Canada plans to bury Nuclear Waste Near Lake Huron

[Carmody]

Then engage in the work yourself.

As usual, that is what it comes down to.

Note the tone of my prior post, I read it before you added your last.

I gave you more than enough frameworks to look into it yourself.

And no matter how you may feel about the one specific thing, or data point... the area involved is a HUGE doorway, which a thousand different things can cascade through.

[Bob]

Posted by Carmody (here)
Bob, you are coming from your science background.

At this point, this methodology and knowledge base of yours.... has no experience in the field, in this area.

It really is that simple.

"No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it."

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

- Albert Einstein.

I'm trying to engage in debate, but that felt more like attack.

Do you have a solution? No?

Then don't slam a potential answer that has been offered...instead.. move toward expanding it, not tearing not down. if that requires proofing, then step into it, but don't substitute what looks like derision covered up in.

When one has only a single position of knowledge to work form, the trick it to turn the chessboard around and move toward proofing and expanding something as opposed to attacking it. The scientific method as it has been taught is a bunch of pretentious egoistic horse****, and it hobbles itself from the get go.

And that, my friend, is the difference between genius and a plodder. To move the self to the new location, so the thing can be seen from multiple angles, and it's truths can be discovered. To not wait for providence, but to inject the conditions required for extrapolation, into the equation. This requires a change in the self. The essence of alchemy is exactly that.

Just run the numbers by the "experiment" quoted. Who cares if transmutation happened or not, if alchemy happened or not. The point is what I said, run the time needed to address the amount of typical waste. The time needed is not practical based on the "evidence" presented. Nothing more than that.

[Carmody]

You don't know that. You looked at single aspect of one test and began the process of tear down and dismissal. based one ONE data point, of ONE experiment. I gave you the ability to sift through hundreds of other data points, with the openings provided.

I will not engage you further. It will not be fruitful.

[Bob]

Back on topic, the issue is Canada plans to dispose of the radioactive waste from a plant that is located on Lake Huron. They have assorted wastes that need to be handled. They have no doubt as has been pointed out, seen that there are people claiming that radioactive waste can be neutralized by an alchemic-transmutative process.

It has been suggested that there is a conspiracy that they are not using alchemic-transmutative processes to neutralize the radioactive waste. Running the numbers using the data provided in the alchemic-transmutative process "experiment" it shows that the amount of time and energy needed to deal with the quantity of waste is excessively long (the numbers have been pointed out in earlier posts in this thread).

It is my assumption that they have run the numbers themselves and there is no conspiracy present, the numbers just say, it is impossible to deal with the time needed to process the immense quantities of waste.

Canada will then as will the others who have reactor wastes needed to be handled proceed to deal with it in the ways they have.

[Bob]

Ontario it appears has decided to not rebuild some of it's reactors. But is it the desire to minimize waste, or something else?

"Costs have fallen since the province first paused its plans to build two new reactors in 2009, when the estimated price was said to be as high as $26 billion.

"The costs have come down, but they have not come down enough to justify us building new nuclear when we have a very comfortable surplus," said Chiarelli.

"It is not wise to invest billions and billions of dollars in new nuclear when the power is not needed."

"The Progressive Conservatives said backing off on the new reactors was proof the Liberals have given up on getting Ontario's manufacturing sector back on its feet, which would drive up demand for electricity. "There is no clearer indication that this government has tossed up the white flag to say that the jobs aren't coming back, and that is incredibly concerning to me," said PC energy critic Lisa MacLeod. "We know that if the economy is to pick up, we're going to need those nuclear reactors."

"The New Democrats welcomed the decision to kill the new nuclear builds, but said the government should have made it before it gave companies millions to help with applications for the new reactors. "It's a good development," said NDP energy critic Peter Tabuns, "but I just wish it had come sooner before we spent $26 million giving these nuclear companies cash to prepare their tenders."

"The Society of Professional Engineers accused the Liberals of political interference in the long-term energy plan, and said no decision on new nuclear builds should be made until competing options have been examined by the Ontario Energy Board."

There is a plan to INCREASE natural gas burning (instead of Coal or Nuclear). And to increase HydroElectric. There is discussion of wind power nearby Bruce Atomic power station.

ref: http://www.thestar.com/news/queenspa...ario_plan.html and
ref: http://www.transcanada.com/6110.html - TRANSCANADA gas fired power plant - "... to develop, own and operate a new 900-megawatt natural gas-fired power plant at Ontario Power Generation’s Lennox Generating Station property near the village of Bath in eastern Ontario."

"Ontario Power Generation is beefing up its hydro-electric capacity.
"The biggest project is expanding capacity on a series of power plants on the Lower Mattagami River in northwestern Ontario, which will add 438 megawatts to the system.

"OPG also just carved a new tunnel through the escarpment at Niagara Falls to feed more water to the Queenston generating station. The tunnel should add about one per cent to the province’s power output — enough to supply a city the size of Kingston."

ref: http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/ontario-ki...#ixzz2mMH0dDBi

[Bob]

http://www.nuclearwaste.ca/

An informative website that explains a lot about Canada's nuclear waste burial policies.

As you can see above, Canada is looking at many communities for radioactive waste burial sites, not just the single site under Lake Huron..

UPDATED: From the Nuclear Waste dot Canada website,

"What is the nuclear industry looking for?
The nuclear industry - under the banner of the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) - is looking for a community willing to become the "host" to all of Canada's nuclear fuel waste - approximately 50,000 tonnes to date.

"The NWMO plan is to place the waste deep underground. It includes the option of centralizing the waste in temporary storage at the site selected for a geological repository while research is still underway and prior to the site having been fully investigated."

Again, the small amount of waste from the Bruce Nuclear power station for recent disposal, only 16,000 tons dwarfs the total amount that Canada has to deal with.

50,000 tons is no small amount to deal with. Apparently, I believe that is why they are looking for a location similar to the US Yucca mountain site. It is assumed that if they cannot find a single site, they will go with the plan to distribute it in as many sites as they can.

"The concept of burying nuclear waste failed an environmental assessment review in Canada. The NWMO’s “Adaptive Phased Management” is based on Atomic Energy of Canada Limited’s 1988 “concept” of burying nuclear waste in the Canadian Shield. After a ten year review – which included 13 months of public hearings – the review panel concluded in 1998 that the AECL concept had not been demonstrated to be safe and acceptable."

[Rocky_Shorz]

make it simple, I've been saying it for a while, Brown's gas isn't magic, it is from taking 2 metal plates and putting a charge to them under water to create HHO which is captured through a bubbler, what is in that bubbler is what is being called brown's gas, Brown made it known, which is why it is called a Brown's Hydrogen gas generator... Not, Brown Gas as in a color... the waste is water, and with slight modification to the engine, can power a Prius with water protection on the engine, turning wind generators to power a neighborhood... Inverter not included...

or you could spend $1,000,000 for solar for the same amount of energy water provides for free...

smack bubblers have been around for years to modify cars and motorcycles for cleaner and faster performance feeding the mixture in through the air intake.

it burns with low compression, so engines need to be modified to run off water...

anyone in Japan or Canada with stainless steel plates, electricity and water can make HHO gas...

that's why the hydrogen vehicles were pulled off the drawing board, we could drive for free...

Posted by Carmody (here)
Brown's gas breaks down radioactive waste. See the video listed on this forum and see the formula of how it is done.

My experience in these matters: firsthand, personal. personally performed the same experiment as the Canadian government did, which is who is in the video.

If one disbelieves, they can find out if it is true and transmutation is true, for about $6000.

Which is a very small fee to pay, to find the truth and to save the world from nuclear waste.

$6000 is for a brown's gas generator, one that can do the work, as in easily transmute a few pounds or more of radioactive waste per day.

(Google 'eagle research' Brown's gas generators)

Thus, the fact that Canada wants to hide nuke waste when their Chalk River Research center* knows very well that this whole thing can be stopped by getting rid of the waste directly, and simply.

Forever, with no risk, and no loss. For pennies on the dollar.

(#Canada's version of 'Los Alamo nuclear labs')

The Chalk River Research people..... are the people in the video!!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh, Bye the bye..Los Alamos is also well aware of this technology. so they don't have a waste problem but they also refuse to use the technology. even though this mess with fukushima exists and we are seemingly trying to have the same thing happen in the USA.

My information source regarding their knowing:

PEOPLE WHO WORK THERE.

So, in essence exactly ~WHO~ is blocking this information and technology from getting out and being used to end this 'nuclear terror'?

the government offices of Nuclear research in Japan are also very well aware of all of this.

Again, exactly ~WHO~ and ~WHAT~ is blocking this from happening?

[Bob]

Green Peace studied the Canadian Nuclear waste management plan, and noted that the Darlington Reactor site has a production of wastes which will take on average 2.5 million years to decay to safe levels. Much longer than the Bruce Power Plant wastes. Darlington is seldom talked about. I am beginning to see why.

The Green Peace report also notes:

The isolation period for waste from new generation reactors will increase to 2.3 million years from one million years before radioactivity approaches that of natural uranium;
Environmental and human health consequences will significantly increase in severity if there is an accident or terrorist attack involving higher burn up nuclear fuel;
More toxic fuel waste will increase costs of managing waste, including costs of interim storage, transportation and long-term storage in a repository; and
Despite billions of dollars in research internationally, there is no technologically proven or universally acceptable long-term repository for fuel waste in operation anywhere in the world. The cost of repositories is speculative.

“By ignoring the increased costs to future generations for managing radioactive waste, governments are subsidizing nuclear power today, undermining green power and preventing the development of cleaner and cheaper green energy,” said Stensil.

ref: http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/...tons-reactors/

ref: http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/en/...ace-report/#a0

What does Canada's Darlington Reactor and Fukushima have in common?

"Does the Darlington’s nuclear station design meet modern international nuclear safety standards?

"No. Darlington’s CANDU reactors share a design flaw with the Chernobyl RBMK reactors. It’s called ‘positive reactivity.’ Most international safety regulators shun reactors designs like that but Canada's nuclear safety regulator has continued to allow positive reactivity because all Canadian reactors in operation have it.

"The four Darlington reactors also share one containment system because OPG wanted to save money. Such sharing of safety systems would not be allowed if International Atomic Energy Agency safety guidelines were applied to Darlington. In the event of an accident at more than one reactor Darlington has a limited ability to contain radiation releases.

"Does Ontario Power Generation believe a Fukushima or Chernobyl-scale accident can happen at Darlington?

"Yes. OPG believes nuclear accidents like the Fukushima accident are possible here in Canada.

"That’s why OPG has asked for the special legislation – called the Nuclear Liability Act - which protects them from compensating victims in the event of an accident."

ref: http://www.greenpeace.org/canada/stopdarlington/ (STOP DARLINGTON REACTOR)

ED NOTE: Alex Paterson - Media & Public Relations

c: (416) 524-8496
alex.paterson@
greenpeace.org

the group has researched all possible alternatives for dealing with RadioActive Wastes, the only solution that can work is to combine the radioactive fuel-like byproducts with thorium/uranium and "burn such up" in thorium-uranium breeder reactors.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news...alf-the-price/ from MIT

General Atomics (I had a few posts with Tesla_WTC on this reactor in a different thread), has a design, and TransAtomic's design produces 20 times as much power for its size as Oak Ridge’s technology.

That means relatively small, yet powerful, reactors could be built less expensively in factories and shipped by rail instead of being built on site like conventional ones. Transatomic also modified the original molten-salt design to allow it to run on nuclear waste.

That means burning up the wastes.

AND having IMMENSE quantities of clean low cost energy, with the new reactor systems.

Granted this is not micro-sized off-the-grid Thorium Powerpacks, but it is along the mindset of the megawatt and gigawatt power needs of existing massive country-sized power systems. These are lower cost energy production systems than the dirty uranium-plutonium based reactors that have been creating the thousands of tons of wastes worldwide.


With these designs megawatt and gigawatt systems being setup as a thorium-breeder, potentially they can run for up to a 30 years without needing new fuel nor creating new uranium based wastes.

Atomics are really 10's if not 100's of times of more energy OUT than energy in. A small amount of fuel as pointed out puts out more energy than all the fuel from Saudi Arabia for hundreds of years.

And a way to burn up all the spent DEPLETED URANIUM.

Does anybody think it's sensible or smart to burn one's water, or burn hydrocarbons for fuel? Safe reactors, not stupid plutonium reactors are workable if low cost cleaner energy is desired.

http://www.ga.com/energy-multiplier-module - this reactor burns up nuclear waste cleanly !

http://www.kusi.com/video?clipId=9174595&autostart=true - a video

and the writeup explaining how Nuclear waste from Uranium dirty reactors can be cleaned up AND produce immense amounts of clean energy



YA that sounds like a real solution to me.

With not only perfect clean up but a way to get immense clean energy out in sufficient quantities to run industry and countries.

[Rocky_Shorz]

thanks for the smile Bob,

Did I ever mention I used to drink beer with an engineer from G.A. that was looking for a true clean energy solution, I've met a lot of great minds over the last 30 years since my dreams started bringing me true clean energy solutions...

G.A., time to shut the military wing finding ways to blow a gnat off a monkey's butt from 100 miles without hurting the chimp... That means nothing in a warless world, get the answers you have to clean up this world rolling, and I mean by yesterday...

what are we doing about the California sized mass of radiated material floating towards the West coast, can it be pulled to the surface and burned clean from the same procedure?

[Bob]

Posted by Rocky_Shorz (here)
[...]
G.A., time to shut the military wing finding ways to blow a gnat off a monkey's butt from 100 miles without hurting the chimp... That means nothing in a warless world, get the answers you have to clean up this world rolling, and I mean by yesterday...

see http://www.ga.com/alternative-energy

GA has a lot of involvement in alternative energy, energy clean up projects. They STILL build some amazing KILLER DRONES (see my link under the Robotic Predator Drones).

They are a corporation - the mind of the corporation is scarcity manipulation, make money. If the Board is "Green oriented" the projects come out that way. If the project is energy oriented and being green and cleaning up the wastes at the same time, as they say, with their new Energy Multiplier reactors, the world can have ALL the energy it needs or wants, without the wastes, and inside of 100 years ALL the transuranic wastes can be cleaned up, not BLOWING THEM APART as suggested in earlier posts in this thread, but converted into useful energy - megawatts of useful energy. Economics plus politics. Mindset awareness..

The forum is about sharing issues bringing folks up to understand what is happening in PLAIN ENGLISH, and coming up with solutions which DON'T require years and years of experimenting, but come up with workability NOW.

CANADA the subject of this thread needs solutions NOW to deal with massive amounts of wastes. Let's stay on topic. They are going to bury the wastes or transport the wastes to other countries to deal with it, and risk contamination during an accident if the shipment is lost. Those are the points of this thread. Appreciate it

[Rocky_Shorz]

can someone please call GA and ask how much one of these units delivered and installed would cost for Huron Canada?

I have $40,000,000 in bitcoins to invest...

[Bob]

Posted by Rocky_Shorz (here)
can someone please call GA and ask how much one of these units delivered and installed would cost for Huron Canada?

Physical Address:
General Atomics
3550 General Atomics Court
San Diego, CA 92121-1122

General Business and Media Inquiries phone (858) 455-3000 fax (858) 455-3621

reference to GA page:
http://www.ga.com/energy-multiplier-module

Direct contact to the Energy Multiplier Module, with EMAIL address
Lisa Petrillo
Communications
Energy and Advanced Concepts
Lisa.Petrillo@ga.com

Link to a VIDEO on the Energy Multiplier module - WHY BLOW UP your waste when you can convert it to clean useful massive amounts of virtually FREE ENERGY, and not have any million year waste problem

http://media.ga.com/video-library/en...ule-em2-video/

[Bob]

11 Dec 2013 - Give us your Radioactive Waste !

"An environmental group wants more transparency on potential shipments of high-level nuclear waste from Canada and Germany to Savannah River Site, saying the U.S. Department of Energy has not given enough information to taxpayers and advisory boards."

Canada has asked the US Savannah River Site ("SRS") to take radioactive material.. The Site has also received a request from Germany to receive its radioactive carbon reactor core waste..

"New materials being considered for disposal would be moved from the Juelich facility in Germany to SRS, where they would be processed at the South Carolina site’s H Canyon facilities, said Tom Clements, the southeastern nuclear campaign coordinator for Friends of the Earth."

" The Savannah River National Laboratory at SRS has conducted research this year on the waste, and results will be considered when making a decision, Maxted said at a Tuesday meeting of the nuclear materials committee of the Savannah River Site Citizens Advisory Board. On Thursday, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission will discuss Canadian waste imports to the U.S. In a letter cited by Clements, a coalition of German environmentalists said the waste should stay in Germany where a new storage facility should be built. The waste does not pose a threat because it is not suitable for nuclear weapons, they said."

Each of these sites is trying to dispose of dangerous uranium based waste, from Uranium based reactors. Instead of burning it up on-site, with the proper reactor, these older facilities insist on using the archaic methods of shipment, some type of chemical extraction, then burial of the remainder of unrecoverable material.. Friends of Earth points out it is quite possible that the depleted Uranium would be converted into depleted uranium weapons, again a terrible use, wasteful, toxic and insane..

ref: http://beta.mirror.augusta.com/news/...s?v=1386709666

"The AVR German reactor fuel consists of 152 large casks holding about 290,000 highly radioactive graphite balls, originally containing some US-origin highly enriched uranium. Before moving further with any consideration of bringing this material to the Savannah River Site, an Environmental Impact Statement must be prepared, including description of how it would be processed and the final disposal of it. German media has reported that shipping it to the US could cost 450 million Euros ($600 million), which is the real reason that SRS is interested in taking the waste (not nuclear non-proliferation). "

[Rocky_Shorz]

or sure, let's just fill an oil tanker with it and have Ahmadinejad pop up in a mini sub to torpedo it and wipe out the rest of the world's oceans and give a reason to go kick butt in Iran...

try again dorks, burn it clean, save our oceans and stop the wars...

[Rocky_Shorz]

Bumped for those interested in current technologies we should be using