Did not know that about Thorium byproducts. Thanks Axil. Regards, JM
On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > *Cold Fusion is the goal...only cold fusion...* > > Thorium fission produces loads of *Neptunium* 237. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium > > In many ways, Neptunium is a bigger problem as plutonium. > > Weapons applications ...It can make bombs > > Neptunium is fissionable <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fissionable>, and > could theoretically be used as fuel in a fast neutron > reactor<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_neutron_reactor>or a nuclear > weapon <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon>, with a critical > mass<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass>of around 60 kilograms. > [14] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-rsc-14> In 1992, > the U.S. Department of > Energy<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Department_of_Energy>declassified > the statement that neptunium-237 "can be used for a nuclear > explosive > device".[21]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-RDD-7-21>It is > not believed that an actual weapon has ever been constructed using > neptunium. As of 2009, the world production of neptunium-237 by commercial > power reactors was over 1000 critical masses a year, but to extract the > isotope from irradiated fuel elements would be a major industrial > undertaking. > > In September 2002, researchers at the Los Alamos National > Laboratory<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Alamos_National_Laboratory>briefly > created the first known nuclear critical > mass <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_mass> using neptunium in > combination with shells of enriched > uranium<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enriched_uranium>( > U-235 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-235>), discovering that the > critical mass of a bare sphere of neptunium-237 "ranges from kilogram > weights in the high fifties to low > sixties,"[1]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-critical1-1>showing > that it *"is > about as good a bomb material as > **U-235*<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium-235>*."[17] > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-critical-17>* The > United States Federal government made plans in March 2004 to move America's > supply of separated neptunium to a nuclear-waste disposal site in > Nevada<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nevada> > . > > > But this is really a problem. > > > Role in nuclear waste > Neptunium-237 is the most mobile > actinide<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actinide>in the deep > geological > repository<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_geological_repository>environment. > [23] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-23> This makes it > and its predecessors such as > americium-241<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americium-241>candidates of > interest for destruction by nuclear > transmutation > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_transmutation>.[24]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-24> > > Due to its long half-life, neptunium becomes the major contributor of the > total radiation in 10,000 years. As it is unclear what happens to the > containment in that long time span, an extraction of the neptunium would > minimize the contamination of the environment if the nuclear waste could be > mobilized after several thousand > years.[25]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-25> > [26] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neptunium#cite_note-26> > > Neptunium-237 is water soluble and will contaminate ground water. It is > the major challenge in isolating nuclear waste. > > > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Alain Sepeda <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I find the idea to burn plutonium (with thorium) a very good idea. >> >> when LENR get mainstream and dominant, we would have to get rid of >> nuclear wastes. >> for high activity waste, there is no problem because they have shortlife. >> for transuranians like plutonium, we would need fastneutron reactors, not >> to produce heat, but to get rid of Pu and alike... >> >> this is the only technical problem I see when LENR get mainstream. >> getting rid of nuclear wastes, at good cost. >> >> >> 2014/1/6 Foks0904 . <[email protected]> >> >> Thorium is far from an endgame solution, but at least it buys us some >>> time to get on the right track before everything crashes down. But I >>> understand your cynicism toward such irrational exuberance. >>> >>> Regards, >>> John >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 9:55 AM, Blaze Spinnaker < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Am I the only one that can't help but chuckle at this: "Norway >>>> recently has successfully >>>> installed<http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/160131-thorium-nuclear-reactor-trial-begins-could-provide-cleaner-safer-almost-waste-free-energy> >>>> a >>>> reactor using a mixture of thorium and plutonium," >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 6:47 AM, Foks0904 . <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Vick Stenger is a notorious pseudo skeptical personality. No surprise >>>>> whatsoever about his opinion on this subject. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 3:31 AM, Alain Sepeda >>>>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/victor-stenger/fusion-fission-and-fossil_b_4533513.html >>>>>> >>>>>> pathetic how far he believes his lack of information and assert >>>>>> errors without checking >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
