A Completely Serious Question

[Vanoi]

I know this is going to make me sound like i am 12 years old and know nothing but here it goes.

I was recently reading about Nuclear Reactors and the nuclear waste they produce. I know this waste is higly raidoactive and dangerous, so radioactive that it won't be safe to be around for thousands of years. I also know we store them in safe places away from people until they become safe to be around, but i was thinking. Are we thinking of ANY way to really get rid of this? Storing it will not work since it will stay radioactive for many years so i was thinking (and here comes the 12 year old part) why don't we put as much of it as we can on a rocket, and shoot it towards the sun?

[Vizsla]

It’s a big risk. Something might go wrong. The rocket might explode or land in the sea or take out Slovakia or something.
There are economic factors. It’s expensive to send something up there and we're talking about tons and tons of the stuff. We would have to add this onto the cost of generating electricity.

There are much cheaper and safer alternatives. Like storing it in bunkers somewhere uninhabitable and geologically neutral: like the middle of the Australian outback for example.

[Jack04]

Nuclear waste takes various forms, some being more dangerous than others. As mentioned in the other thread, certain fast reactor systems would theoretically be capable of burning up those products with a particularly short half-life, which are typically the most dangerous ones.

Storage seems to be the only option, which isn't ideal but isn't nearly as threatening as some would have you believe. So long as the short half-life (particularly alpha emitting) products are burnt up, any danger would be reduced dramatically anyway. I think the general idea is to use old mines in geologically sound areas and to build large containment facilities (or, in laymen's terms, burying the lot in a mountain of concrete).

Trying to remove the waste from the planet would use up a large amount of that energy which was produced along with the waste.

[Tacitursa]

I also know we store them in safe places away from people until they become safe to be around

Thats not always the case, Greenpeace have found literally thousands of nuclear and toxic waste barrels in the ocean just rusting and rotting away. Science campus near my house was caught and charged doing it a few years back, Were caught on film.

Ive no idea if it will work but what about drilling into Lava chambers or into the molten layer itself and dropping our waste there. We could send all of our other waste there too instead of having landfills etc

[removeduser_4536284751384]

if you have say, Americium-241, why can't you split it into a bunch of stable atoms?

[Pra]

Storing the waste is essentially a diffusion problem. If you put it deep enough in an approximately non permeable layer of the Earth, you really have no problem with seepage or leaking (in theory.)

It's not a huuuuge issue as some other things are.

[Visna]

Storing the waste is essentially a diffusion problem. If you put it deep enough in an approximately non permeable layer of the Earth, you really have no problem with seepage or leaking (in theory.)

It's not a huuuuge issue as some other things are.

The problem with nuclear waste is not so much where or how to store it (as long as some pretty basic measures are taken), but rather how to communicate to the folks in the future that digging here and looking inside the containers they find might not be such a good idea. Some of that stuff is dangerous for tens of thousands of years. Despite it's somewhat dry tile, the report "Expert Judgement on Markers to Deter Inadvertent Human Intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant" provides both interesting and bizarre reading material and comes very recommended.

Excerpts available here.

[Phier]

The problem with nuclear waste is not so much where or how to store it (as long as some pretty basic measures are taken), but rather how to communicate to the folks in the future that digging here and looking inside the containers they find might not be such a good idea. Some of that stuff is dangerous for tens of thousands of years. Despite it's somewhat dry tile, the report "Expert Judgement on Markers to Deter Inadvertent Human Intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant" provides both interesting and bizarre reading material and comes very recommended.

Excerpts available here.

Thats been one of those things talked about for as long as I can remember, but really the risk is pretty damn small, and outside of some crazy circumstances not likely to cause a major problem in said hypothetical circumstances.

[Visna]

Thats been one of those things talked about for as long as I can remember, but really the risk is pretty damn small, and outside of some crazy circumstances not likely to cause a major problem in said hypothetical circumstances.

So how does the world look in 10,000 years Phier? How has language and symbolism evolved?



That's the first page of 'Beowulf', a manuscript only 1,200 years old max. It's English, so it should be easy enough to read, non? So just writing some kind of "KEEP OUT" sign is not enough. That's not even beginning to touch upon how to make a sign that's readable after 10,000 years.

And even if the warnings are understandable, will they follow them? The Egyptian tombs are riddled with warnings of all the terrible things that will happen if you defile them, and look what good that did. "Oh, it says that if I open this container invisible rays will kill me, lolwut?"

[Phier]

So how does the world look in 10,000 years Phier? How has language and symbolism evolved?



That's the first page of 'Beowulf', a manuscript only 1,200 years old max. It's English, so it should be easy enough to read, non? So just writing some kind of "KEEP OUT" sign is not enough. That's not even beginning to touch upon how to make a sign that's readable after 10,000 years.

And even if the warnings are understandable, will they follow them? The Egyptian tombs are riddled with warnings of all the terrible things that will happen if you defile them, and look what good that did. "Oh, it says that if I open this container invisible rays will kill me, lolwut?"

Not my point, you don't need to school me on the evolution of writing and language.

Of course they would open them, and a few people would get sick but it won't be a major issue before they figure it out.

Edit: Sphere's correct. (read it after reply)

[Pra]

The problem with nuclear waste is not so much where or how to store it (as long as some pretty basic measures are taken), but rather how to communicate to the folks in the future that digging here and looking inside the containers they find might not be such a good idea. Some of that stuff is dangerous for tens of thousands of years. Despite it's somewhat dry tile, the report "Expert Judgement on Markers to Deter Inadvertent Human Intrusion into the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant" provides both interesting and bizarre reading material and comes very recommended.

Excerpts available here.

That's really a question of creating a proper universally regonizable warning sign indicating danger. In Chemical Safety, we've had to deal with similar issues (with flames, oxidation, reactions, etc..) for some time. It's something where you can communicate this information cross-culturally without language. If you can do that, then you can most likely communicate it to future generations.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Nobody even knows what it could do to the sun... it might sound like a bright idea but what if it causes the sun to emit dangerous solar flares or go supernova. /kidding.

[Sphere]

As Pra said, nuclear waste really isn't a huge problem, mainly because theres not that much of it. Even after 60+ years of nuclear power production, you could easily fit it all in a football stadium. Currently power plants just store their waste in pools located inside the plant, and it could just stay their even after they become decommisoned. However this means you have the waste spread out, and thus the risks increase. The DoE is considering transferring all waste to a central location in the future, but that might never happen.

To put things in perspective though, ~10,000 people die from solar radiation caused cancer a year in the US, while nobody dies from nuclear waste radiation. So in that respect getting people to wear sunscreen is a far more important issue than what to do with nuclear waste.

[chamaeleo]

As Pra said, nuclear waste really isn't a huge problem, mainly because theres not that much of it. Even after 60+ years of nuclear power production, you could easily fit it all in a football stadium. Currently power plants just store their waste in pools located inside the plant, and it could just stay their even after they become decommisoned. However this means you have the waste spread out, and thus the risks increase. The DoE is considering transferring all waste to a central location in the future, but that might never happen.

According to my bro, who's currently working on a project at the WIPP site (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) in SE NM, the vast majority of what is being stored is not spent fissionable materials. Rather: tools, machinery, PPE, vehicles, storage containers and the like. The problem of disposal is not limited to the material. It includes virtually everything which comes into contact with it.

Given, WIPP houses all the crap from Los Alamos National Labs, Sandia NL, Kirkland AFB and other research facilities, so contaminated equipment is over-represented compared to your typical energy-producing reactor. Still, those trucks run straight through Albuquerque and for hundreds of miles, in one of the worst states for drunk driving and one that's earned a foul reputation for bad drivers in general...

Finally: although WIPP is situated in a tectonically stable region, in a geologically inert salt formation...can a 12 year old please answer this question:

What happens when you add water to salt?

...and if there happens to be another geologist in the building:

How might anisotropic transmissivity in a karst aquifer affect the migration of groundwater, and the transport of radionuclide contaminants?

...because the WIPP salt formation is above/within the geological equivalent of swiss cheese.

I am not saying that the site is doomed to fail. I am just saying that caution is healthy, considering the potential consequences of sequestering nasty stuff...within a soluble material...sitting atop carbonate rock that is riddled with caves...all located upgradient from cattle/oil country that is 99% dependent upon groundwater...and expecting it to remain in situ for thousands of years.

To put things in perspective though, ~10,000 people die from solar radiation caused cancer a year in the US, while nobody dies from nuclear waste radiation. So in that respect getting people to wear sunscreen is a far more important issue than what to do with nuclear waste.

This might piss off a small number of Ukrainians and Russians. Just sayin...

[Pra]

According to my bro, who's currently working on a project at the WIPP site (Waste Isolation Pilot Plant) in SE NM, the vast majority of what is being stored is not spent fissionable materials. Rather: tools, machinery, PPE, vehicles, storage containers and the like. The problem of disposal is not limited to the material. It includes virtually everything which comes into contact with it.

Given, WIPP houses all the crap from Los Alamos National Labs, Sandia NL, Kirkland AFB and other research facilities, so contaminated equipment is over-represented compared to your typical energy-producing reactor. Still, those trucks run straight through Albuquerque and for hundreds of miles, in one of the worst states for drunk driving and one that's earned a foul reputation for bad drivers in general...

Finally: although WIPP is situated in a tectonically stable region, in a geologically inert salt formation...can a 12 year old please answer this question:

What happens when you add water to salt?

...and if there happens to be another geologist in the building:

How might anisotropic transmissivity in a karst aquifer affect the migration of groundwater, and the transport of radionuclide contaminants?

...because the WIPP salt formation is above/within the geological equivalent of swiss cheese.

I am not saying that the site is doomed to fail. I am just saying that caution is healthy, considering the potential consequences of sequestering nasty stuff...within a soluble material...sitting atop carbonate rock that is riddled with caves...all located upgradient from cattle/oil country that is 99% dependent upon groundwater...and expecting it to remain in situ for thousands of years.

This might piss off a small number of Ukrainians and Russians. Just sayin...

Again it's a diffusion problem. How do you prevent the transfer of radioactive materials? By putting in into a nonpermeable 'zone'. and surrounding it with that material. Now who's idea was it to put it into a bed/area that would be semipermeable to the transfer of these materials?

[xcorps]

I hate it when people destory delirium with facts. It makes things so sensible.

[Banana Jelly]

To get rid of them without producing too much damage, we could always just point them at our moon and shoot it there. It's not like they are aesthetically perfect with there thousands of craters.

[Akar]

To get rid of them without producing too much damage, we could always just point them at our moon and shoot it there. It's not like they are aesthetically perfect with there thousands of craters.

Space aliens realitate by bombing japan. On second thought... LAUNCH THE ROCKETS ASAP

[Poach]

Slight differences there, Visna.

Modern information storage and record-keeping is far more detailed and durable than in times of old: barring some sort of global disaster that causes society worldwide to collapse, such systems will continue to be maintained, upgraded and expanded. In addition, Egyptian Tomb warnings were religious in nature, and hence were ignored (as the Tomb diggers didn't tend to be of Ancient Egyptian religion), but the radioactivity signs are based on proven science. Again, unless a large disaster happens to wipe out our knowledge of radioactivity, persons in AD12,000 will likely be aware that "KEEP OUT: RADIOACTIVE WASTE" means it is nuclear byproduct, or will be capable of translating the sign into their own language due to the vast documentation available on the English language.

[Visna]

Slight differences there, Visna.

Modern information storage and record-keeping is far more detailed and durable than in times of old: barring some sort of global disaster that causes society worldwide to collapse, such systems will continue to be maintained, upgraded and expanded.

Digital storage is unreliable at best, DVD's have a lifetime of, say, 100 years, and that's me being optimistic. That, coupled with the sheer volume of information stored and the advances in technology, makes preservation more tricky, not less. And that's only in the scenario in which technology continues to improve and society remains stable, 10,000 years is a long time in a "civilisation timescale".

In addition, Egyptian Tomb warnings were religious in nature, and hence were ignored (as the Tomb diggers didn't tend to be of Ancient Egyptian religion), but the radioactivity signs are based on proven science. Again, unless a large disaster happens to wipe out our knowledge of radioactivity, persons in AD12,000 will likely be aware that "KEEP OUT: RADIOACTIVE WASTE" means it is nuclear byproduct, or will be capable of translating the sign into their own language due to the vast documentation available on the English language.

See above. And it's blind luck that we're able to read ancient Egyptian, without the Rosetta Stone and the Ptolomaic Decrees and us actually finding it, ancient Egyptian might as well have been a written language from a different planet. And that's on a timescale of only some 5,000 years max.
You can't use symbols either, because symbols, like language, change not only over time, but also depending on the civilisation in which they're being used.

Take skulls for example.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

While a sign with a skull in the western mindset (atm), provokes images of something dangerous and deadly, in Latin America skulls are used in the Day of the Dead festivities, a time of celebration.