Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........

Expand Messages
  • evelyn sardina
    I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this forum. Does anyone want to respond to this question though? Note: forwarded message
    Message 1 of 10 , Aug 20, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this forum.  Does anyone want to respond to this question though?

      Note: forwarded message attached.


      Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.
    • Bashir Syed
      I heard the same program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their
      Message 2 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        I heard the same program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS," many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis" completely based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said about Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
        Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents of disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It will take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny pores, eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people will die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been forgotten. But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los Alamos Labs injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting their dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from that era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files" was published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less than what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the training in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such materials.
         
        Bashir A. Syed
        Retired aerospace Physicist
        Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
        ----- Original Message -----
        To: hreg
        Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
        Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........

        I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this forum.  Does anyone want to respond to this question though?

        Note: forwarded message attached.


        Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.

      • evelyn sardina
        What about the suggestion about sending it up to space? Bashir Syed wrote: I heard the same program on NPR about French
        Message 3 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          What about the suggestion about sending it up to space?

          Bashir Syed <bsyed@...> wrote:
          I heard the same program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS, " many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis" completely based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said about Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
          Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents of disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It will take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny pores, eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people will die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been forgotten. But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los Alamos Labs injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting their dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from that era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files" was published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less than what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the training in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such materials.
           
          Bashir A. Syed
          Retired aerospace Physicist
          Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
          ----- Original Message -----
          To: hreg
          Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
          Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........

          I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this forum.  Does anyone want to respond to this question though?

          Note: forwarded message attached.

          Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us.


          Ready for the edge of your seat? Check out tonight's top picks on Yahoo! TV.

        • Ariel Thomann
          -1. I agree with Bashir, except I d delete the supernatural element. -2. Re: space. I ve wondered about it for some time. Humanity has some reliable big
          Message 4 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            -1. I agree with Bashir, except I'd delete the supernatural element.

            -2. Re: space. I've wondered about it for some time. Humanity has some
            reliable big rockets. Could a payload of nuclear waste be sent up with just
            enough ooomph to escape Earth gravity? I guess the sun's gravity would ensure
            delivery to the big furnace, where it wouldn't even make a ripple. Perhaps
            with a pair of gravity assist "slingshots" as it swings by Venus and Mercury.
            I don't know how many such shots it would take, but it should be worth
            considering.

            Ariel
            - We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
            otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
            - All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
            generations.
            ------------------------------------

            > What about the suggestion about sending it up to space?
            >
            > Bashir Syed <bsyed@...> wrote: I heard the same
            > program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were
            > enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their
            > opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS,"
            > many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other
            > phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the
            > false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis" completely
            > based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said about
            > Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
            > Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents of
            > disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the
            > "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It will
            > take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny pores,
            > eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or
            > animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products
            > (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the
            > occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people will
            > die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been forgotten.
            > But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will
            > face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the
            > pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can
            > figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los
            > Alamos Labs
            > injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting their
            > dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his
            > Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from that
            > era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files" was
            > published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less than
            > what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the training
            > in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such
            > materials.
            >
            > Bashir A. Syed
            > Retired aerospace Physicist
            > Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: evelyn sardina
            > To: hreg
            > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
            > Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
            >
            >
            > I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this
            > forum. Does anyone want to respond to this question though?
            >
          • Bashir Syed
            This aspect has been considered and due to more risks of having a mishap on the launch pad or close to earth, this method of disposing off any radio active
            Message 5 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              This aspect has been considered and due to more risks of having a mishap on the launch pad or close to earth, this method of disposing off any radio active material was abondoned. A few years ago a Satellite came very close to earth and crashed in Canada, spilling radioactive material used in Thermo-Nuclear power generator. After that such power sources were replaced by Photovoltaic PV Solar Cells (and Fuell Cells in International Space Station), much safer than earlier Thermo-Nuclear powerr sources.  
              ----- Original Message -----
              Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 6:33 PM
              Subject: Re: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........

              -1. I agree with Bashir, except I'd delete the supernatural element.

              -2. Re: space. I've wondered about it for some time. Humanity has some
              reliable big rockets. Could a payload of nuclear waste be sent up with just
              enough ooomph to escape Earth gravity? I guess the sun's gravity would ensure
              delivery to the big furnace, where it wouldn't even make a ripple. Perhaps
              with a pair of gravity assist "slingshots" as it swings by Venus and Mercury.
              I don't know how many such shots it would take, but it should be worth
              considering.

              Ariel
              - We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
              otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
              - All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
              generations.
              ------------ --------- --------- ------

              > What about the suggestion about sending it up to space?
              >
              > Bashir Syed <bsyed@worldnet. att.net> wrote: I heard the same
              > program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were
              > enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their
              > opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS, "
              > many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other
              > phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the
              > false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis" completely
              > based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said about
              > Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
              > Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents of
              > disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the
              > "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It will
              > take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny pores,
              > eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or
              > animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products
              > (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the
              > occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people will
              > die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been forgotten.
              > But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will
              > face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the
              > pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can
              > figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los
              > Alamos Labs
              > injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting their
              > dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his
              > Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from that
              > era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files" was
              > published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less than
              > what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the training
              > in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such
              > materials.
              >
              > Bashir A. Syed
              > Retired aerospace Physicist
              > Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
              > ----- Original Message -----
              > From: evelyn sardina
              > To: hreg
              > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
              > Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
              >
              >
              > I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this
              > forum. Does anyone want to respond to this question though?
              >

            • Ron Spross
              It turns out, I seem to recall, that to send a rocket into the sun is more expensive energetically than sending into interstellar space (anything starting on
              Message 6 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                It turns out, I seem to recall, that to send a rocket into the sun is more expensive energetically than sending into interstellar space (anything starting on the earth is already going around the sun at a considerable speed and to go into the sun it must slow down.  The work required to slow it down sufficiently is greater than the work required to achieve solar system escape velocity).  I don't know if it is possible to use, say, a Venus flyby to reduce the angular momentum enough to plunge the rocket into the sun.

                Furthermore, a number of years ago there was a great controversy about sending up a satellite payload that had plutonium as an energy source in its power supply.  The satellite was launched, but it was in the face of a great hue and cry.  Therefore, even if it turned out to be economical, the controversy and real substantial risk (rockets still occasionally fail during launch) of sending the many existing tons of radioactive waste into either space or the sun probably would be too great.

                Some one mentioned earlier a "nuclear power bandwagon".  There may be such a bandwagon, but there also seems to be a bandwagon that is theologically opposed to doing anything with radioactive waste -- which is sitting in surface storage currently (it is safe from the point of view of radiation containment, but vulnerable to terrorism).  Even if by some miracle of public enlightenment we were to succeed in getting a Congress and Administration dominated by Sierra Club members, the radioactive waste material currently in storage in pools above ground would not disappear -- it would still be a problem to be solved. 

                I believe the following approach to disposal is the safest and most reasonable:   The radioactive material can be placed in ceramic (glass) ingots, which should be stable for tens of millenia, at least.  Then these ingots can be deposited in a number of places where they would be "safe".  One possibility is the bottom of a deep sea trench where there is a geologic subduction zone -- I believe the Marianas Trench is an example -- the material would be beneath 5 miles of water, and over the millenia the ingots would be reabsorbed into the mantel of the earth.  Another safe location, although this would seem counter intuitive, would be on the bottom of the ocean floor, on the "downstream" side of something like the mid-Atlantic ridge.  These regions are among the most geologically stable on earth, expanding slowly away from the ridge where new continental material is being formed.  Material from the surface is constantly being layered down on the sea floor, covering what is there now with sediments.  The results of this slow but stable sedimentary process, which lasts over 100s of millions of years,  are evident in the uniform strata that are exposed almost anywhere a road or river cuts through a hill side, or -- very spectacularly -- in places like the Grand Canyon.

                ronspross


                On 8/21/07, Ariel Thomann <ajthomann@...> wrote:

                -1. I agree with Bashir, except I'd delete the supernatural element.

                -2. Re: space. I've wondered about it for some time. Humanity has some
                reliable big rockets. Could a payload of nuclear waste be sent up with just
                enough ooomph to escape Earth gravity? I guess the sun's gravity would ensure
                delivery to the big furnace, where it wouldn't even make a ripple. Perhaps
                with a pair of gravity assist "slingshots" as it swings by Venus and Mercury.
                I don't know how many such shots it would take, but it should be worth
                considering.

                Ariel
                - We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
                otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
                - All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
                generations.
                ------------------------------------



                > What about the suggestion about sending it up to space?
                >
                > Bashir Syed <bsyed@...> wrote: I heard the same
                > program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were
                > enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their
                > opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS,"
                > many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other
                > phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the
                > false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis" completely
                > based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said about
                > Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
                > Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents of
                > disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the
                > "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It will
                > take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny pores,
                > eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or
                > animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products
                > (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the
                > occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people will
                > die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been forgotten.
                > But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will
                > face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the
                > pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can
                > figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los
                > Alamos Labs
                > injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting their
                > dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his
                > Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from that
                > era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files" was
                > published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less than
                > what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the training
                > in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such
                > materials.
                >
                > Bashir A. Syed
                > Retired aerospace Physicist
                > Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
                > ----- Original Message -----
                > From: evelyn sardina
                > To: hreg
                > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
                > Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                >
                >
                > I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this
                > forum. Does anyone want to respond to this question though?
                >


              • Kevin Conlin
                I d have to say the whole concept is very impractical and irresponsible. It s bad enough we ve spewed our poisons into the atmosphere and seas without regard,
                Message 7 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
                • 0 Attachment

                  I’d have to say the whole concept is very impractical and irresponsible.  It’s bad enough we’ve spewed our poisons into the atmosphere and seas without regard, surely we don’t have to do the same with space!  I’m also quite sure the economics are horrible, I heard one space expert say it takes the figurative equivalent of several pounds of gold to launch one pound of payload into orbit.

                   

                   

                  ________________________

                  Kevin Conlin

                  Solarcraft, Inc.

                  4007 C Greenbriar

                  Stafford, TX 77477-4536

                  Local (281) 340-1224

                  Toll Free (877) 340-1224

                  Fax 281 340 1230

                  Cell 281 960 8979

                  kconlin@...

                  www.solarcraft.net

                   

                  Please make a note of our new contact information above.

                   


                  From: Bashir Syed [mailto:bsyed@...]
                  Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 7:07 PM
                  To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: Re: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........

                   

                  This aspect has been considered and due to more risks of having a mishap on the launch pad or close to earth, this method of disposing off any radio active material was abondoned. A few years ago a Satellite came very close to earth and crashed in Canada, spilling radioactive material used in Thermo-Nuclear power generator. After that such power sources were replaced by Photovoltaic PV Solar Cells (and Fuell Cells in International Space Station), much safer than earlier Thermo-Nuclear powerr sources.  

                  ----- Original Message -----

                  Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 6:33 PM

                  Subject: Re: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........

                   

                  -1. I agree with Bashir, except I'd delete the supernatural element.

                  -2. Re: space. I've wondered about it for some time. Humanity has some
                  reliable big rockets. Could a payload of nuclear waste be sent up with just
                  enough ooomph to escape Earth gravity? I guess the sun's gravity would ensure
                  delivery to the big furnace, where it wouldn't even make a ripple. Perhaps
                  with a pair of gravity assist "slingshots" as it swings by Venus and Mercury.
                  I don't know how many such shots it would take, but it should be worth
                  considering.

                  Ariel
                  - We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
                  otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
                  - All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
                  generations.
                  ------------ --------- --------- ------

                  > What about the suggestion about sending it up to space?
                  >
                  > Bashir Syed <bsyed@worldnet. att.net> wrote: I heard the same
                  > program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were
                  > enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their
                  > opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS, "
                  > many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other
                  > phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the
                  > false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis" completely
                  > based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said about
                  > Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
                  > Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents of
                  > disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the
                  > "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It will
                  > take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny pores,
                  > eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or
                  > animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products
                  > (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the
                  > occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people will
                  > die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been forgotten.
                  > But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will
                  > face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the
                  > pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can
                  > figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los
                  > Alamos Labs
                  > injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting their
                  > dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his
                  > Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from that
                  > era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files" was
                  > published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less than
                  > what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the training
                  > in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such
                  > materials.
                  >
                  > Bashir A. Syed
                  > Retired aerospace Physicist
                  > Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: evelyn sardina
                  > To: hreg
                  > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
                  > Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                  >
                  >
                  > I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this
                  > forum. Does anyone want to respond to this question though?
                  >

                • (no author)
                  Well, if (yes, admittedly IF) it works, space would not be contaminated by a payload traveling on its way to be incinerated by the sun. Next, is it worth a
                  Message 8 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Well, if (yes, admittedly IF) it works, "space" would not be contaminated by a
                    payload traveling on its way to be incinerated by the sun.

                    Next, is it worth a few pounds of gold to eliminate from the planet something
                    we don't want around because of how bad it is? What was the cost of cleaning up
                    the Brio site?

                    Ariel
                    - We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
                    otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
                    - All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
                    generations.
                    ------------------------------------

                    > I'd have to say the whole concept is very impractical and irresponsible. It's
                    > bad enough we've spewed our poisons into the atmosphere and seas without
                    > regard, surely we don't have to do the same with space! I'm also quite sure
                    > the economics are horrible, I heard one space expert say it takes the
                    > figurative equivalent of several pounds of gold to launch one pound of payload
                    > into orbit.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ________________________
                    >
                    > Kevin Conlin
                    >
                    > Solarcraft, Inc.
                    >
                    > 4007 C Greenbriar
                    >
                    > Stafford, TX 77477-4536
                    >
                    > Local (281) 340-1224
                    >
                    > Toll Free (877) 340-1224
                    >
                    > Fax 281 340 1230
                    >
                    > Cell 281 960 8979
                    >
                    > kconlin@...
                    >
                    > www.solarcraft.net <http://www.solarcraft.net/>
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > Please make a note of our new contact information above.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > _____
                    >
                    > From: Bashir Syed [mailto:bsyed@...]
                    > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 7:07 PM
                    > To: hreg@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > This aspect has been considered and due to more risks of having a mishap on
                    > the launch pad or close to earth, this method of disposing off any radio
                    > active material was abondoned. A few years ago a Satellite came very close to
                    > earth and crashed in Canada, spilling radioactive material used in
                    > Thermo-Nuclear power generator. After that such power sources were replaced by
                    > Photovoltaic PV Solar Cells (and Fuell Cells in International Space Station),
                    > much safer than earlier Thermo-Nuclear powerr sources.
                    >
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    >
                    > From: Ariel Thomann <mailto:ajthomann@...>
                    >
                    > To: hreg@yahoogroups. <mailto:hreg@yahoogroups.com> com
                    >
                    > Cc: evelynsardina@ <mailto:evelynsardina@...> yahoo.com
                    >
                    > Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 6:33 PM
                    >
                    > Subject: Re: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > -1. I agree with Bashir, except I'd delete the supernatural element.
                    >
                    > -2. Re: space. I've wondered about it for some time. Humanity has some
                    > reliable big rockets. Could a payload of nuclear waste be sent up with just
                    > enough ooomph to escape Earth gravity? I guess the sun's gravity would ensure
                    > delivery to the big furnace, where it wouldn't even make a ripple. Perhaps
                    > with a pair of gravity assist "slingshots" as it swings by Venus and Mercury.
                    > I don't know how many such shots it would take, but it should be worth
                    > considering.
                    >
                    > Ariel
                    > - We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
                    > otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
                    > - All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
                    > generations.
                    > ------------------------------------
                    >
                    >> What about the suggestion about sending it up to space?
                    >>
                    >> Bashir Syed <bsyed@worldnet. <mailto:bsyed%40worldnet.att.net> att.net>
                    > wrote: I heard the same
                    >> program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were
                    >> enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their
                    >> opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS,"
                    >> many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other
                    >> phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the
                    >> false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis"
                    > completely
                    >> based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said
                    > about
                    >> Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
                    >> Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents
                    > of
                    >> disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the
                    >> "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It
                    > will
                    >> take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny
                    > pores,
                    >> eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or
                    >> animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products
                    >> (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the
                    >> occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people
                    > will
                    >> die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been
                    > forgotten.
                    >> But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will
                    >> face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the
                    >> pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can
                    >> figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los
                    >> Alamos Labs
                    >> injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting
                    > their
                    >> dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his
                    >> Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from
                    > that
                    >> era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files"
                    > was
                    >> published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less
                    > than
                    >> what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the
                    > training
                    >> in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such
                    >> materials.
                    >>
                    >> Bashir A. Syed
                    >> Retired aerospace Physicist
                    >> Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
                    >> ----- Original Message -----
                    >> From: evelyn sardina
                    >> To: hreg
                    >> Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
                    >> Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                    >>
                    >>
                    >> I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this
                    >> forum. Does anyone want to respond to this question though?
                    >>
                    >
                    >
                  • evelyn sardina
                    It seems to me that the solar towers are the only thing massive enough to supply our energy needs. Weather they be the tower ( main source) or a tower
                    Message 9 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      It seems to me that the solar towers are the only thing massive enough to supply our energy needs.  Weather they " be " the tower ( main source) or a tower used to piggy back fossils like the ones Otto describes.  I don't understand why this has not taken off any faster. I saw they have plans for as soon as 2010 but not here in the U.S.  Does anyone know what is going on?  Why don't we built them right here?

                      Kevin Conlin <kconlin@...> wrote:
                      I’d have to say the whole concept is very impractical and irresponsible.  It’s bad enough we’ve spewed our poisons into the atmosphere and seas without regard, surely we don’t have to do the same with space!  I’m also quite sure the economics are horrible, I heard one space expert say it takes the figurative equivalent of several pounds of gold to launch one pound of payload into orbit.
                      ____________ _________ ___
                      Kevin Conlin
                      Solarcraft, Inc.
                      4007 C Greenbriar
                      Stafford, TX 77477-4536
                      Local (281) 340-1224
                      Toll Free (877) 340-1224
                      Fax 281 340 1230
                      Cell 281 960 8979
                      Please make a note of our new contact information above.

                      From: Bashir Syed [mailto:bsyed@ worldnet. att.net]
                      Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 7:07 PM
                      To: hreg@yahoogroups. com
                      Subject: Re: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                      This aspect has been considered and due to more risks of having a mishap on the launch pad or close to earth, this method of disposing off any radio active material was abondoned. A few years ago a Satellite came very close to earth and crashed in Canada, spilling radioactive material used in Thermo-Nuclear power generator. After that such power sources were replaced by Photovoltaic PV Solar Cells (and Fuell Cells in International Space Station), much safer than earlier Thermo-Nuclear powerr sources.  
                      ----- Original Message -----
                      Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2007 6:33 PM
                      Subject: Re: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                      -1. I agree with Bashir, except I'd delete the supernatural element.

                      -2. Re: space. I've wondered about it for some time. Humanity has some
                      reliable big rockets. Could a payload of nuclear waste be sent up with just
                      enough ooomph to escape Earth gravity? I guess the sun's gravity would ensure
                      delivery to the big furnace, where it wouldn't even make a ripple. Perhaps
                      with a pair of gravity assist "slingshots" as it swings by Venus and Mercury.
                      I don't know how many such shots it would take, but it should be worth
                      considering.

                      Ariel
                      - We are all Human beings here together. We have to help one another, since
                      otherwise there is NO ONE who will help.
                      - All countries need a NO REGRETS strategic energy policy. Think ahead 7
                      generations.
                      ------------ --------- --------- ------

                      > What about the suggestion about sending it up to space?
                      >
                      > Bashir Syed <bsyed@worldnet. att.net> wrote: I heard the same
                      > program on NPR about French storing such waste based on laws which were
                      > enacted under complete secrecy so that people will not express their
                      > opposition against such action. Man is blindly following the "SCIENTISTS, "
                      > many of whom have been proven wrong about Earth Warming, and many other
                      > phenomenon based on "Models" and neglecting many variables. Recently, the
                      > false prophets have invented a new technique called "Risk Analysis" completely
                      > based on Statistical laws. And we all know what Benjamin Disraeli said about
                      > Lies: "Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics."
                      > Earth quakes are a reality, and no matter what assumtions the proponents of
                      > disposal of radioactive waste might say, this waste will creep through the
                      > "CLAY" which is considered as strog as porcelain (which it is not). It will
                      > take relatively longer time, but sure enough it will get through tiny pores,
                      > eventually polluting the water table. Once that happens and people or
                      > animals drink water contaminated with highly radioactice waste by-products
                      > (some of these have a half-life of the order of billions of years) the
                      > occurrence of cancer and tumors will increase and many innocent people will
                      > die. But then those who decided burying the waste would have been forgotten.
                      > But remember, there is an ultimate Judgement by God that these people will
                      > face for deceiving their own people just because of Greed. Just see the
                      > pictures of victims and fetuses affected by Depleted Uranium and you can
                      > figure out the damage. After the Manhattan Project, the scientists at Los
                      > Alamos Labs
                      > injected Plutoium in terminal patients without their consent or letting their
                      > dear ones know about their actions. During Clinton's first term, his
                      > Secertary of Energy, Hazel O'Leary declassified lots of documents from that
                      > era (including those from Los Alamos Labs) and a book "Plutonium Files" was
                      > published to publicize this crime against humanity which ware not less than
                      > what the Nazis did during the World Wars. Those of us who have the training
                      > in this subject know quite well the hazards involved in handling such
                      > materials.
                      >
                      > Bashir A. Syed
                      > Retired aerospace Physicist
                      > Former Member: Radiation Safety Committee, NASA/JSC
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: evelyn sardina
                      > To: hreg
                      > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 9:03 PM
                      > Subject: [hreg] Fwd: Re: I guess I should ask........
                      >
                      >
                      > I know that the subject of radioactivity has been covered before on this
                      > forum. Does anyone want to respond to this question though?
                      >


                      Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.

                    • Steven Deterling
                      According to the Department of Energy, the US has about 55,000 metric tons of radioactive waste.
                      Message 10 of 10 , Aug 21, 2007
                      • 0 Attachment
                        According to the Department of Energy, the US has about 55,000 metric tons of radioactive waste. (http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/ym_repository/about_project/waste_explained/howmuch.shtml)

                        According to several sources, it costs about $5,000 - $10,000 to send a kilogram into orbit. And that's in orbit close to the earth. To get away from the earth, either into space or to the sun, would cost more. But let's just say that into orbit is good enough for now, and let's go with the lower estimate, $5,000/kg.

                        Doing the math, that gives you about $550,000,000,000, or $550 billion to put all the waste into space.

                        Let's use the Ariane 5 launch vehicle, as it can launch around 10,000 kg at one time. To send 55,000 metric tons into orbit, we'd only need 5,500 launches of the Ariane 5.

                        The Ariane 5 has a success rate of around 86%. Out of 5,500 launches, that means about 825 would have some sort of failure. Assume that half of those happen in the atmosphere, so that means you get a little over 400 vehicles putting some amount of radioactive waste in the atmosphere.

                        US launch vehicles have been generally more successful at launching, around a 91% to 95% success rate. So let's go with a 95% success rate. Out of 5,500 launches, that means that only about 275 launches fail. (not to fault the Ariane 5 here, it hasn't had that many launches)

                        Again, if we assume half of those fail in the atmosphere, then you only have to contend with about 137 incidents of radioactive waste in the atmosphere.

                        The Delta 2 spacecraft has a launch rate of around 12 per year. This is probably a good launch rate, but let's double that, so we can get 24 launches every year. At that rate, it will take about 229 years to launch all the current waste.

                        Of course, we are continuing to generate more waste all the time. The DOE predicts that the US will have about 119,000 metric tons by the year 2035.

                        Yucca mountain is slated to hold around 70,000 metric tons.

                        Steve





                        http://toolbar.Care2.com Make your computer carbon-neutral (free).

                        http://www.Care2.com Green Living, Human Rights and more - 7 million members!
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.