外獨會意見庫存

馬凱:無知者不配玩核電。給馬凱的第七課:乾式貯存後還是要終極處置


發言人:挖地雷, on 22/04/2011  10:19:22 (IP code: 233.222)

有擁核者把乾式貯存誇成解決終極處置高階核廢料的科技,蒙騙國人



  乾式貯存高階核廢料並不是終極處置,只是能將高階核廢料暫時性地多放個幾十年,然後還是要做終極處置,並且乾式貯存所用的容器,因為被幅射照射了幾十年,本身也成了需要被處理的核廢料,體積上是大量的增加了空間的需求。

In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the need for alternative storage in the United States began to grow when pools at many nuclear reactors began to fill up with stored spent fuel. As there was not a national storage facility in operation (Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository was, and remains, embroiled in controversy), utilities began looking at options for storing spent fuel. Dry cask storage was one of the most practical options for temporary storage.

  乾式貯存並不是為了處理高階核廢料而發展出來的新科技,台電與原能會一直在這些相關資訊上採行愚民政策,剝奪人民在核能安全上知的權力,再假借科技之名霸凌國人對核安的公民選擇權。

The first operating license for a dry storage installation was issued in 1986 for the Surry nuclear power plant in Virginia, and today there are approximately thirty approved dry cask storage facilities throughout the U.S. (Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2003). Each of these facilities is located at a reactor site (all but two are at commercial reactor sites), and most consist of a concrete slab upon which the casks are vertically placed in the open air (some facilities consist of above-ground concrete or steel structures and the casks are placed inside, either vertically or horizontally).

  現在來看看乾式貯存法到底是什麼東西:當用過的燃料棒數目多到冷卻池擺不下時,又還沒有終極處置場可送去的狀況下,乾式貯存法只不過是解燃眉之急的短期救急方案,只能護住用過的燃料棒數十年而己

高階核廢料到底需要什麼程度的終極處置


  高階核廢料是人類造出來的毀滅性物質,會危害到地球上所有的生物,甚至可能會有滅種的威脅,而且危害的時間之長是超乎人類所有的經驗的,至少要和生物圈隔絕一萬年到一百萬年之久。

Since the dawn of the atomic age, the United States and every other nation that has chosen to use nuclear power have created hazardous substances that have the capacity to outlast human civilization, and possibly even the human species, and the potential to devastate the environment. The management of these substances that make up what has been termed high-level radioactive waste (HLRW) has presented a set of technical and socio-political challenges that are matched by few, if any, other science and technology policy issues.

For the purposes of this discussion, high-level radioactive waste consists of spent fuel from civilian and military reactors, as well as transuranic waste which comes primarily from the fabrication of nuclear weapons. The most serious of these challenges stem from the fact that this type of waste is extremely harmful to all life and will remain so (and, therefore, must be secured) for a period of time that is beyond anything in human experience (at least 10,000 and, possibly, more than 1,000,000 years).

The time frame over which the waste will remain dangerous depends on its composition and, to some extent, on the definition of what constitutes a dangerous level of radioactivity. In terms of spent reactor fuel, composition is a function of the type of reactor and on whether or not re-processing takes place.

乾式貯存是個什麼樣的技術


  乾式貯存是把在冷卻池裡放的夠久的用過的燃料棒,廿四隻捆成一堆裝進用鋼材水泥等材質做成的大桶子裡,這種方法原則上是可保固廿五年到一百年,不過在台灣因為天候與地理環境的關係,蝕朽的速度會更快些。因為台灣是海島性氣候,濕度遠比美國那種大陸型氣候區高,核電廠又都在海邊,海風帶來的細小水珠含有鹽份,這都會大幅度地降低乾式貯存桶的保固年限。

Dry casks typically consist of a sealed metal cylinder containing the spent fuel enclosed within a metal or concrete outer shell. In some designs, casks are placed horizontally; in others, they are set vertically on a concrete pad. The NRC reviews and approves the designs for spent fuel dry storage systems. The NRC's regulations for review are developed through a public process and provide a sound basis for determining whether use of a proposed storage system will protect public health and safety and the environment.

The policy challenges that dry cask storage presents as it becomes the de facto HLRW disposal option for the medium term (25 to 100 years), stem from a number of potential problems:


高階核廢料乾式貯存會出現哪些問題


一、一旦電廠除役了,它的高階核廢料乾式貯存桶會不會就成了孤兒?

二、高階核廢料的乾式貯存桶會增高將來做終極處置時的難度。

三、高階核廢料的乾式貯存桶都會有存放地點的問題:Your place or mine?

The proliferation of storage sites presents monitoring challenges with attendant security and environmental safety implications. These challenges are magnified significantly by the prospect that increasing number of sites will be "orphaned" as the nuclear power plants to which they are attached are decommissioned (some, such as the Maine Yankee site are already "orphaned"). Costly site protection and monitoring activities will have to continue indefinitely without attendant revenueproducing activities. How will safety and security vigilance be assured for each site over time?
The ongoing development of dry cask storage sites with a multitude of different cask designs poses possible environmental risks that may make the exercise of other options in the future difficult. Most cask designs are not transportable. This means that for waste to be transported either to a permanent repository or interim storage facility, it must be transferred from the casks to special transport vessels. However, the extraction of waste from the casks may be risky. In order to maintain shielding, the waste will most likely have to be extracted under water. Cask-stored waste is hot enough to vaporize water virtually upon impact. The resulting steam may cause damage to the stored spent fuel assemblies, may cause explosions, or may carry dangerous radionuclides as it is vented. Steam would make even routine maintenance of the casks difficult. With transportation from cask sites being riskier, more complicated, and, therefore, more expensive than directly from storage pools, consolidation of a large number of sites to a few may become unfeasible.
Is the development of numerous storage sites going to be acceptable to the public, both at each site and at-large? What are the socio-political implications of this option? Alternatively, the development of one or a small number of central storage sites, while making the management of the waste simpler, will also have to contend with the issue of public acceptance, as well as with issues of transportation planning and safety.


  馬凱先生,非常不好意思,一共開了七天的課,連週休二日都沒留給您,請您把這七課消化消化,再回頭讀一下您那投到聯合報的文章:【無知者不配玩核電】,互相對照一下。

個人非常渴望能在近期見到您再提出相關領域的大作

趕快把該做的功課做好吧!



※ 歡迎轉載拷貝,可以不用注明出處

Record ID: 1303438762 From: 台灣
回信發言人:七夕大番, on 22/04/2011  10:56:35 (IP code: 134.176)

挖老大

早安。請借問,中文都是您翻譯的?肯定,請接受本番一鞠躬加鼓掌。不是,還是要對您一鞠躬兼鼓掌,謝謝您多日來的辛苦。

Record ID: 1303438762R001 From: 台灣
回信發言人:挖地雷, on 22/04/2011  11:02:08 (IP code: 233.222)

七夕大番:

  不敢,那不算是翻譯,是節要出我認為是重點的部分。

Record ID: 1303438762R002 From: 台灣
回信發言人:一隻壁虎, on 22/04/2011  11:03:09 (IP code: 205.83)

真的辛苦,但馬凱先生會不會在北海道七天六夜自由行,沒時間消化你的大作?

Record ID: 1303438762R003 From: 台灣
回信發言人:挖地雷, on 22/04/2011  11:15:46 (IP code: 233.222)

核一廠用過核燃料乾式中期貯存設施安全無虞 與電廠除役無關 亦非最終處置設施

針對媒體報導昨(23)日環保署「核能一廠用過核燃料中期貯存計畫環境現況差異分析及對策檢討報告」專案小組第7次審查會之相關細節,以及部分北海四鄉鄉親及關心本案人士所提之問題,台電公司澄清說明如下:

一、用過核燃料之貯存及處置計畫係參照核能先進國家之做法,部分人士所稱「係為電廠延役」並非事實

  由於核一廠現有貯存水池容量有限,不足以容納正常運轉40年期間所產生之用過核子燃料,而核一廠部份用過核子燃料在貯存水池中冷卻的時間長達20年以上,其殘餘熱及輻射強度已大幅降低,因此台電公司參照歐美核能先進國家的做法,採取水池冷卻、乾式貯存、最終處置三階段營運方式,目前正規劃將這些經充分冷卻的用過核子燃料移至電廠內之乾式中期貯存設施,也就是進入第2階段的乾式中期貯存;惟此項作業與核能電廠之延役無關。

二、用過核燃料乾式中期貯存不會成為最終處置設施

  用過核燃料在乾式貯存期間,如國內最終處置場完工、國際區域合作處置或再處理案有所突破時,用過核子燃料將會儘早移出,故乾式中期貯存不會成為最終處置設施。

三、用過核子燃料乾式中期貯存設施在美國已有19年以上之安全使用經驗

  用過核子燃料乾式中期貯存設施在美國已有19年以上之安全使用經驗,至今已有57部核能機組使用。美國愛達荷國家實驗室曾對貯存15年的用過核子燃料進行金屬晶相等檢驗,結果顯示用過核子燃料並無劣化現象,且核一廠計劃採用之乾式中期貯存技術係由核研所技轉自美國NAC公司之貯存系統,該系統已獲得美國核能管制委員會審查通過並核准使用,依目前之規劃,核一、二廠用過核子燃料乾式中期貯存設施興建計畫對廠界之劑量要求較法規更為嚴謹,應能確保民眾的安全。

Idaho Nuclear Technology & Engineering Center

四、核一廠用過核燃料中期貯存計畫安全分析報告尚在審查中

  本計畫之安全分析報告已於95年10月函送原能會審查,並於96年3月正式向原能會提出建造執照之申請,原能會於96年4月4日函覆正式受理本案建造執照之申請,開始辦理審查,惟目前仍處審查作業中,並無如報導中所稱本計畫乾式貯存場之安全性已經原能會30位專家審查通過乙節。

五、台電公司積極與北海四鄉地方民眾溝通

  台電公司在推動核一廠用過核子燃料乾式中期貯存設施興計畫之過程中,亦持續與北海四鄉地方民眾溝通,於93年8月下旬至93年9月中旬期間,對石門鄉 3,276戶鄉民進行挨家挨戶拜訪之宣導溝通過程中,經彙整鄉民意見中對本計畫之支持情形,其中表示無意見者占77%、贊成者4.5%、反對者0.6%。

Dry Cask Storage: from Stopgap to Viable Alternative for HLRW Management


Record ID: 1303438762R004 From: 台灣
回信發言人:七夕大番, on 22/04/2011  11:17:16 (IP code: 134.176)

挖老大

是衷心的感謝您啦!有您這些寶貴資料,嘻嘻,可以讓自認有唸些書,且凡事都像無腦者,盲目支持中國國民黨政策者啞口無言。至少在核能這方面的辯正。

謝謝您,您的課程本番都下載與列印。

Record ID: 1303438762R005 From: 台灣
回信發言人:HUNTER, on 22/04/2011  11:25:47 (IP code: 133.107)

請問欄主

多年來 台灣一直有建物"輻射鋼筋"報導 "真相"如何?來源如何??

Record ID: 1303438762R006 From: 台灣
回信發言人:挖地雷, on 22/04/2011  11:35:16 (IP code: 233.222)

  以下節錄自【輻射屋簡介

  輻射鋼筋之由來,各方說法大都傾向於煉鋼廠買進混雜於其中的輻射源;將其一併熔入熔爐,尤因鈷60射源其性質與鐵十分近似,一旦熔解立即與鐵熔液相融合,而製成鋼材,這就產生了輻射鋼筋。

  為何會有輻射鋼筋?鋼筋製造過程因熔爐溫度高,須利用同位素鈷六十照射來測得液態鋼溶液液位高低,雖然鈷60密封在阻絕輻射線容器中,但因作業場所高溫高濕,容器較易袘k,一旦輻射源掉入熔爐內,就會產出輻射鋼筋。另因報廢輻射源廠商任意棄置,或當作廢五金處理,經回收後,進入熔爐製作鋼筋,也會產出輻射鋼筋。

Record ID: 1303438762R007 From: 台灣
回信發言人:, on 22/04/2011  11:44:20 (IP code: 79.199)

真專業

推+19748

Record ID: 1303438762R008 From: 台灣
回信發言人:老鄭, on 22/04/2011  11:59:10 (IP code: 19.39)


老挖

再為你的論點提供點證据

切爾諾貝里95%核廢料還在那里。現在封堵的建筑物已經出現裂痕等問題。据說現在正在造一個世界上最大的有滑輪的水泥罩子,覆豪鴙鴩茠澈夆羺鴾W。不過可能10多年后,又要加遠s的。這樣一直加誘U去,不知道那將是個怎樣的怪物。

Record ID: 1303438762R009 From: 澳洲
回信發言人:沈黑朝, on 22/04/2011  11:59:29 (IP code: 236.144)

核問題,核解決(欄主口中的哆啦A夢)
A Nuclear Waste Burning Liquid Salt Thorium Reactor
一個多小時介紹熔鹽釷核爐(中國叫釷基熔鹽堆)
重點在40分鐘左右時介紹如何銷毀現有核電廠廢核燃料(主要是廢核料中的「超鈾廢料」鈽)
我相信馬凱先生也應該看看這段youtube
從核能的全面性知識來看,他也一樣無知

Record ID: 1303438762R010 From: 台灣
回信發言人:沈黑朝, on 22/04/2011  12:10:50 (IP code: 236.144)

核能問題是政策問題,也是知識技術問題。
核能可以相當安全,只要你用對知識技術,
而且要真正討論核能政策,必須由不同政治信仰的核能專家們先討論核能的全面性觀點。台灣的核電廠要不要停廠,是技術安全問題,不是反核擁核問題。

Record ID: 1303438762R011 From: 台灣
回信發言人:新復土, on 22/04/2011  12:35:12 (IP code: 29.108)

挖大:
 能不能將核能七課ㄧ起放在精選文章目錄內,方便閱讀,感恩喔!

Record ID: 1303438762R012 From: 台灣
回信發言人:耳聾, on 22/04/2011  12:56:02 (IP code: 171.95)

挖地雷先生


你可以寄一份合訂本的教材給瑪凱!

Record ID: 1303438762R013 From: 台灣
回信發言人:耳聾, on 22/04/2011  12:58:53 (IP code: 171.95)

挖地雷先生


你可以寄一份合訂本的教材給瑪凱!

===========================================================
忽然想到鄉土情!

如果您也學我那樣說, 那才是狗腿的最高境界!!

但是, 我這樣說, 沒人會說我是狗腿!

你可以區分嗎??

Record ID: 1303438762R014 From: 台灣
回信發言人:耳聾, on 22/04/2011  13:01:19 (IP code: 171.95)

>>> 你可以寄一份合訂本的教材給瑪凱!

唉!

那一個阿幹久說要出一本吸油記, 答應送我ㄧ本.....

Record ID: 1303438762R015 From: 台灣
回信發言人:HUNTER, on 22/04/2011  14:03:43 (IP code: 133.107)

和艦案失望 曹興誠轉籍星國
拖了5年的和艦案,讓曹興誠對司法...YAHOO NEWS


欄主
抱歉 轉貼"中國人星洲籍曹董"!!!新鮮吧

Record ID: 1303438762R016 From: 台灣
回信發言人:HUNTER, on 22/04/2011  14:09:10 (IP code: 133.107)

不知曹董有無"國籍放棄證書"?

Record ID: 1303438762R017 From: 台灣
回信發言人:一時興起, on 22/04/2011  23:10:40 (IP code: 133.208)

我來晚了!

好文,推~~~~~~~~~

Record ID: 1303438762R018 From: 台灣
回信發言人:濁水溪畔的國中生, on 22/04/2011  23:31:42 (IP code: 71.108)

謝謝您的分享說明。

orz^19748!

Record ID: 1303438762R019 From: 台灣
回信發言人:挖地雷, on 23/04/2011  10:27:59 (IP code: 233.222)

沈黑朝:

> 40分鐘左右時介紹如何銷毀現有核電廠廢核燃料(主要是廢核料中的「超鈾廢料」鈽)

  先去教美國、日本、德國、英國這些國家的國家核能委員會吧!

  台灣只敢引進先進國家用過十年以上的成熟產品。

Record ID: 1303438762R020 From: 台灣
回信發言人:挖地雷, on 23/04/2011  10:34:56 (IP code: 233.222)

沈黑朝:

  實驗室能做到的和商業運轉間還有非常巨大的差距,否則美國 30 billions,德國 2 billions 地去找個能挖個洞埋起來的地點,別說他們的政府有多麼地白痴,國會會讓這種預算通過嗎?

Record ID: 1303438762R021 From: 台灣
本篇到此告一段落———版主    2011-04-28 10:35:51

WE ARE 49ER TAIWANESE