Revision as of 14:36, 28 November 2015 editGah4 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users9,719 edits →Proliferation: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:27, 18 March 2016 edit undoKku (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users115,374 edits →top: highNext edit → | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | {{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= | ||
{{WikiProject Environment|class=B|priority=High}} | {{WikiProject Environment|class=B|priority=High|importance=High}} | ||
{{WikiProject Glass|class=b|importance=mid}} | {{WikiProject Glass|class=b|importance=mid}} | ||
{{WikiProject Physics |class=c|importance=low}} | {{WikiProject Physics |class=c|importance=low}} |
Revision as of 13:27, 18 March 2016
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Archives |
This page has archives. Sections older than 150 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
Radioactive Waste
radioactive waste contains very toxic material — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.11.123 (talk) 04:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Cost of Storing Radioactive Waste Through Staff
If we take some of the models of storing radioactive waste at 10,000, 100,000 or 1 million years.
I was just wondering if there was a security personnel and there wage were say from the year 2000 as a baseline say a salary $10,000 per year.
What would the salary be of that person doing that job in 10,000, 100,000 or 1 million years time be?
I believe it would take more than one person to maintain such a facility to hold radioactive waste.
This is just a simple question on economics.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Supertoaster2 (talk • contribs) 16:47, 16 June 2009
Figures lack units
A few figures give the activities in Curies (1 Curie = 3.7e10 decays/sec) as a function of time. But they need to state the amount of waste that produces this activity. Is this for one kg? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.234.140.124 (talk) 17:59, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
according to a turncoat
http://en.wikipedia.org/Radioactive_waste#Illegal_dumping
shouldn't it say "according to a whistleblower"? Turncoat seems unfairly harsh.Ballchef (talk) 01:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Not just harsh, but value laden in a way that whistleblower is not. i am changing it. Just more examples of nuclear industry influence on WP content, i guess. Paxus Calta (talk) 14:30, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
- Another idea - while, admittedly, not quite as probable as this being a conspiracy by the nuclear industry big pharma reptilian illuminati - is that the editor who added it was quoting the word used repeatedly in the Guardian article. Kolbasz (talk) 15:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Misrepresentation of source
In the section "Geologic disposal": "Aside from dilution, chemically toxic stable elements in some waste such as arsenic remain toxic for up to billions of years or indefinitely."
- The source mentions arsenic in the context of long-term waste problems from carcinogenic elements from the buried wastes produced by non-nuclear methods of generating electricity ! The point being that while we worry about the danger of nuclear waste, these dangers dissapear with time, unlike those of non-nuclear carcinogens in the waste produced by fossile fuel plants. Ssscienccce (talk) 18:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
I might edit this a bit, in part because of misuse of words, using radioisotopes, rather than radionuclides. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Graemem56 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Specifically, C & C are radio-isotopes, & CC are non-radioactive isotopes. But C, K & Sr are not radio-isotopes for the same reason that C, K & Sr are not isotopes. C, K & Sr are radio-nuclides.Graemem56 (talk) 12:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Proliferation
In addition to plutonium-239, which is highly suitable for building nuclear weapons, it contains large amounts of undesirable contaminants: plutonium-240, plutonium-241, and plutonium-238. Pu240 has a high spontaneous fission rate, which complicates weapons design. Pu238 is an alpha emitter, I don't see SF specified. Does Pu241 also have a high SF rate? Gah4 (talk) 14:36, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
Categories:- All unassessed articles
- B-Class Environment articles
- High-importance Environment articles
- B-Class glass articles
- Mid-importance glass articles
- B-Class glass articles of Mid-importance
- WikiProject Glass articles
- C-Class physics articles
- Low-importance physics articles
- C-Class physics articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Engineering articles
- Low-importance Engineering articles
- WikiProject Engineering articles