<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for Obama budget proposal would cut off funding for Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by amazingdrx</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:35:32 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Yes!</strong></p><p>We can! &nbsp;Stop the nuclear boondoggle before it brings about another Chernobyl.</p><p>
Treat the waste onsite in the nuclear containment structures at each power plant. &nbsp;As James Hansen has proposed, with fast neutron waste recycling reactors. &nbsp;Move the modular reactors to the waste, not the reverse.</p><p>
Time to clean up this titanic mess, but in a cost effective safe fashion. &nbsp;And generate some power as a side benefit, right through existing turbines and power systems.

<p>http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog     John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin </p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Yes!</strong></p><p>We can! &nbsp;Stop the nuclear boondoggle before it brings about another Chernobyl.</p><p>
Treat the waste onsite in the nuclear containment structures at each power plant. &nbsp;As James Hansen has proposed, with fast neutron waste recycling reactors. &nbsp;Move the modular reactors to the waste, not the reverse.</p><p>
Time to clean up this titanic mess, but in a cost effective safe fashion. &nbsp;And generate some power as a side benefit, right through existing turbines and power systems.

<p>http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog     John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin </p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by Karen Street</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 03:18:57 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Reid: toxic wasteland?<p>Compare the relative dangers to Nevadans and the world, not counting climate change:<p>


 Yucca Mountain accepts nuclear waste from all over the US, perhaps from outside the US, up to its technical limit, which is much higher than its legal limit, compared with<p>
 Nevada keeps the smallest of its coal plants open.<p>


Obama has advanced the cause of science significantly, with impressive changes from the Bush times. However, he has decided to end the scientific evaluation of Yucca Mountain. (Actually, I don't understand this--if NRC's questions are going to be answered, does that mean the scientific process will continue, but the scientific evaluation will not be part of Obama's decision-making, or that Obama is ending the scientific process before it can produce a result not to his liking?)<p>
<a href="http://pathsoflight.us/musing/" rel="nofollow">A Musing Environment

<p>Karen Street</p></a></p></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Reid: toxic wasteland?<p>Compare the relative dangers to Nevadans and the world, not counting climate change:<p>


 Yucca Mountain accepts nuclear waste from all over the US, perhaps from outside the US, up to its technical limit, which is much higher than its legal limit, compared with<p>
 Nevada keeps the smallest of its coal plants open.<p>


Obama has advanced the cause of science significantly, with impressive changes from the Bush times. However, he has decided to end the scientific evaluation of Yucca Mountain. (Actually, I don't understand this--if NRC's questions are going to be answered, does that mean the scientific process will continue, but the scientific evaluation will not be part of Obama's decision-making, or that Obama is ending the scientific process before it can produce a result not to his liking?)<p>
<a href="http://pathsoflight.us/musing/" rel="nofollow">A Musing Environment

<p>Karen Street</p></a></p></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #3 by sindark</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:20:15 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/3</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Short-term thinking?<p>It is hard to reconcile this will the apparently high probability of more nuclear plants being built (or having their lives extended) in the US.

<p><a href="http://www.sindark.com/" rel="nofollow">a sibilant intake of breath</a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Short-term thinking?<p>It is hard to reconcile this will the apparently high probability of more nuclear plants being built (or having their lives extended) in the US.

<p><a href="http://www.sindark.com/" rel="nofollow">a sibilant intake of breath</a></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #4 by sindark</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 05:51:08 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/4</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Existing wastes<p>At the very least, the US needs somewhere to store existing wastes in the long-term.<p>
Dry cask storage and cooling ponds are temporary solutions, and they require regular maintenance.

<p><a href="http://www.sindark.com/" rel="nofollow">a sibilant intake of breath</a></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Existing wastes<p>At the very least, the US needs somewhere to store existing wastes in the long-term.<p>
Dry cask storage and cooling ponds are temporary solutions, and they require regular maintenance.

<p><a href="http://www.sindark.com/" rel="nofollow">a sibilant intake of breath</a></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #5 by BILL HANNAHAN</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 06:40:41 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/5</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>It is a good move<p>I strongly favor nuclear power but have called for cutting off the waste of money at Yucca for years.<p>
If all our electricity came from fission, today's reactors would produce about 10 pounds of spent fuel per person per 80 year lifetime. It would contain about 6 oz. of fission products. Advanced reactors could reduce that to just the six ounces of fission products dissolved in a few pounds of glass or rock.<p>
Here is an interesting 1 hr video on a very promising family of reactor designs for the next generation.<p>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F0tUDJ35So&amp;eurl=http://newenergyandfuel.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F0tUDJ35So&amp;eurl=http: ...<p>
Recommendation;<p>
1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; When fuel is removed from the reactor it goes into the spent fuel pool. Water is the ideal medium for fresh spent fuel because of water's excellent shielding characteristics, high heat capacity, and transparency.<p>
2&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; After several years the heat rate is low. The fuel is transferred into dry cask storage, a hermetically sealed container, vacuumed to remove all trace of moisture, and then partially filled with helium, a non corrosive gas with good heat transfer properties. The cask is shielded by thick layers of concrete and steel.<p>
3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;Maintain a low level R&amp;D program to incorporate advances in materials and technology into the development of a fully automated fuel recycling system.<p>
4&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Develop commercial applications for radioactive and non radioactive fission products.<p>
5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; As time goes by the value of the material in spent fuel increases while the cost of reprocessing decreases. When those two curves cross reprocessing becomes economically attractive and should begin.<p>
6&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Uranium and plutonium are recycled into advanced reactors, useful fission products are sold.<p>
7&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Unused waste is buried at sea.<p>
<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96oct/seabed/seabed.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96oct/seabed/seabed.htm ...<p>
Sea bed disposal is very inexpensive, unlimited, and nearly risk free.

<p><a href="http://coal2nuclear.com/energy_facts.htm" rel="nofollow">Things Everybody Should Know About Energy</a></p></p></a></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></a></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>It is a good move<p>I strongly favor nuclear power but have called for cutting off the waste of money at Yucca for years.<p>
If all our electricity came from fission, today's reactors would produce about 10 pounds of spent fuel per person per 80 year lifetime. It would contain about 6 oz. of fission products. Advanced reactors could reduce that to just the six ounces of fission products dissolved in a few pounds of glass or rock.<p>
Here is an interesting 1 hr video on a very promising family of reactor designs for the next generation.<p>
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F0tUDJ35So&amp;eurl=http://newenergyandfuel.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F0tUDJ35So&amp;eurl=http: ...<p>
Recommendation;<p>
1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; When fuel is removed from the reactor it goes into the spent fuel pool. Water is the ideal medium for fresh spent fuel because of water's excellent shielding characteristics, high heat capacity, and transparency.<p>
2&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; After several years the heat rate is low. The fuel is transferred into dry cask storage, a hermetically sealed container, vacuumed to remove all trace of moisture, and then partially filled with helium, a non corrosive gas with good heat transfer properties. The cask is shielded by thick layers of concrete and steel.<p>
3&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;Maintain a low level R&amp;D program to incorporate advances in materials and technology into the development of a fully automated fuel recycling system.<p>
4&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Develop commercial applications for radioactive and non radioactive fission products.<p>
5&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; As time goes by the value of the material in spent fuel increases while the cost of reprocessing decreases. When those two curves cross reprocessing becomes economically attractive and should begin.<p>
6&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Uranium and plutonium are recycled into advanced reactors, useful fission products are sold.<p>
7&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Unused waste is buried at sea.<p>
<a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96oct/seabed/seabed.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/96oct/seabed/seabed.htm ...<p>
Sea bed disposal is very inexpensive, unlimited, and nearly risk free.

<p><a href="http://coal2nuclear.com/energy_facts.htm" rel="nofollow">Things Everybody Should Know About Energy</a></p></p></a></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></p></a></p></p></p></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #6 by GreyFlcn</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:06:51 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/6</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>On &quot;Reprocessing&quot;<p>Official UK plans and strategies suggest that spent fuel from future UK production of nuclear power will be stored directly rather than being reprocessed, and there are no plans for further operations at THORP after 2010/11, when existing reprocessing contracts will be completed. Should the plant be reopened in April, Ms Bj&#248;rn&#248;y takes it for granted that any reprocessing activity will be limited to existing contracts and not continued after 2010.<br>
<a href="http://www.norway.org.uk/policy/environment/thorp.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.norway.org.uk/policy/environment/thorp.htm<p>
For all practical purposes,<br>
Nuclear waste without the U238, is just as radioactive as Nuclear waste with it.<br>
<a href="http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891" rel="nofollow">http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891<br>
<a href="http://www.fissilematerials.org/ipfm/pages_us_en/documents/documents/documents.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.fissilematerials.org/ipfm/pages_us_en/document ...<p>
Reprocessing isn't a "solution" for waste unless you plan on rolling out a whole fleet of breeder reactors, and running them for a few centuries.<p>
And so far, we don't even have 1 commercial breeder reactor, and none are expected for many decades. &nbsp;If at all.

<p>-David Ahlport</p></p></p></a></br></a></br></br></p></a></br></p></strong></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>On &quot;Reprocessing&quot;<p>Official UK plans and strategies suggest that spent fuel from future UK production of nuclear power will be stored directly rather than being reprocessed, and there are no plans for further operations at THORP after 2010/11, when existing reprocessing contracts will be completed. Should the plant be reopened in April, Ms Bj&#248;rn&#248;y takes it for granted that any reprocessing activity will be limited to existing contracts and not continued after 2010.<br>
<a href="http://www.norway.org.uk/policy/environment/thorp.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.norway.org.uk/policy/environment/thorp.htm<p>
For all practical purposes,<br>
Nuclear waste without the U238, is just as radioactive as Nuclear waste with it.<br>
<a href="http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891" rel="nofollow">http://www.spectrum.ieee.org/print/4891<br>
<a href="http://www.fissilematerials.org/ipfm/pages_us_en/documents/documents/documents.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.fissilematerials.org/ipfm/pages_us_en/document ...<p>
Reprocessing isn't a "solution" for waste unless you plan on rolling out a whole fleet of breeder reactors, and running them for a few centuries.<p>
And so far, we don't even have 1 commercial breeder reactor, and none are expected for many decades. &nbsp;If at all.

<p>-David Ahlport</p></p></p></a></br></a></br></br></p></a></br></p></strong></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #7 by GreyFlcn</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 Mar 2009 10:10:17 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/7</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Not to mention</strong></p><p>The prospect of this gargantuan reprocessing/breeder reactor infrastructure being economically viable is pretty slim.</p><p>
Especially compared to the trouble conventional nuclear is having, where it can't even get private financing.

<p>-David Ahlport</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Not to mention</strong></p><p>The prospect of this gargantuan reprocessing/breeder reactor infrastructure being economically viable is pretty slim.</p><p>
Especially compared to the trouble conventional nuclear is having, where it can't even get private financing.

<p>-David Ahlport</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #8 by amazingdrx</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/</link>
			<pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 14:12:27 -0800</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/Nuh-uh-Yucca/8</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Waste treatment, not reprocessing</strong></p><p>Treating the waste with fast neutron reactors will use the remaining fuel up, producing heat that can be used to generate power in existing nuclear power plant turbine systems. &nbsp;It's all just extra neutrons we are talking about.</p><p>
The fast neutrons shake them loose producing heat, eventually all the loose neutrons are shaken out and the material becomes non-radioactive. &nbsp;The waste can't be transported safely and affordably. &nbsp;The only alternative to 10,000 year storage onsite, spread all over the planet, is treatment.</p><p>
It lets the nuclear industry keep going, but in a safe and necessary direction. &nbsp;Enough of the newer executive and engineers taking over the industry could get this message and proceed, for the old line industry leaders who brought on this huge dangerous expensive mess? &nbsp;Retirement, with plain old social security, no golden parachutes on ratepayer's and taxpayer's dimes.</p><p>
Enough is enough. &nbsp;The old guard in energy, auto, and banking industries that screwed up ought to be history. &nbsp;Not forgoten so their screwups are not repeated.<br>


<p>http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog     John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin </p></br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Waste treatment, not reprocessing</strong></p><p>Treating the waste with fast neutron reactors will use the remaining fuel up, producing heat that can be used to generate power in existing nuclear power plant turbine systems. &nbsp;It's all just extra neutrons we are talking about.</p><p>
The fast neutrons shake them loose producing heat, eventually all the loose neutrons are shaken out and the material becomes non-radioactive. &nbsp;The waste can't be transported safely and affordably. &nbsp;The only alternative to 10,000 year storage onsite, spread all over the planet, is treatment.</p><p>
It lets the nuclear industry keep going, but in a safe and necessary direction. &nbsp;Enough of the newer executive and engineers taking over the industry could get this message and proceed, for the old line industry leaders who brought on this huge dangerous expensive mess? &nbsp;Retirement, with plain old social security, no golden parachutes on ratepayer's and taxpayer's dimes.</p><p>
Enough is enough. &nbsp;The old guard in energy, auto, and banking industries that screwed up ought to be history. &nbsp;Not forgoten so their screwups are not repeated.<br>


<p>http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog     John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin </p></br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>