Posted by Morris Dovey on March 25, 2011, 5:52 pm
On 3/24/11 11:29 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
>> On 3/23/11 2:51 PM, vaughn wrote:
>>> Where is the permanent storage for the waste from our coal plants?
>>
>> I think most of it is probably not far from the coal plants. ...
> They charge you to haul the crushed silicate slag away:
> http://www.northerntool.com/shop/tools/product_200136674_200136674
> I bought one bag directly from the power plant. It cuts fast and well
> on its first pass through the sandblasting gun but breaks down
> quickly. So I switched to sand from the side of the road, filtered
> through window screen.
Resourceful, with cardio side-benefits. :-)
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
Posted by Jim Wilkins on March 25, 2011, 7:54 pm
> On 3/24/11 11:29 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> ...
> > ...So I switched to sand from the side of the road, filtered
> > through window screen.
> Resourceful, with cardio side-benefits. :-)
> Morris Dovey
When I went back to work and they asked me how I spent my vacation
week I said "just lying on my back in the sand", not mentioning it was
under the truck.
jsw
Posted by vaughn on March 25, 2011, 8:02 pm
>They charge you to haul the crushed silicate slag away:
>http://www.northerntool.com/shop/tools/product_200136674_200136674
I love it when thy find a good use and a market for a byproduct that would
otherwise be a disposal problem. My favorite is Milorganite fertilizer, a
product of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District. Need I say more? Ok I
will, it's a damn good product.
Vaughn
Posted by vaughn on March 26, 2011, 11:57 am
> Didn't they have a problem with heavy metal contamination at one point? Is
> that solved?
I believe the heavy metal is within limits, but Milorganite last I knew was not
labeled for food production, mostly it is a turf fertilizer.
(It's odd where a Usenet discussion can wander)
Vaughn
Posted by daestrom on March 23, 2011, 11:06 pm
On 3/23/2011 11:13 AM, Tom P wrote:
> On 03/21/2011 09:43 PM, Curbie wrote:
>> I avoid discussions of a political or religious nature like the
>> plague, but I think a policy discussion of energy need to include BOTH
>> unvarnished pros and cons along with the question of "if NOT one
>> particular plan, than what".
>>
>> I'm neither pro nor anti-nuke (if NOT nuclear, than what), but I would
>> like to see a well vetted plan for the storage/disposal of spent
>> nuclear fuel and waste included by the advocates. If I'm not mistaken,
>> any nuclear plan would commit 1000's of years of future citizens to
>> pay for the care and protection of spent nuclear fuel.
>>
>> I avoid discussions of a political or religious nature like the
>> plague, but I think a policy discussion of energy need to include BOTH
>> unvarnished pros and cons along with the question of "if NOT one
>> particular plan, than what".
>>
>> I'm neither pro nor anti-nuke (if NOT nuclear, than what), but I would
>> like to see a well vetted plan for the storage/disposal of spent
>> nuclear fuel and waste included by the advocates.
>>
>> If I'm not mistaken, any nuclear plan would commit 1000's of years of
>> future citizens to pay for the care and protection of spent nuclear
>> fuel. I thought the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository was
>> killed, do we even have another site approved?
>>
>> I'm not sure a clear picture of anything comes from listening to
>> advocates from just one or the other.
>>
>> Curbie
>>
> As of to date, there is no facility anywhere in the world capable of
> permanent storage of nuclear waste. By permanent, I mean designed for
> the irretrievable and inaccessible storage of nuclear waste for the next
> millenia. Finland has plans for one. The European Union has mandated
> that all member states develop plans.
Consider how many things of man have lasted 10,000 years, this is not
surprising that we haven't built one.
Many countries are allowed to re-process their fuel. This has the
advantage of separating the low-level radioactive waste that lasts for
many years from the high-level radioactive waste that lasts less than
100 years. It also allows the retrieval of some useful radionuclides
rather than burying them some storage.
> If my understanding is correct, most countries have legislation that
> relieves nuclear power utilities of the costs and responsibility for the
> ultimate disposal of nuclear waste, and additionally, the utilities are
> relieved of the legal liability for the consequences of a nuclear
> catastrophe - the reason being that it would be impossible to finance
> the necessary insurance, even assuming that any such insurance could
> ever be contracted.
Actually, you need to go read some of them again. The Price-Anderson
act in the US does *not* relieve reactor owners from such liability.
What it *does* do is require all reactor owners *together* to agree to
pay the liability together. So if one reactor, by one owner, has an
accident, that owner can count on specific funds from *all* reactor
owners towards any public liability. So far, not a single dollar has
been used from such funding.
The P-A also provides that if the funding needed for public liability is
insufficient, then congress can pass whatever act/law it deems necessary
to cover additional funds.
Nowhere in the P-A does it state the utility with the accident is
limited in its liability.
> In other words, society has burdened itself with all the risks and the
> costs, this being the reason why nuclear energy is so "cheap".
> Such legislation, with the intention of encouraging development of
> nuclear energy, may have made sense a half a century ago, does it still
> make sense in the 21st century?
Not true, at least in the US. Go read the actual Price-Anderson act.
daestrom
XML site map
>>> Where is the permanent storage for the waste from our coal plants?
>>
>> I think most of it is probably not far from the coal plants. ...
> They charge you to haul the crushed silicate slag away:
> http://www.northerntool.com/shop/tools/product_200136674_200136674
> I bought one bag directly from the power plant. It cuts fast and well
> on its first pass through the sandblasting gun but breaks down
> quickly. So I switched to sand from the side of the road, filtered
> through window screen.