Skip to main content
added 1 character in body
Source Link
J. Manuel
  • 2.2k
  • 11
  • 33

First, the output of a reaction is not necessarily less dangerous or at least as dangerous as itsit's input. Take dynamite for example(*): glycerin is a rather harmless material; nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture of mostly uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. nuclear reactions are a totally different process from chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products are not necessarily safer than inputs.

First, the output of a reaction is not necessarily less dangerous or at least as dangerous as its input. Take dynamite for example(*): glycerin is a rather harmless material; nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture of mostly uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. nuclear reactions are a totally different process from chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products are not necessarily safer than inputs.

First, the output of a reaction is not necessarily less dangerous or at least as dangerous as it's input. Take dynamite for example(*): glycerin is a rather harmless material; nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture of mostly uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. nuclear reactions are a totally different process from chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products are not necessarily safer than inputs.

Fix typos, spelling, grammar, awkward phrasings.
Source Link
Prof. Legolasov
  • 16.3k
  • 2
  • 33
  • 70

First, the output of a reaction doesis not necessarily becomes less dangerous or at least as dangerous as its input. Take dynamite for example(*): glycerin is a rather harmless material; nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture mostly of mostly uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. nuclear reactions are a totally different process from chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products are not necessarily safer than inputs.

First, the output of a reaction does not necessarily becomes less or at least as dangerous as its input. Take dynamite for example(*): glycerin is a rather harmless material; nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture mostly of uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. nuclear reactions are a totally different process from chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products are not necessarily safer than inputs.

First, the output of a reaction is not necessarily less dangerous or at least as dangerous as its input. Take dynamite for example(*): glycerin is a rather harmless material; nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture of mostly uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. nuclear reactions are a totally different process from chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products are not necessarily safer than inputs.

Fix typos, spelling, grammar, awkward phrasings.
Source Link

First, the output of a reaction dodoes not necessarily becomes less or at least as dangerous as its input. Take dynamite for example(*): Glyceringlycerin is a rather harmless material; Nitricnitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting Nitroglycerinnitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture mostly of uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nucleus,nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non radioactive-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive also.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor, must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. Nuclear reactionnuclear reactions isare a totally different process thanfrom Chemicalchemical reactions. Still, the point is, products doare not necessarily are safer thatthan inputs.

First, output of a reaction do not necessarily becomes less or at least as dangerous as its input. Take dynamite for example(*): Glycerin is a rather harmless material; Nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, still not as dangerous as the resulting Nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor input fuel is a mixture mostly of uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nucleus, into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is part the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non radioactive materials from the fuel rod will become radioactive also.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor, must be done remotely

(*) This is just an analogy. Nuclear reaction is a totally different process than Chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products do not necessarily are safer that inputs.

First, the output of a reaction does not necessarily becomes less or at least as dangerous as its input. Take dynamite for example(*): glycerin is a rather harmless material; nitric acid is a strong acid for sure, but still not as dangerous as the resulting nitroglycerin (active element of dynamite) that results from the reaction of those 2.

In a nuclear reactor, input fuel is a mixture mostly of uranium 238 ($\rm ^{238}U$ a very mild radioactive material), 2-3% uranium 235 ($\rm ^{235}U$ which is more radioactive than $\rm ^{238}U$, though radioactively very mild when compared with other radioactive materials, plenty of then will result from the fission reaction or split of this nucleus), and others.

To produce energy, a nuclear reactor splits $\rm ^{235}U$ nuclei into some lighter elements (this is the source of power, not its radioactivity). Almost all of the resulting elements are radioactive themselves, with their own radioactive properties. This is only part of the origin of the radioactive materials of a reactor’s waste.

The other part appears from a process known as activation. By this process, previously non-radioactive materials from the fuel rod will also become radioactive.

Combined, the waste result of a nuclear reactor is far more dangerous than the input fuel. As a matter of fact, when the fuel is inserted into the reactor, workers handle it directly, just using special gloves (not necessarily too thick or with a lot of protective material as lead). However, removing it from the reactor must be done remotely.

(*) This is just an analogy. nuclear reactions are a totally different process from chemical reactions. Still, the point is, products are not necessarily safer than inputs.

added 5 characters in body
Source Link
J. Manuel
  • 2.2k
  • 11
  • 33
Loading
added 24 characters in body
Source Link
J. Manuel
  • 2.2k
  • 11
  • 33
Loading
added 7 characters in body
Source Link
J. Manuel
  • 2.2k
  • 11
  • 33
Loading
Source Link
J. Manuel
  • 2.2k
  • 11
  • 33
Loading