4 ms·

Unmentioned in TFA: what's to become of the spent fuel. Maybe since we're fighting in someone else's home, we can just leave it there...

e12e 7y ago
Keep in mind that depleted uranium has been used for ammunition (arguably resulting in war crimes against the civilian population in Iraq). I think it's safe to say that the armies of the world has not learned much from wwi: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_Rouge https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_Rouge
- coretx 7y ago
  Not just Iraq. Many other theaters as well, the balkans for example. Imho more significant for this debate however, is the fact that personnel from coalition partners also have been harmed by it. Point being, it's a unacceptable hazard for everyone and everything.
- mdorazio 7y ago
  Spent fuel is a hell of a lot more dangerous than depleted uranium, though. DU is less radioactive than the unprocessed kind that comes out of the ground. Spent fuel, on the other hand, is extremely radioactive - enough that just spreading it with a regular bomb would be really bad.
  - coretx 7y ago
    When either is atomized enough for people being able to breath it, the end results is something you likely don't want to see. Nor does it matter if it was DU or spent fuel; at that point.
  - e12e 7y ago
    Oh, quite. I just meant that the organizations that see no problem with effectively creating depleted uranium aerosol (pulverized on impact) isn't too likely to be concerned with the environmental aspects. I suppose they might be counted on to consider the weaponization of things left behind... But then again it seems they aren't really able to keep track of who they supply actual weapons to either..
  - Iolaum 7y ago
    DU is less radioactive but is quite active as a chemical element and causes a lot of problems.
acidburnNSA 7y ago
It will stay in the reactor for around 10 years and then be replaced in a facility just like we do with submarines. Don't worry, we won't leave plutonium-laden spent fuel around in warzones.

e12e 7y ago

Keep in mind that depleted uranium has been used for ammunition (arguably resulting in war crimes against the civilian population in Iraq). I think it's safe to say that the armies of the world has not learned much from wwi: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_Rouge https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_Rouge

coretx 7y ago
Not just Iraq. Many other theaters as well, the balkans for example. Imho more significant for this debate however, is the fact that personnel from coalition partners also have been harmed by it. Point being, it's a unacceptable hazard for everyone and everything.
mdorazio 7y ago
Spent fuel is a hell of a lot more dangerous than depleted uranium, though. DU is less radioactive than the unprocessed kind that comes out of the ground. Spent fuel, on the other hand, is extremely radioactive - enough that just spreading it with a regular bomb would be really bad.
- coretx 7y ago
  When either is atomized enough for people being able to breath it, the end results is something you likely don't want to see. Nor does it matter if it was DU or spent fuel; at that point.
- e12e 7y ago
  Oh, quite. I just meant that the organizations that see no problem with effectively creating depleted uranium aerosol (pulverized on impact) isn't too likely to be concerned with the environmental aspects. I suppose they might be counted on to consider the weaponization of things left behind... But then again it seems they aren't really able to keep track of who they supply actual weapons to either..
- Iolaum 7y ago
  DU is less radioactive but is quite active as a chemical element and causes a lot of problems.

acidburnNSA 7y ago

It will stay in the reactor for around 10 years and then be replaced in a facility just like we do with submarines. Don't worry, we won't leave plutonium-laden spent fuel around in warzones.