If Uranium's half life is 4.5 billion years, why does it become waste

[sophiecentaur]

If you say that radioactive 'waste' is not waste because it has some use and will eventually decay to something harmless that is like saying that Dioxins will eventually break down in the environment and be harmless and that the red hot coal I picked up in my hand just then is harmless because it will, eventually cool down. Both of the above are bad news and so is (what we call) radioactive waste. Does the word we use make any difference to this?

 

[splitringtail]

If you say that radioactive 'waste' is not waste because it has some use and will eventually decay to something harmless that is like saying that Dioxins will eventually break down in the environment and be harmless and that the red hot coal I picked up in my hand just then is harmless because it will, eventually cool down. Both of the above are bad news and so is (what we call) radioactive waste. Does the word we use make any difference to this?

Waste is a subjective term. If I put my soda cans in the trash and it goes to a landfill, then it is pretty much waste even though it can be recycled.

A talented chemist can extract/recover many things from waste and what not. Problem is how expensive it is. Some things are a matter of technology as one poster said, but it applies to everything not just nuclear waste.

Computers have noble metals in them, but its hard to extract so you don't see many places buying them up to get the material. I bet you can actually get more gold by going out to old mines and pan for it than trying to get some from a modern computer.

Problem with nuclear waste is how and where to store it--it is a pretty big debate. However, up 95%, give or take a few percent, is still uranium. This would reduce the amount of waste that needs to be stored. It will also remove some of the longer lived isotopes. With advanced fast reactors, we could "burn up| some the minor actinides. This can lessen the geological requirements needed for storing the waste.

At the OP, decayed Uranium would actually be a different element. It is just called waste because they put it in a reactor and where it was used and removed.

 

[sophiecentaur]

I think, in the context of Spent Nuclear Fuel we could substitute the term 'Waste' with 'sodding nuisance' or 'open-ended liability' to be nearer the mark.

 

[splitringtail]

I always wondered why one could not use DU for weight plates in lifting. I would think there would actually be a market for them. There are plenty lifters always trying to pack as much weight as possible on barbells. In Olympic lifting they put thick rubber coatings to make them safer. For DU, that would cover them so you do not have to handle the DU itself--I am thinking about its chemical toxicity as radiologically its activity is quite low. As for Radon build up, I would think a properly ventilated room could eliminate that. It would be the perfect prank for those accustomed cast iron plates.

 

[Drakkith]

I don't think the need is great enough to use Depleted Uranium. Plus then you'd have to look at health risks, even if it is low.

 

[Astronuc]

Waste is a subjective term. If I put my soda cans in the trash and it goes to a landfill, then it is pretty much waste even though it can be recycled.

Yes - but it is also a legal definition.

http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/basic-ref/glossary/high-level-radioactive-waste-hlw.html

http://www.nrc.gov/waste/high-level-waste.html

Then there is industrial waste, which could be organic (hydrocarbon) chemical waste or heavy metals. Some organic chemical and all heavy metals are generally classified as toxic waste. The goal is to isolate the waste from the environment and people, just as the nuclear industry and government have the goal to keep radionuclides isolated from the environment and people. On the other hand, not all non-radioactive industrial waste is not necessarily as restricted as 'nuclear waste'.

Much of spent fuel (~95-96%) can be used again (recycled/reprocessed), with the remain 4-5% calcined and vitrified into a mineral that should be placed in a geological stable respository.

 

[daveb]

Much of spent fuel (~95-96%) can be used again (recycled/reprocessed), with the remain 4-5% calcined and vitrified into a mineral that should be placed in a geological stable respository.

I imagine if we had the technology to make reprocessigne economically feasible so that each radioistope could be isolated, even that remainder would be usable as some calibration or reference standard.

 

[splitringtail]

Yes - but it is also a legal definition.

True, they are legal definitions of course, hazardous waste has to be regulated.

Speaking of industrial waste, Xylene, Toulene, and some variants of Mineral Spirits are aromatic hydrocarbons that can be purchased from any hardware store, usually for thinning paints. I have always wondered how many of the homeowners and other small time users dispose of such chemicals. It would not be surprise me if most simply poured them down the drain or dump it on the ground, rather than putting it in an appropriate container and taking it a hazardous material facility.

Edit: To be a little fair for some places, a nearby hazardous material place would probably be a very long drive.