We're talking about 70,000 metric tons of radioactive waste.
How does France handle their nuclear waste problem? As I understand it, a large portion of their energy needs are provided through nuclear plants. Surely they must have nuclear waste to dispose of. I honestly don't know the answer.
So, back to the tanks.
They leak, you find out, you build a new (and better) tank, then transfer the contents.
Why has this not happened?
We can not be passing the buck down the road on this any more.
My point was that leaking tanks can be fixed, and or replaced. That did not happen. The reason is political.
As for Hanford, there was nothing to keep it from being transported. If it was stored in tanks on the ground, it could just as easily be stored in tanks on train cars. By the time we get the safety aspect down to an acceptable level, the entire area will be radioactive and everyone will be complaining about why we had to vitrify the stuff to start with. In our efforts to make everything "risk free" we cause more problems than we solve.
Transporting the waste in it's current state would be insane.
You should stick to commenting on things that you actually know about.
|Terms of Service | Search/Archive | Feedback | Contact Information | DC50tv |
Baltimore Sun | Chicago Tribune | Daily Press | Hartford Courant | LA Times | Orlando Sentinel | Sun Sentinel
The Morning Call | The Virginia Gazette
Baltimore Sun, 501 N. Calvert Street, P.O. Box 1377, Baltimore, MD 21278