Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
Fri May 23, 2014, 06:49 PM May 2014

Evident differences between CO2 and Nuclear waste

Cesium comes from nuclear fission which occurs in nuclear power plants.

The most talked about product of nuclear fission is Radioactive Cesium.

The most talked about air emission from other power plants is CO2.

The same companies that emit Radioactive Cesium, also emit CO2 without fear, without much capture or control of that CO2. But when it comes to the Cesium, companies spend billions on control and containment.

CO2 is a natural molecule that much of life can't live without. Radioactive Cesium is known to be deadly to nearly all life and is not a naturally occurring atom.

The US government has regulated nuclear wastes, and companies have spent billions following those regulations. Not so with CO2.

So is CO2 as bad as nuclear wastes? The government thinks not. The government has known for 50 years that nuclear wastes need to be kept out of the environment. And the corporations agreed.

But CO2 still flies out from tailpipes and smokestacks freely.


25 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Evident differences between CO2 and Nuclear waste (Original Post) RobertEarl May 2014 OP
I think you lost your audience with that first attempt. nt GliderGuider May 2014 #1
Golly gee RobertEarl May 2014 #2
You also don't understand what it means to be transuranic. Gravitycollapse May 2014 #9
I'll provide the link for a bit of context and jocularity Brother Buzz May 2014 #8
Yeah RobertEarl May 2014 #11
"i finally made a mistake..." Finally? FINALLY?!? Gravitycollapse May 2014 #14
You caught that too? zappaman May 2014 #15
nope...you missed it. FBaggins May 2014 #25
Cesium is a natural element. longship May 2014 #3
Cesium 137 RobertEarl May 2014 #4
"So says wiki." - A summation of your understanding on the subject. Gravitycollapse May 2014 #7
Eh? RobertEarl May 2014 #10
Read up on Oklo hobbit709 May 2014 #12
Again, your entire ignorance on the subject shines brightly. Stellar nucleosynthesis... Gravitycollapse May 2014 #13
How do you know? zappaman May 2014 #16
I suppose the courses I took on astro/geo-physics didn't hurt. Gravitycollapse May 2014 #17
This is weird RobertEarl May 2014 #19
Spam-scientician maddezmom May 2014 #20
I think it is performance art. zappaman May 2014 #23
Nope. No deletion RobertEarl May 2014 #24
Anyway RobertEarl May 2014 #5
Tell that to the Bachmann's of the world. longship May 2014 #6
It means that fear rather than science Union Scribe May 2014 #21
GW is a problem, no doubt RobertEarl May 2014 #22
All humans emit CO2 when they exhale seveneyes May 2014 #18
 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
2. Golly gee
Fri May 23, 2014, 07:07 PM
May 2014

A transuranic is plutonium. I had mixed up cesium with the transuranic plutoinium, which has also been released from Fukushima.

I read a lot about nuclear stuff a year or so ago. Came across transuranics then. Never needed to know about it until Fukushima blew up and really don't care to, but the people here that know don't even want to admit that it is worse than anything else man has released. So i made a stab at it and improperly used the word transuranic.

Not like i released plutonium upon the public. No big deal.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
9. You also don't understand what it means to be transuranic.
Fri May 23, 2014, 08:26 PM
May 2014

As I read in your post. Transuranic elements are not necessarily man-made, as you suggested.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
11. Yeah
Fri May 23, 2014, 08:51 PM
May 2014

Was reading a year ago about plutonium which is transuranic and in the meantime had a notion that cesium was too.

Hope yall had fun, i finally made a mistake and admit it.

Frankly tho, the real criminals are the ones who lied about nuclear power being safe. It would be nice to just once see some of you climb their asses. Just once. Why some never do is quite confounding.

FBaggins

(26,749 posts)
25. nope...you missed it.
Sat May 24, 2014, 05:45 PM
May 2014

It's that he finally made a mistake and admitted it.

He makes lots of mistakes.

longship

(40,416 posts)
3. Cesium is a natural element.
Fri May 23, 2014, 07:20 PM
May 2014

It is mined for it's many uses.

Some other facts:
Cesium is very pyrophoric, it ignites in air and explosively, like sodium, in water.

I do not think it would be soluble in water -- it is an alkali metal -- but as it oxidizes instantly, one would likely have to consider the characteristics of the oxide product, which are typically soluble.

Cesium is natural and forms about 3 parts per million of the earth's crust, 45th most abundant element and 36th most abundant metal, that's more abundant than antimony, cadmium, tin, and tungsten and two orders of magnitude more abundant than mercury and silver.

So, again, you have not fact checked.

Sorry.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
7. "So says wiki." - A summation of your understanding on the subject.
Fri May 23, 2014, 07:47 PM
May 2014

The many isotopes of Caesium are produced in stellar nucleosynthesis. A natural process.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
10. Eh?
Fri May 23, 2014, 08:48 PM
May 2014

Caesium-137 (137
55Cs, Cs-137), cesium-137, or radiocaesium, is a radioactive isotope of caesium which is formed as one of the more common fission products by the nuclear fission of uranium-235 and other fissionable isotopes in nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons. It is among the most problematic of the short-to-medium-lifetime fission products because it easily moves and spreads in nature due to the high water solubility of caesium's most common chemical compounds, which are salts.

SNIP

Caesium-137 in the environment is anthropogenic (human-made). Unlike most other radioisotopes, caesium-137 is not produced from the same element's nonradioactive isotopes but as a byproduct of the nuclear fission of much heavier elements,[10] meaning that until the building of the first artificial nuclear reactor, the Chicago Pile-1, in late 1942, it had not occurred on Earth for billions of years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesium_137

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
13. Again, your entire ignorance on the subject shines brightly. Stellar nucleosynthesis...
Fri May 23, 2014, 11:34 PM
May 2014

And other forms of nucleosynthesis take place in unimaginable quantities outside of the realm of Earth.

Stellar nucleosynthesis is the process of producing various elements and their isotopes within the active core of stars. Supernova and novae nucleosynthesis takes place under the immense heat and pressure of stellar death. And, in fact, the original form of nucleosynthesis took place right after the formation of the Universe when the most abundant elements were produced in mass.

Caesium 137 was and continues to be produced in nucleosynthesis beyond our world. It is as natural as any other material in the Universe. What makes it dangerous is its ability to distribute quickly and effectively throughout the human body, lowering the threshold for negative effects of ionizing radiation.

Gravitycollapse

(8,155 posts)
17. I suppose the courses I took on astro/geo-physics didn't hurt.
Fri May 23, 2014, 11:51 PM
May 2014

Then again, I don't read ENE so I guess that disqualifies me.

Honestly, I read these threads and I'm just like...

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
19. This is weird
Sat May 24, 2014, 02:04 AM
May 2014

The nuke industry is polluting the world and you in all your educated glory feel not one bit of need to go after them. Instead your venom is reserved for an anonymous internet poster. That's f'n weird as can be. You need to check yourself.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
24. Nope. No deletion
Sat May 24, 2014, 11:39 AM
May 2014

I have been reminded what transuranics are. I will probably forget again, so stay tuned and you can get your jollies again!!

Meanwhile the nuke polluters just got another huge government subsidy. And the WIPP plant (where they store nuclear waste) is still closed down as it is smoldering. The excuse they give for the smoldering is not that the plutonium stored there got hot, but that the kitty litter it is packed in did not do what they expected. "Damn kitty litter".

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
5. Anyway
Fri May 23, 2014, 07:32 PM
May 2014

The point is that cesium is regulated, and co2 is not.

What does that tell you?

Radioactive Cesium has had millions spent on containment. And virtually nothing spent on containing co2.

longship

(40,416 posts)
6. Tell that to the Bachmann's of the world.
Fri May 23, 2014, 07:36 PM
May 2014

I think you'd be preaching to the choir on that issue here.

Most here would agree that CO2 emissions should be curtailed. The question is how. That's the sticky wicket. Getting that through congress won't be easy.

We will do it eventually however, come Hell or high water. The latter, literally.

Union Scribe

(7,099 posts)
21. It means that fear rather than science
Sat May 24, 2014, 09:37 AM
May 2014

has ruled public energy policy for decades and the blind idiotic terror has put the far more real danger of climate change on the back burner for more than a generation. And anti-nuclear protesters are largely responsible for that, and for the effects of the coal plants used instead. Transuranic that.

 

RobertEarl

(13,685 posts)
22. GW is a problem, no doubt
Sat May 24, 2014, 10:55 AM
May 2014

But blaming people who are against nuke power for the general public's ignoring of GW is quite a stretch. In fact is a dumb idea.

Given that corporations have spent millions controlling transuranics and other fission products while spending next to nothing on co2 emissions is a real clue as to which is the more deadly.

Problem is, even after all that money spent on controlling transuranics there is still more needed to be spent.... for oh, say another 1,000 years.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Evident differences betwe...