Subject from nuclear fuel waste

In the first level of the hierarchy, radioactive waste that arises from operations of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., from processing of uranium or thorium ores and production of nuclear fuel, any uses of nuclear reactors, and subsequent utilization of radioactive material used or produced in reactors) is distinguished from radioactive waste that arises from any other source or practice. The latter type of waste is referred to as NARM (naturally occurring and accelerator-produced radioactive material), which includes any radioactive material produced in an accelerator and NORM [naturally occurring radioactive material not subject to regulation under the Atomic Energy Act (AEA)]. 

Since that time, laser photochemistry has become a popular subject and with it have come the laser photochemists looking for a photon target. Obviously, the first laser photons would be aimed toward isotope separations which required the narrow band-widths which the laser so uniquely provided but spin-off targets have since included the separations of reactor fuel components in reprocessing and/or waste isolation systems. Although much has been promised from the application of lasers to the reprocessing of nuclear fuels, there has been very little evidence that would... 

The mutual separation of actinide elements and the selective isolation of useful actinides from fission products are indispensable for the nuclear fuel cycle and have become important subjects of investigation for the development of advanced nuclear fuel reprocessing and TRU (TRans Uranium elements) waste management [1], A variety of research concerning the separation chemistry of actinides has so far been accumulated [2]. There are, however, only a few theoretical studies on actinides in solution[3-5]. Schreckenbach et a), discussed the stability of uranyl (VI) tetrahydroxide [UO,(OH) ] [3] and Spencer and co-workers calculated the optimized structures of some uranyl and plutonyl hydrates [AcO, nH,0 (Ac = U, Pu and n = 4,5,6)] [4],... 

At the final stage, where disposal must proceed, there are two basic approaches. Firstly to contain the waste or pollutant, immobilized in a controlled manner. The pollutant is then localized and release is subject to the lifetime of the containment barriers, under the storage conditions used. This is relatively straightforward where the lifetime of the hazard is short but a major consideration in the longer term, where containment must perform adequately for many hundred and thousands of years. The management of radioactive waste from the nuclear fuel cycle is perhaps the most appropriate example here of the latter. ... 

From a technical and economic viewpoint, COCONUT is still, in 1984, the only viable medium term strategy for most industrial nations. However, there are two other factors which have arisen to complicate the issue. One is public concern over the safety of nuclear power and the disposal of radioactive waste. The other is similar public concern over acid rain and the so-called "greenhouse effect caused by the build-up of CO2 in the stratosphere both of these undesirable effects have been ascribed to the burning of fossil fuels. These concerns are the subject of extensive public debate and professional evaluation at present and it is not profitable to speculate on the outcome[6]. Clearly, conservation alone is an inadequate strategy and the renewables will be continuously monitored and reassessed in the light of additional financial burdens which may fall on nuclear power and coal-burning to produce technical solutions which satisfy the public as regards safety and environmental issues. 

---