rockytriton Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 I was thinking the other day about waste disposal and I was wondering how possible it would be to send our trash into space. I'm sure that currently it would probably be too expensive, but maybe in a few decades we could just package up large chunks of garbage and shoot them into outer space. Would there be any real problems with this? I mean we would be helping our ecosystem by not having the garbage seap into our water supply or our oceans. Since there doesn't seem to be anyone in a reasonable distance from us that would be adversely affected, maybe it would be a good idea. What do you guys think, maybe this idea is just plain stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 ...Yaaah - pretty stupid, I'd say. But seriously, now - Launching radioactive waste into space, and aiming for the sun, is probably the best we can do with that kind of waste. Any other waste will just be too expensive $$$ per kilo to launch. (It's still far too expensive for radioactive waste as it is...) It's a good idea to rid the Earth of any toxic substances, and if we can lower launch costs, it'll probably be the way to go - provided the trash-rockets don't explode on take-off and cover the landscape in luminous green radioactive stuff... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 Shoot waste into the sun and it turns into Superman's nemisis. It's true, just rent Superman III. Seriously, though, the temperatures inside the sun would render whatever we shot into it into it's compnent atoms. The ultimate recycling. We'd be better off (perhaps) if we could somehow get fusion power to work, then shoot the waste through the plasma. It would render the waste into elemental form, which could be sorted as they popped out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockytriton Posted June 16, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 yes, then we can turn trash into gold, even better than lead to gold. I'm thinking decades into the future, since it seems that there is more interest in space then maybe there will be much cheaper space travel by then, making it more of a possibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 no, I don't think it's a good idea already now with the waste we have orbiting around the earth thre is a non negligible quantity and this in only 50 years! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 yes, then we can turn trash into gold, even better than lead to gold. Short term thinking. Gold is relativally worthless as is. Good in some electronics, but if it could be produced en mass it would lose value rapidly. Many economic sectors would be in trouble- aluminum smelting, precious metals, etc. The reduction in waste mass would be worth it, but it certainly wouldn't make you rich. It would make everyone rich... so nobody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 ___Seems counterproductive to me. We need to recycle the waste here; today's cemetaries make tomorrow's oil. Throw too much away into space & the rate of Earth's spin changes & then what? A load of nuclear waste on a vehicle as good as Challenger or Columbia? :rant: Sounds like a bad idea all around. :eek: :rant: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UncleAl Posted June 16, 2005 Report Share Posted June 16, 2005 I was thinking the other day about waste disposal and I was wondering how possible it would be to send our trash into space.The Fresh Kills Landfill (Staten Island, New York) covers 2200 acres (3.44 square miles) and is up to 225 feet thick. It holds about 100 million tonnes of garbage overall. Give us a clever idea for lofting 100 million tonnes of garbage into low Earth orbit and we'll move on to the next landfill. BTW, the cost of boosting stuff in the lamentable Space Scuttle is $(US)30/gram. Look up the cost of gold. Launching radioactive waste into space, and aiming for the sun, is probably the best we can do with that kind of waste.You don't "aim for the sun." You stop it in space and it falls into the sun. Blow the dust off your calculator. It requiries less energy to shoot it to infinity than it requires to drop it into the sun. Both ideas are ludicrously awful. Th only qualification for succeeding in the Liberal Arts is a big mouth - pencil and paper. if you wish to be a scientist, you'll need a wastebasket. (Purchase a wastebasket. Bring it home in a bag. Arrive home. The bag goes into the wastebasket. Closure.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 Launching radioactive waste into space, and aiming for the sun, is probably the best we can do with that kind of waste.I wonder why we can't just put things like spent uranium back in the ground. It did come out of the ground to begin with. Maybe in places like old uranium mines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 I wonder why we can't just put things like spent uranium back in the ground. It did come out of the ground to begin with. Maybe in places like old uranium mines. Because it's not the same as when it came out. It's been split into two lighter elements, although which escape me. Energy doesn't come for free, you know- we take something out, extract energy- it's not the same thing. The byproducts of fission are extremely nasty. Uranium is not so bad, the left overs... awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C1ay Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 Because it's not the same as when it came out. It's been split into two lighter elements, although which escape me. Energy doesn't come for free, you know- we take something out, extract energy- it's not the same thing. The byproducts of fission are extremely nasty. Uranium is not so bad, the left overs... awful.Yeah, I know. It still came out of the ground to begin with and I don't think we have anywhere to put it but the ground. I actually think Yucca Mountain is the right approach if they can ever make any progress on it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bumab Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 I heard they were talking about encasing the spent remains in glass. Sounds pretty good to me- glass is about as non-permiable as we can get, and in a geologically stable reigion, it would be safe from jostling. Obviously not perfect, but until we can shoot it into the sun, or speed up radioactive decay :shrug:, probably the best option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boerseun Posted June 17, 2005 Report Share Posted June 17, 2005 I heard they were talking about encasing the spent remains in glass. Sounds pretty good to me- glass is about as non-permiable as we can get, and in a geologically stable reigion, it would be safe from jostling. Obviously not perfect, but until we can shoot it into the sun, or speed up radioactive decay :shrug:, probably the best option.Sounds interesting - but glass is a liquid, it should work if they cast it in glass that's encased in a solid form, like concrete. Otherwise, in a couple'a thousand years, there will be a very slow-flowing glass puddle lying on the floor... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanctus Posted June 18, 2005 Report Share Posted June 18, 2005 C1ay, back in the ground doesn't seem a good idea, an earthquake is already bad enough without radiation... About the waste orbiting earth I akesd my prof of the "particles in the universe"- cours and he said that already now it is a probability game to start a rocket, because only the big waste we can monitor it, but the small particles orbiting... and at the speed they move they are quite lethal.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.