Wind Farm Seeks Permit to KILL GOLDEN EAGLES

[Abraham3]

No one powers a reactor with plutonium, but it is produced there.

 

[bripat9643]

No one powers a reactor with plutonium, but it is produced there.

Actually, some do. I think the federal government has built test reactors powered by plutonium. Furthermore, Plutonium comprises a significant portion of the fuel used in French nuclear reactors:

Nuclear Power in France | French Nuclear Energy

Fuel cycle – back end

France chose the closed fuel cycle at the very beginning of its nuclear program, involving reprocessing used fuel so as to recover uranium and plutonium for re-use and to reduce the volume of high-level wastes for disposal. Recycling allows 30% more energy to be extracted from the original uranium and leads to a great reduction in the amount of wastes to be disposed of. Overall the closed fuel cycle cost is assessed as comparable with that for direct disposal of used fuel, and preserves a resource which may become more valuable in the future. Back end services are carried out by Areva. Used fuel storage in pools at reactor sites is relatively brief. Late in 2011, 70% of EdF's used fuel was in used fuel pools, mostly at La Hague, 19% was in dry casks and 11% had been reprocessed.

Used fuel from the French reactors and from otehr countries is sent to Areva's La Hague plant in Normandy for reprocessing. This has the capacity to reprocess up to 1700 tonnes per year of used fuel in the UP2 and UP3 facilities, and had reprocessed 28,600 tonnes to the end of 2012. The treatment extracts 99.9% of the plutonium and uranium for recycling, leaving 3% of the used fuel material as high-level wastes which are vitrified and stored there for later disposal. Typical input today is 3.7% enriched used fuel from PWR and BWR reactors with burn-up to 45 GWd/t, after cooling for four years. In 2009 Areva reprocessed 929 tonnes, most from EdF, but 79 t from SOGIN in Italy. By 2015 it aims for throughput of 1500 t/yr.

EdF has been sending some 850 tonnes for reprocessing out of about 1200 tonnes of used fuel discharged per year, though from 2010 it will send 1050 t. The rest is preserved for later reprocessing to provide the plutonium required for the start-up of Generation IV reactors. Reprocessing is undertaken a few years after discharge, following some cooling. Some 8.5 tonnes of plutonium and 810 tonnes of reprocessed uranium (RepU) are recovered each year from the 850 tonnes treated each year to 2009. The plutonium is immediately shipped to the 195 t/yr Melox plant near Marcoule for prompt fabrication into about 100 tonnes of mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel, which is used in 20 of EdF's 900 MWe reactors. Four more are being licensed to use MOX fuel.

At the end of 2010, there were 80 tonnes of civilian plutonium in storage in France, 60 t of it at La Hague. Of the total, 56 t belonged to French entities, and 27 t to EdF. ANDRA said that quantity corresponds to almost three years’ production of MOX fuel at Areva’s 195 t/yr Melox facility.

Used MOX fuel and used RepU fuel is stored pending reprocessing and use of the plutonium in Generation IV fast reactors. These discharges have amounted to about 140 tonnes per year, but rise to 200 tonnes from 2010. Used MOX fuel is not reprocessed at present.

 

[Abraham3]

Currently, no one is using plutonium as the primary fuel in a nuclear reactor.

 

[Abraham3]

Plutonium doesn't get sold at Costco and the supermarket and end up in unintended waste streams... The RELATIVE danger is largely in your head..

Tell that to the people working at the Fukushima power plant.

That plant is Uranium powered, numskull.

Q&A: Plutonium detected at Fukushima | World news | theguardian.com

Plutonium found outside of containment in marine soil at Fukushima Daiichi | Enformable

Study: Fukushima plutonium in Pacific Ocean from ?liquid direct releases??

Fukushima soil contains plutonium traces, according to Japanese officials | World news | The Guardian

 

[mamooth]

Yep. A trace of plutonium, levels at about 1/10,000 of what was found around Chernobyl.

Fukushima emitted a couple grams of plutonium. Open-air H-bomb tests emitted a couple million grams of plutonium. If millions of grams didn't poison the biosphere, a couple grams won't.

 

[bripat9643]

Currently, no one is using plutonium as the primary fuel in a nuclear reactor.

I see. So now you're back peddling.

What difference does it make whether Plutonium is the primary fuel or not? If they're using it, that means it needs to be handled, transported, processed and manufactured into fuel pellets, just like Uranium.

 

[bripat9643]

Tell that to the people working at the Fukushima power plant.

That plant is Uranium powered, numskull.

Q&A: Plutonium detected at Fukushima | World news | theguardian.com

Plutonium found outside of containment in marine soil at Fukushima Daiichi | Enformable

Study: Fukushima plutonium in Pacific Ocean from ?liquid direct releases??

Fukushima soil contains plutonium traces, according to Japanese officials | World news | The Guardian

Plutonium is a natural by-product of the fission process. Virtually every functioning reactor contains small amounts of plutonium. That's why claims that we should never use Plutonium to generate power are so fatuous and idiotic.

 

[Abraham3]

That plant is Uranium powered, numskull.

Q&A: Plutonium detected at Fukushima | World news | theguardian.com

Plutonium found outside of containment in marine soil at Fukushima Daiichi | Enformable

Study: Fukushima plutonium in Pacific Ocean from ?liquid direct releases??

Fukushima soil contains plutonium traces, according to Japanese officials | World news | The Guardian

Plutonium is a natural by-product of the fission process. Virtually every functioning reactor contains small amounts of plutonium. That's why claims that we should never use Plutonium to generate power are so fatuous and idiotic.

We both know why intelligent people think its a bad idea to accumulate plutonium anywhere for any purpose. It is neither fatuous nor idiotic. It is a perfectly reasonable position. Plutonium has been used heretofore to seed uranium to increase its neutron flux density, both for weapons and reactors. And, as I said earlier, it is produced in fission reactors as a byproduct.

This entire argument started when you claimed that the Japanese should not be worried about plutonium because Fukushima used uranium for fuel. You now have effectively admitted you had no basis to criticize Orogenicman and the Japanese are entirely justified to worry about plutonium from the failed Fukushima plant.

 

[Mr. H.]

As a producer of liquid hydrocarbons, might I ask where I can get a permit to kill me some Golden Eagles?

 

[Mr. H.]

In my 36 years of pumping crude oil out of the ground, I can't recall one instance of a Golden Eagle death. Still, I'd like to get me some of those permits.

Yo- little help?

 

[Mr. H.]

Pre-dead Golden Eagles for sale- cheap. Let's kill 'em before they're dead

 

[Mr. H.]

Whoa- pre dead my children, please.

 

[jon_berzerk]

In my 36 years of pumping crude oil out of the ground, I can't recall one instance of a Golden Eagle death. Still, I'd like to get me some of those permits.

Yo- little help?

you are not going to hear a peep from the left about these permits

to kill eagles and such

 

[Peterf]

AGW Deniers seek to starve millions of baby children

Bird kills are actual - and not only in America. "Starving babies" are hypothetical constructs of defective, sometimes fraudalent, computer models.

 

[PMZ]

AGW Deniers seek to starve millions of baby children

Bird kills are actual - and not only in America. "Starving babies" are hypothetical constructs of defective, sometimes fraudalent, computer models.

You need to give some thought to that for which there is evidence, and that which is ''hypothetical'', or without evidence. Computer models are the visualization of the math that describes that which both empirical data and demonstrated theory conclude. So, what's hypothetical in your post, without evidence, are ''defective'' and ''fraudulent''.