Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 21st 04, 04:58 PM
Paul Burridge
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 14:31:12 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

Sooner or later the World MUST concentrate on atomic energy.


Absolutely right, Reg. Even good old fission if necessary. Yeah, it's
dirty but so what? Outer space has a limitless capacity for our
radioactive garbage. Instead of encasing it in concrete and burying
it, we should be just firing away in rockets. Way to go!
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.
  #2   Report Post  
Old June 21st 04, 05:31 PM
Reg Edwards
 
Posts: n/a
Default


The problems of how to get rid of relatively minute quantities of mildly
radioactive waste materials have been exaggerated by the oil conglomerates
and the other multi-national companies in the control of world governments.
They do it for obvious reasons via the international media which they also
own and control. Whoever owns and controls the Internet will ruthlessly
rule the Earth. Only the Chinese can prevent it.
----
Reg.

======================================

"Paul Burridge" wrote -

Absolutely right, Reg. Even good old fission if necessary. Yeah, it's
dirty but so what? Outer space has a limitless capacity for our
radioactive garbage. Instead of encasing it in concrete and burying
it, we should be just firing away in rockets. Way to go!



  #3   Report Post  
Old June 21st 04, 05:35 PM
Hans Summers
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Reg Edwards" wrote in message
...

The problems of how to get rid of relatively minute quantities of mildly
radioactive waste materials have been exaggerated by the oil conglomerates
and the other multi-national companies in the control of world

governments.
They do it for obvious reasons via the international media which they also
own and control. Whoever owns and controls the Internet will ruthlessly
rule the Earth. Only the Chinese can prevent it.


To get rid of even a relatively minute quantity of radioactive material into
space requires the expenditure of rather huge amounts of fuels. Fossil fuels
that is. Ooops


  #4   Report Post  
Old June 21st 04, 11:13 PM
Paul Burridge
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:31:08 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:


The problems of how to get rid of relatively minute quantities of mildly
radioactive waste materials have been exaggerated by the oil conglomerates
and the other multi-national companies in the control of world governments.
They do it for obvious reasons via the international media which they also
own and control. Whoever owns and controls the Internet will ruthlessly
rule the Earth. Only the Chinese can prevent it.


God help us if the Chinese take over in 20 years' time.
But I was serious, Reg. There's nothing wrong with good ol' fashioned
fission. Just blast the leftover crap into space and have done with
it. It's lousy with radioactive debris anyway and the sun can swallow
everything we throw at it.
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.
  #5   Report Post  
Old June 22nd 04, 08:19 AM
Paul Keinanen
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 23:13:36 +0100, Paul Burridge
wrote:

God help us if the Chinese take over in 20 years' time.
But I was serious, Reg. There's nothing wrong with good ol' fashioned
fission. Just blast the leftover crap into space and have done with
it. It's lousy with radioactive debris anyway and the sun can swallow
everything we throw at it.


There are only two small problems with this approach, since first you
have to reach the 11.2 km/s escape velocity to escape the earth. The
Saturn V moon rocket was capable of delivering about 40 tons to escape
velocity.

With this velocity, you just end up in an orbit similar to the Earth's
orbit. In fact the Apollo 10 (or 12) third stage went into solar
orbit, but a year or two ago, it was captured by the Moon and Earth
and now it orbits the Earth for a year or two, before escaping back
into the solar orbit. With some bad luck, this stage might have hit
the Earth and imagine that it had contained 40 tons of highly
radioactive waste, which would spread into the atmosphere...

Thus, in order to avoid the risk of collisions with the earth in the
future, an additional rocket burn is required in the solar orbit to
prevent the orbit from intersecting with the orbit of the Earth. Thus
reducing the available payload.

If you want to drop something into the sun, you first must kill nearly
all of the 30 km/s orbital motion of the Earth. This would require a
huge amount of fuel and practically nothing would end up into the Sun.

It is in fact much easier to escape the solar system, since only about
43 km/s is required or 13 km/s in addition to the Earth's orbital
velocity. With Saturn V, maybe 500 kg would reach the solar escape
velocity directly.

Using Jupiter as a slingshot (as with Pioneer 11&12 and Voyager 1&2)
maybe a few tons could reach the solar escape velocity.

Unfortunately Saturn V does not exist any more and the Shuttle and the
Proton are toys compared to Saturn V. Any launch failure would also be
quite nasty with a lot of nuclear waste on board.

Paul OH3LWR



  #6   Report Post  
Old June 22nd 04, 10:16 AM
Paul Burridge
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 10:19:41 +0300, Paul Keinanen
wrote:

If you want to drop something into the sun, you first must kill nearly
all of the 30 km/s orbital motion of the Earth. This would require a
huge amount of fuel and practically nothing would end up into the Sun.


Okay, well what about dumping it on the moon? Let's face it: there's
not a lot of other suitable uses for this redundant body - other than
providing tidal flows on Earth, of course. I guess you'd get some
complaints from these idiots who've 'bought plots of land' on the
moon, but they're never going to get to build on it in their lifetimes
so WGAS?
--

"What is now proved was once only imagin'd." - William Blake, 1793.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lumped Load Models v. Distributed Coils Wes Stewart Antenna 480 February 22nd 04 02:12 AM
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade Gene Gardner Homebrew 2 January 15th 04 02:17 AM
Drake TR-3 transceiver synthesizer upgrade Gene Gardner Homebrew 0 January 13th 04 05:28 PM
Smith Chart Quiz Radio913 Antenna 315 October 21st 03 05:31 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:34 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017