Re: How Do the Europeans Get Rid of Nuclear Waste?

Michael Moroney wrote:
>
> Uncle Al <UncleAl0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >How about getting a clean beta-decay stream and handling that. The
> >slightly beta-decay dirty actinides go back into the reactor as fuel.
> >That gives you a small volume short half-life beta-decay waste stream
> >plus recycled fuel folks won't be eager to steal.
>
> >Current fuel recycling is military and exactly stupid: A small clean
> >actinide stream for bombs and a huge beta-decay plus actinide stream
> >that is not recovered for fuel and must be stored forever until it
> >decays.
>
> >All ya gotta do is get out the fission poisons - and they are all
> >neutron-rich short half-life beta-decay isotopes. Everything else can
> >go back into the cooker.
>
> Dumb question: Is it possible to create a reactor design where the
> reactor has an inner and outer set of fuel rods? The inner portion works
> as a normal reactor except it produces an excess of neutrons which escape
> into the outer portion. The outer portion is "spent" fuel rods which
> can't maintain a chain reaction by themselves, but are constantly
> irradiated by neutrons from the inner portion and are more thoroughly
> "burned up" and produce more energy than if they were just removed.
> The outer portion is not needed for the inner portion to function (excess
> neutrons would be just lost without it)
>
> Refueling would be removing outer fuel rods, moving inner to outer and
> adding new fuel to inner. Maybe even three or more layers (fuel is
> "more spent" as you go outward)

How could neutron irradiation of neutron-rich beta-decay isotopes help
things any? All you will accomplish is making them decay faster, on
the average, into slower beta-decay isotopes of the next element up.
It's a waste of neutrons and a very slow way to get back to uranium
from, say, lanthanum.

--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.

Quantcast