posted
Thanks to some of the wonderful people on here, I've been introduced to George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire series. Currently I'm on A Clash of Kings. But on to the point of this thread ... My chemistry class yesterday was about nuclear stuff and one of the things discussed was the problem of nuclear waste. And so I was thinking, what if we started something like the Night Watch for nuclear waste? A brotherhood dedicated to protecting it and also pledged to stay out of 'the troubles of the realm'. I know I'm probably making sense to only a small minority of people, but I think it's an interesting idea and would be interested in what other people have to say about it.
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The new generation of fast reactors will burn the nuclear waste of the old generation as fuel, get another 94% of the energy out of it (we only use 5% now), and leave waste that's only dangerous for 500 years instead of 10,000. I think it's a great idea.
There will still be that tiny amount of waste which is dangerous for 500 years, so your brotherhood (aren't sisters allowed?) for protecting it could still work. Your job just got a whole lot easier, though. Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
hey hey, I'm a genius! When we were learning about all that stuff, I thought to myself "I bet there's a way to use that junk". And I was right!
Yeah, Kwea, I thought pretty much the same thing. The Night Watch had the advantage of being largely ignored, while any sort of Nuclear Brotherhood (and Sisterhood I suppose) would be in the limelight. But as to the fallibility factor, that exists now as well. There wouldn't be any lessening of security measures. If anything there would be a strengthening. So it wouldn't likely create any holes that don't already exist and could possibly maybe serve to plug some. Not that I have any special knowledge of a hole in the security of nuclear waste,just sayin ...
Posts: 2827 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I suspect that funding would become an issue. If the federal government funded it, then there would always be pressure to have more direct oversight. That is, with each budget that was approved, I think the issue of funding and/or associated lack of oversight would come up.
If the federal government was not funding it, then who would be? Any private entity (especially without government oversight) would be seen -- and rightly so, perhaps -- as having a chokehold on the control of some seriously [potentially] dangerous stuff.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
