Deep Borehole Disposal

Re:Deep Borehole Disposal by otterpro on Monday January 13, 2020 @01:08PM (#22036934)

It's probably a bad idea, but has anyone thought of sending nuclear waste into space? I've always thought that it might be possible to launch it into space using a space elevator (if that is even feasible), but then I can also see the disaster if something bad happened during the launch, resulting in cataclysmic event.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deep Borehole Disposal by nkrisc on Monday January 13, 2020 @03:17PM (#22038156)

Putting a bunch of nuclear waste onto a rocket (basically a dirty-bomb ICBM) doesn't seem like the best idea. Look at how many rockets, to this day, blow up on launch.

If, however, this is contingent upon a space elevator, I wouldn't give it much thought at this time.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deep Borehole Disposal by hinkley on Monday January 13, 2020 @01:55PM (#22037383)

Some earlier spacecraft used thermoelectric generators powered by isotopic decay. More recently there have been some vigorous protests of this design, even though the modern versions apparently encase the radioactive material in a ceramic matrix.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioisotope_thermoelectric_ge...

If a well designed, low yield nuclear reactor can't be launched then firing random waste into space will surely draw many more protestors.

Also I'm often surprised by the volume of waste we're talking about here. Under this umbrella you have not only fuel rods but also contaminated materials (eg, building materials, soil), and the launch costs per pound are very, very high.

I think I heard at one point someone was trying to work out if they could safely evaporate water (heat of vaporization of water being much lower than most isotopes?) and just store the residuals but even that got pushback. Hanford, if memory serves, has a rather substantial volume of liquid waste to deal with, and some of the containment vessels are past their expected lifespan.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deep Borehole Disposal by hinkley on Monday January 13, 2020 @05:33PM (#22039493)

Also I can't believe I spaced on this, but we are trained by movies to ignore the fact that we are in orbit around the Sun, and you can't just 'drop' things into the Sun.

From the numbers I can find, the delta-v to achieve escape velocity from the Earth is just over half the delta-v needed to crash into the Sun. To "get rid" of something you need a big rocket. To get rid of it forever, the rocket equation means you need a rocket many times bigger to go 90% faster.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deep Borehole Disposal by 867-5309 on Monday January 13, 2020 @01:52PM (#22037346)

I'd imagine it would not have to leave just this planet, but also the whole solar system not to pose any future threat

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deep Borehole Disposal by NopeNotToday on Monday January 13, 2020 @02:53PM (#22037936)

We can make anything leave the solar system, with an escape velocity and the proper orientation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_artificial_objects_lea...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Deep Borehole Disposal by RunningDroid on Monday January 13, 2020 @04:17PM (#22038695)

Some of the nuclear material may be valuable in the future, so it's probably better to set it in a stable orbit between Jupiter and Saturn.

[ Parent | on HN ]