Southern Man said:
Then lets focus on this then. We have government run eateries and privately run eateries. All of them are subject to government regulation. Which one's are the highest quality establishments?
Click to expand...

A private industry is motivated by profit. This would not be a profitable endeavor. This is an endeavor concerned with building a facility that will last far longer than the company. Private industry's track record for dodging EPA rules is ample.
 
WinterBorn said:
A private industry is motivated by profit. This would not be a profitable endeavor. This is an endeavor concerned with building a facility that will last far longer than the company. Private industry's track record for dodging EPA rules is ample.
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't it be profitable? Wouldn't there be many generators of nuclear wastes willing to pay large dollars to get rid of it? Aren't medical waste treatment facilities and solid waste landfills operated for profit?
 
Southern Man said:
Why wouldn't it be profitable? Wouldn't there be many generators of nuclear wastes willing to pay large dollars to get rid of it? Aren't medical waste treatment facilities and solid waste landfills operated for profit?
Click to expand...

It will not be profitable in the long term. Once the facility is sealed, the profits drop to nil. And the dangers of the waste material will continue to be an issue for centuries.
 
WinterBorn said:
It will not be profitable in the long term. Once the facility is sealed, the profits drop to nil. And the dangers of the waste material will continue to be an issue for centuries.
Click to expand...
You've raised that issue previously and I addressed it previously (post 126).
 
Southern Man said:
You've raised that issue previously and I addressed it previously (post 126).
Click to expand...

That answer only works if the society is still intact. Any major upheaval would make it worthless.



The fact that this dangerous material must be stored in such a way that it is safe from leakage or sabotage and must endure 1,000 years of natural phenomenon puts it on a level that we have not previously dealt with.
 
I recall when commercial nuke electric power plants came out the claim was that nuke power would be almost free it would be so cheap.

Well that has proven to be false.
Nuke power palnts are the more expensive to build than other types of power plants.

How many superfund sites are nuke sites? Several.
If it was feasable to launce the nuke waste into the sun it would be a different matter.
Fusion not fission will be the true cheap non polluting power source when we get there.
 
WinterBorn said:
That answer only works if the society is still intact. Any major upheaval would make it worthless.



The fact that this dangerous material must be stored in such a way that it is safe from leakage or sabotage and must endure 1,000 years of natural phenomenon puts it on a level that we have not previously dealt with.
Click to expand...

What sort of "major upheaval" are you talking about? We have 5000 years of written history, many major upheavals, yet society has always managed to advance itself.

Yucca Mountain is designed to contain the wastes safely based on advanced principles of engineering. Are you suggesting that the technology isn't sound? Perhaps you could point out where you think the weak points would be.

Sabotage wouldn't be an issue if there were a major upheaval of civilization, would it? Under that scenario all of the other aspects of society would be in disarray. So why would it matter if someone got into the waste at that point?
 
uscitizen said:
I recall when commercial nuke electric power plants came out the claim was that nuke power would be almost free it would be so cheap.

Well that has proven to be false.
Nuke power palnts are the more expensive to build than other types of power plants.
....
Click to expand...
They are expensive because of the safeguards. The life-cycle costs are among the lowest in the power industry.
 
Southern Man said:
What sort of "major upheaval" are you talking about? We have 5000 years of written history, many major upheavals, yet society has always managed to advance itself.

Yucca Mountain is designed to contain the wastes safely based on advanced principles of engineering. Are you suggesting that the technology isn't sound? Perhaps you could point out where you think the weak points would be.

Sabotage wouldn't be an issue if there were a major upheaval of civilization, would it? Under that scenario all of the other aspects of society would be in disarray. So why would it matter if someone got into the waste at that point?
Click to expand...

If society is in disarray it will be acceptable to have someone get into the wastes?

We have 5,000 year of history in which nothing as dangerous as the toxic wastes of the last 100 years have existed.

Is the Yucca Mountain facility immune to earthquakes? I have not researched it. But that is a very real possibility over the next 10 centuries.
 
WinterBorn said:
If society is in disarray it will be acceptable to have someone get into the wastes?

We have 5,000 year of history in which nothing as dangerous as the toxic wastes of the last 100 years have existed.

Is the Yucca Mountain facility immune to earthquakes? I have not researched it. But that is a very real possibility over the next 10 centuries.
Click to expand...
Again, why would it matter if someone got into the waste at that point? Why would they bother?
The containers used to ship the wastes have been tested to survive railroad collisions. These are then containerized more heavily under Yucca Mountain. Yucca's one of the most geologically stable sites in the country. What kind of earthquake would it see that would be worse than a railroad collision?
 
Southern Man said:
Again, why would it matter if someone got into the waste at that point? Why would they bother?
The containers used to ship the wastes have been tested to survive railroad collisions. These are then containerized more heavily under Yucca Mountain. Yucca's one of the most geologically stable sites in the country. What kind of earthquake would it see that would be worse than a railroad collision?
Click to expand...

We are actually placing nuke waste in Yucca Mtn?

hmm SM is wrong again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top