Nuclear Half-Life Modification!

I always wondered why radioactive material stayed lethal for so long? how it kept its potency? and how we could reduce the Half-life of nuclear waste. Then I came across this.

Nuclear Half-Life Modification!

from this site it informs that this technology has been around for a while now but we refuse to use it!

So my question is how might we implement this technology so that society demands it?

reply to post by Sagitaris


Make it cheap, profitable and if history is any lesson, destructive to the environment?

reply to post by Thorneblood


fair enough that answered the question now why isnt this technology implemented? is it lake of knowledge of its existence or is it money?

there's quite a few studies going on on waste neutralizing
peswiki.com...:Nuclear_Remediation#Proven_Technologies

reply to post by Sagitaris


Nuclear decontamination of any kind wouldn't necessarily be safe and as such will be extremely expensive not to mention difficult to control. This isn't to say that it would not work, there are many bright and enterprising young minds out there who might one day develop some quick and efficient method of de-radiating these old cast offs of the nuclear arms race. But at the moment it is still a costly, difficult task. So i doubt it is so much a lack of knowledge, its not even really a lack of money, its just a lack of profit.

reply to post by Thorneblood


Thanks for bringing this to us! I don't see why this has to be profitable but, I also don't see how it has to be expensive.

Very interesting indeed and I couldn't find any obvious problems other than transportation. The reason all the waste is still sitting in pools onsite at reactors is because moving it presents too much risk at present. It really isn't about Yucca mountain.

So, that means this would have to be done onsite at each facility. I still don't see a problem with that.

One other potential reason for keeping the spent fuel around is that it could be recycled into gaseous reactors thereby producing more energy (and more plutonium, whoopie!)

reply to post by Sagitaris


Thanks for sharing that.
This is one of many such prospects concerning management,
that should be explored and verified.

I would humbly present another:

Dump the waste into stable yet active volcanic calderas, if we cannot get our act together
on a well designed Yucca Mountain Plan.

AT Least Do Something Preparatory instead of kicking the Isotopic Can Down The Road.

Be Positive and Proactive. S&F

Originally posted by Sagitaris
I always wondered why radioactive material stayed lethal for so long? how it kept its potency? and how we could reduce the Half-life of nuclear waste. Then I came across this.

Nuclear Half-Life Modification!

from this site it informs that this technology has been around for a while now but we refuse to use it!

So my question is how might we implement this technology so that society demands it?

Ah, but is it available for Half-Life 2?
...and where can I download it?


...sorry.

reply to post by Sagitaris


I never even heard of such a thing and why the hell we aren't already utilizing this technology to dispose of nuclear waste, as well as cleaning up sites like Fukushima and Chernobyl, is beyond me.

Without a doubt, the answer must have to do with money. It must be cheaper to just bury it in a mountain than to subject it to this process.

Insane, but cheaper and in a capitalistic society guess which one always seems to win the day?

On a more serious note, I think we should all be writing our congressional representatives, copying them with this document and asking them why we aren't deactivating our nuclear waste. I'd just bet that most of them have never heard of this process either.

F&S for the OP!

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by Sagitaris

 

I never even heard of such a thing and why the hell we aren't already utilizing this technology to dispose of nuclear waste, as well as cleaning up sites like Fukushima and Chernobyl, is beyond me.

Without a doubt, the answer must have to do with money. It must be cheaper to just bury it in a mountain than to subject it to this process.

Insane, but cheaper and in a capitalistic society guess which one always seems to win the day?

On a more serious note, I think we should all be writing our congressional representatives, copying them with this document and asking them why we aren't deactivating our nuclear waste. I'd just bet that most of them have never heard of this process either.

F&S for the OP!

I was thinking, because the world also doesnt know of the Modification. So what better way to inform the world than ATS haha

Originally posted by Awen24

Originally posted by Sagitaris
I always wondered why radioactive material stayed lethal for so long? how it kept its potency? and how we could reduce the Half-life of nuclear waste. Then I came across this.

Nuclear Half-Life Modification!

from this site it informs that this technology has been around for a while now but we refuse to use it!

So my question is how might we implement this technology so that society demands it?

Ah, but is it available for Half-Life 2?
...and where can I download it?


...sorry.

If its not done there wont be a Half Life 2 for you.

Originally posted by Wildmanimal
reply to post by Sagitaris

 

Thanks for sharing that.
This is one of many such prospects concerning management,
that should be explored and verified.

I would humbly present another:

Dump the waste into stable yet active volcanic calderas, if we cannot get our act together
on a well designed Yucca Mountain Plan.

AT Least Do Something Preparatory instead of kicking the Isotopic Can Down The Road.

Be Positive and Proactive. S&F

And then the volcano explodes sending nuclear material ALL over the place. Not sure that would work.

Originally posted by greencmp
reply to post by Thorneblood

 

Thanks for bringing this to us! I don't see why this has to be profitable but, I also don't see how it has to be expensive.

Very interesting indeed and I couldn't find any obvious problems other than transportation. The reason all the waste is still sitting in pools onsite at reactors is because moving it presents too much risk at present. It really isn't about Yucca mountain.

So, that means this would have to be done onsite at each facility. I still don't see a problem with that.

One other potential reason for keeping the spent fuel around is that it could be recycled into gaseous reactors thereby producing more energy (and more plutonium, whoopie!)

moving it would be risky unless they froze the tanks as they shipped them risky to move risky to not do anything and probably less costly than drilling pipes in the ground to freeze the earth so no more contaminated water gets to underground water.

as for recycling I see fuel rods being recycled not so much the water. sprinkle some widget modification powder in the tanks no more contaminated water.

Originally posted by Thorneblood
reply to post by Sagitaris

 

Nuclear decontamination of any kind wouldn't necessarily be safe and as such will be extremely expensive not to mention difficult to control. This isn't to say that it would not work, there are many bright and enterprising young minds out there who might one day develop some quick and efficient method of de-radiating these old cast offs of the nuclear arms race. But at the moment it is still a costly, difficult task. So i doubt it is so much a lack of knowledge, its not even really a lack of money, its just a lack of profit.

Im not a nuclear scientist. if you understand the process and could explain it for ATS that would be great, because i cant see how it would be extremely expensive costly and difficult to control unless i know how its done.

Originally posted by suicideeddie
there's quite a few studies going on on waste neutralizing
peswiki.com...:Nuclear_Remediation#Proven_Technologies

this is great 1.75 hours reduced the Half Life in Half!

What would happen if it was run through the machine for 3 hrs or more. It would have to keep reducing it right? sounds like a EXCELLENT MACHINE TO ME

reply to post by Sagitaris


Decades ago . . . I was convinced that they had the tech to render the stuff relatively harmless. I don't know for certain how or why I knew it. I just KNEW it.

I was mystified that they'd play the dangerous game they were playing.

Then I watched the farce about where to bury the stuff. That convinced me even more.

Then I came across the DEPOPULATION goals. Ahhhhhhhhhhh now it made sense. And the fear mongering.

Also . . . IF they admitted they could render the stuff harmless, then they'd be pressed to have abundant cheap atomic power and water the deserts--MORE population. Evil bustards.

Along the way, I read an obscure document that noted that they could render the stuff harmless. I was totally convinced.

Now this.

Just another case of the serfs and slaves suffering at the hands of the evil elite.

Thankfully, their days are very numbered like the rest of us . . . only much more so and much worse so.

Originally posted by BO XIAN
reply to post by Sagitaris

 

Then I came across the DEPOPULATION goals. Ahhhhhhhhhhh now it made sense. And the fear mongering.

I dont believe killing people is the solution, But I do believe we have a population problem.

Its a privilege and a HUGE RESPONSIBILITY to have a child, but we have these teen moms doing it like its a kool thing to do.

I think having a child should be like buying a house. A soul requires a certain amount of income to live a decent life. If we can give our children decent lives, then we can change our future for our children for the better in turn change our future for the better.

Firs things first which is to prevent them from killing us. So we need to get this idea into the heads of everyone that there is a way out that we can save ourselves from this nuclear threat.

When explaining we can save X number of lives. I would say that would be the best time to implement a change to monitor and ensure the human race is responsible when it comes to creating a body for a soul, because this would save millions of lives and with the more ways of keeping life, comes more ways that population could become a problem.

reply to post by Sagitaris


The natural man part of me would go quite a lot of that distance with you.

Except that the planet COULD COMFORTABLY AND ECOLOGICALLY handle many dozens of times the population we now have IF we had the free energy tech available etc. etc. etc.

However, the elite do NOT want a large population. The satanic demonic forces DRIVING THEM LOVE to kill humans as their major passion, hobby, job, goal etc. It's the only way satan can sort of kick sand in God's eyes for satan getting kicked out of Heaven.

In terms of "licenses" to have children . . . IF there were a way to reward voluntarily doing so . . . I might be for that. I'm NOT AT ALL in favor of that kind of heavy-handed GOVERNMENT !CONTROL!

I CERTAINLY, as a shrink, DEPLORE children having children and fathers-in-sperm-&-cheap-thrills-only producing more ATTACHMENT DISORDERED children to fill more prisons and heartaches with.