Re: I thought of an initialy regulated industry!... (fwd)
Forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 1998 07:41:29 -0400 From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com> Subject: Re: I thought of an initialy regulated industry!...
A normally operating coal plant releases more radioactive material (carbon 14) than a normally operating nuclear plant.
The largest environment impact issue with a nuclear plant is hot water discharge (which is much larger than the exhaust from a coal plant) and spent fuel storage because of the amount of time that is required to guarantee seals. In the first place the heated water effects the ecology of the local area and you see the ripples of this in the ecology changes for hundreds of miles. An additional impact is that because of the water needs of plants they are usualy located in or near wetlands which are critical to the entire eco-cycle for thousands of miles. The issue with storage is that it occurs on a time line that is best described as near-geologic. Periods of time that are orders of magnitude longer than human civilizations survive.
coal plant are not only more voluminous (though less dense) than the coal that goes in but also contain a substance that is more poisonous than plutonium (arsenic trioxide).
Consider the difference in volume of these two waste products... ____________________________________________________________________ The seeker is a finder. Ancient Persian Proverb The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
At 07:46 AM 10/2/98 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
The largest environment impact issue with a nuclear plant is hot water discharge (which is much larger than the exhaust from a coal plant)
Since the operating temperature of the steam of a typical nuclear reactor is only a little lower than the operating temperature of the steam of a coal fired plant, the hot water discharge is necessarily about the same for the same amount of power generated. For a nuclear plant to discharge much more hot water than a coal plant, it would have to have much lower thermal efficiency, which is not the case.
and spent fuel storage because of the amount of time that is required to guarantee seals.
High level nuclear waste should be kept isolated for five hundred years. Since there are plenty of buildings, mostly fortresses and monuments, that have survived for a good deal longer than five hundred years, this does not seem terribly difficult.
The issue with storage is that it occurs on a time line that is best described as near-geologic. Periods of time that are orders of magnitude longer than human civilizations survive.
Bunkum: The contaminant that lasts geological ages is plutonium, and the arsenic dumped by a coal plant constitutes far more lethal doses than the plutonium dumped by a nuclear power plant.
Consider the difference in volume of these two waste products...
So dilution is an acceptable solution for the poison in fly ash, but it is a big problem for the plutonium in radioactive waste? If dilution is acceptable, let us dump our waste in the cold salty current coming off the arctic icecap, as the russians are doing. It will be a thousand years before that stuff comes back to the surface, and by that time only the plutonium will be a problem. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG hVZVbJPCiyR27Tdf+qFl+uj9Hc2KWiql5J1jnKJf 4lXDcc7tAkwo7qEp0ZXbXv7XJqHc7d2LpmbS0UlzA ----------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ James A. Donald
The issue with storage is that it occurs on a time line that is best described as near-geologic. Periods of time that are orders of magnitude longer than human civilizations survive.
coal plant are not only more voluminous (though less dense) than the coal that goes in but also contain a substance that is more poisonous than plutonium (arsenic trioxide).
Consider the difference in volume of these two waste products...
Really? The amount of fuel that goes into a nuclear plant is farirly low, compared to the amount shoved into a coal plant. When they shut down the nuclear plants to change the fuel, the fuel that dcomes out is 95% (or maybe 99%, I forget the figures I heard at Fermi II in Michigan) usable. The problem is that the governemtn refuses to let anyone process the fuel to eliminiate the waste and reuse the fuel. The 1-5% waste slows the reaction down enough that the fuel is not nearly usable. Considering pure volume: Coal exhaust is continuos and significant. Nuclear waste is a burst every 18 mohts, equal to a barrel or two, worst case. (to the best of my knowledge.)( Ryan Anderson PGP fp: 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57 E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9
participants (3)
-
James A. Donald -
Jim Choate -
Ryan Anderson