This probably sounds absurd, but why doesn't NASA use some of the nuclear waste to power radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) on spacecraft traveling beyond Mars? We would produce fuel for such spacecraft far more cheaply and could deposit it safely in the cores of the giant planets, rather than somewhere on Earth.

Like the thinking, xel. Hooray for the Universes method of cleaning up after itself. It appears we're learning from it...

How about we stay clear of this EXTREMELY deadly material altogether? Irradiating food and then eating it? Maybe everyone should sit down with a bag of irradiated bt popcorn and watch the movie "Silkwood" first. Do a little investigation into the safety of irradiation before you endorse it.

@ OZGuy | k_m | lite |,

You three stooges should read the history about the women who hand painted watch faces with radium, only to develop huge cancerous goiters later on. This spent material is even more dangerous.

This probably sounds absurd, but why doesn't NASA use some of the nuclear waste to power radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) on spacecraft traveling beyond Mars? We would produce fuel for such spacecraft far more cheaply and could deposit it safely in the cores of the giant planets, rather than somewhere on Earth.

Most isotopes are not useable in atomic batteries for a variety of reasons. They have the wrong kind of decay, their half lives are too short, or too long, etc.

There is nothing new here. Sr-90 makes a good radio-isotope for RTGs, though not as good as Pu-238. The Russians have been using Sr-90 for quite some time. I prefer SRGs (Stirling Radio-thermal Generators) due to their significantly higher efficiency.

Cs-137 makes a good Gamma emitter for sterilization.

Both can be extracted easily by vacuum distillation of fluorinated SNF. They both have extremely high boiling points as fluorides so will remain together in the still bottoms. They can then be easily separated since one is water soluble and the other not.

telekinetic wrote:
You three stooges should read the history about the women who hand painted watch faces with radium, only to develop huge cancerous goiters later on. This spent material is even more dangerous.

Said women also were prone to lick the tip of the brush to give it a nice point for all that delicate work. Not a good idea.

There is such a thing as overdoing it. Your attitude is overdoing the fear thing. Botulism toxin is extremely dangerous too, but it is used safely every day for medical procedures.

SNF is a resource. We should USE it, not bury it. I am happy that this group has gotten some folks to think about it some more.

@ sa kiteman:
"When food is exposed to high doses of ionising radiation, the chemical composition and nutritional content of food can change. Radiolytic by-products are often formed in irradiated food. Very few of these chemicals have been adequately studied for toxicity. One such chemical - 2-DCB - can cause DNA damage in rat colon cells at high doses." -Medical News Today

People welcoming known and unknown toxic processes with open arms and shuddering at the thought of eating organically grown broccoli is a cancer tumor's dream come true.

At least one company is now producing electrically driven X-ray generators as a Cobalt-60 substitute which have a similar energy and fluence to Cobalt-60. (1Mev with 200,000 amp beam currents; kiloRad to megaRad fluence) Why bother with dealing with hazardous isotopes with potential terrorist uses when a simple electrically powered system will do the same job?

How about we stay clear of this EXTREMELY deadly material altogether? Irradiating food and then eating it? Maybe everyone should sit down with a bag of irradiated bt popcorn and watch the movie "Silkwood" first. Do a little investigation into the safety of irradiation before you endorse it.

You didn't read the article did you? It's gamma rays. Like light. It doesn't hang around on the food waiting to jump out on you when you turn your back.

Even the radioactive substances themselves are not as dangerous as you claim. More people get sick panicking about radiation than from exposure to it. Compare deaths from having too much iron in your system to radiation sickness and realize that iron has a much better claim to being "very dangerous" yet they sell it in pharmacies for people to gobble.

why doesn't NASA use some of the nuclear waste to power radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) on spacecraft traveling beyond Mars

Too low power/energy density and fast decay rate. Also, the generation of gamma rays and neutrons is particularly unwanted in these applications, as they cannot be shielded easily and they destroy the electronic equipment.