At 01:06 AM 3/16/2000 -0500, Spudboy wrote:
>One proposal I have read about (and nothing was done about) was the use of
>synchrotron radiation, scaled to emit vast amounts of directed gamma rays for
>a comparitively short distance. Theoretically this bombardment of gamma rays
>should initiate a reaction for fissile and fertile materials, allegedly
>rendering them eventually harmless. Plutonium, instead of a 24,000 year
>half-life would go half-lfe in 6 months. Also the process would produce a lot
>of excess thermal energy to be used for additional energy production.
Was this another victim of Klinton's "administration"? It sounds like it
could end up using more power than fissioning the Pu would produce.
If the cost of waste reduction exceeds the value of the power produced,
then the technology is worthless. Does fission belong in this
classification, and if so, is the cost due to legislation or due to actual
handling? I never have seen a cost breakdown other than that supplied by
ComEd, and you know how far to trust them..
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:05:23 MDT