Nuclear Waste Not Mac OS
ZDNet's technology experts deliver the best tech news and analysis on the latest issues and events in IT for business technology professionals, IT managers and tech-savvy business people. When handled properly it doesn't. The small amounts that do reach the environment are insignificant compared to the large amounts of naturally occurring radioactive materials already in the environment: uranium, thorium, potassium-40, carbon-14, r.
Article Title
Authors
Nuclear Waste Not Mac Os Download
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.
Recommended Citation
Kristin Moody-O'Grady, Nuclear Waste Dumping in the Oceans: Has the Cold War Taught Us Anything, 35 Nat. Resources J. 695 (1995).
Available at: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/nrj/vol35/iss3/9
Nuclear Waste Not Mac Os 11
Share
To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.
NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.
The waste forms produced during the process of generating nuclear energy constitute a nearly intractable management problem because of technical and social factors.
Technically, what makes dealing with some forms of nuclear waste so difficult is the presence of radioactive substances with extremely long half-lives, hundreds of thousands of years in some cases. Since radiation is hazardous to health, even at low levels, exposure to these wastes will be harmful to people and other living organisms as long as the wastes remain radioactive, and they have to be isolated from human contact for up to a million years. Such a need for stewardship is unprecedented in human history.
As explained in a review in WIREs Energy and Environment, the solution advocated by the nuclear industry and many scientific and technical bodies—disposing of these wastes deep underground, in repositories constructed in suitable geological media—still poses a long-term risk because, over the long timespan needed for the radioactivity to decay, any container or waste package will likely corrode and radioactive materials will percolate and contaminate ground water sources. Experiences of failures and accidents at pilot facilities also renders the long term safety of repositories a dubious proposition. Another technical method that is advocated by some in the nuclear industry as a way of managing radioactive wastes is called reprocessing, but that comes with its own set of problems and does not really eliminate any radioactive waste or make it easier to dispose of.
Socially, the main problem is the presence of significant public opposition, almost anywhere in the world, to such facilities. Substantial majorities of people consider nuclear waste with dread and do not approve plans to dispose of radioactive wastes near them, or, often, far away either. Public resistance has halted multiple proposals to set up sites to bury nuclear waste in several countries. The failure to set up repositories and thus seemingly solve the problem of nuclear waste has been one important factor that helped counter the propaganda effort by the nuclear industry to market nuclear power as a solution to climate change, and more generally make it harder to expand nuclear energy on a large scale. Conversely, the realization that nuclear waste is so difficult to deal with offers yet another reason to phase out nuclear energy.
Kindly contributed by M. V. Ramana.