4 ms·

This sounds totally reasonable to me. However, i think the cost of processing the waste and storing it long term is probably many orders of magnitude larger tha

This sounds totally reasonable to me. However, i think the cost of processing the waste and storing it long term is probably many orders of magnitude larger than the cost of disposing of CRTs, so the economics of using them would be a rounding error. Ive talked to some people who do research on glassification for the DOE, and i suspect the desire to minimize unknown factors like possible inconsisties in formulation of feedstocks will probably outweigh the desire to recycle. The cost of disposing of radioactive material is truly astronomical. For example a few years ago i saw a $100k quote for getting rid of 300 Ci of elemental tritium, which compared to the stuff in the hanford tanks is nearly harmless and only has a 12.5 year half life. If you inhale it your body will absorb a small fraction and flush it out as water. If i had to choose something highly radioactive to be put in my body, it might be tritium. Compare that to the stuff in the tanks, much of which has half lives more than 10k years and is "bone seeking" if it gets in your body. Compounding this even further is that there are also heavy metals and other hazardous stuff mixed in, which tends to multiply rather than add to costs. I guess what im saying is this will be massively expensive, and that will probably be the determining factor in most decisions.

exmadscientist 7y ago
Minor clarification/nitpick: shorter half-life is generally considered more dangerous, all else being equal (which it never is, especially if you're using Ci or Bq as your units, which correct for this by being disintegrations per second). The extreme example of this is Bi-209, which has a half-life of order 10¹⁹ years. Of course, it's perfectly safe to ingest, especially with pink dye and a nice bottle!
- yummypaint 7y ago
  It's true that things with shorter half lives have more decays per second for the same number of nuclei. However, the type of and energy of the decay is very important to the type of health impact it has, as well as how/how long it's retained in the body. Tritium is relatively safe because it emits a very low energy electron (<18 keV), which almost immediately ranges out in most materials, especially water. The only way it can get you is if its sitting right on top of your dna when it decays. Since it's hydrogen, it freely exchanges with the hydrogens in the water in a persons body, and is excreted quickly as a result. It doesnt accumulate in any particular place, which is also a plus. The treatment for tritium is lots of water and a few beers. Contrast that with actinides, some of which decay by neutron emission, alpha emission, and spontaneous fission. This page has a good breakdown https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiationionizing/background.html https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiationionizing/background.html alphas deposit alot of energy per unit length traversed, so alpha decay happening inside the body is pretty destructive. Alot of actinides also concentrate in bone marrow, which leads to leukemia.
throwaway_pdp09 7y ago
From wikipedia it seems Ci is a curie. Tritium is a hydrogen isotope, just releasing it in the atmosphere where it will float up and eventually escape seems a possibility. Not suggesting, just asking, really. OTOH I thought tritium was rather valuable. I guess finding a buyer might be the difficult part. Out of interest, I have a beta light (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nite-Tritium-Keyring-Glowring-Colours/dp/B0178BQ1TC/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nite-Tritium-Keyring-Glowring-Colou...) and it's still glowing well after a couple of years. I've wondered how much energy it actually contains, were it released at once - any one know?
- andbberger 7y ago
  You could easily calculate the contained energy. Find the average mass difference between the current state and its decay products and plug it into That Famous Formula.

exmadscientist 7y ago

Minor clarification/nitpick: shorter half-life is generally considered more dangerous, all else being equal (which it never is, especially if you're using Ci or Bq as your units, which correct for this by being disintegrations per second). The extreme example of this is Bi-209, which has a half-life of order 10¹⁹ years. Of course, it's perfectly safe to ingest, especially with pink dye and a nice bottle!

yummypaint 7y ago
It's true that things with shorter half lives have more decays per second for the same number of nuclei. However, the type of and energy of the decay is very important to the type of health impact it has, as well as how/how long it's retained in the body. Tritium is relatively safe because it emits a very low energy electron (<18 keV), which almost immediately ranges out in most materials, especially water. The only way it can get you is if its sitting right on top of your dna when it decays. Since it's hydrogen, it freely exchanges with the hydrogens in the water in a persons body, and is excreted quickly as a result. It doesnt accumulate in any particular place, which is also a plus. The treatment for tritium is lots of water and a few beers. Contrast that with actinides, some of which decay by neutron emission, alpha emission, and spontaneous fission. This page has a good breakdown https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiationionizing/background.html https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiationionizing/background.html alphas deposit alot of energy per unit length traversed, so alpha decay happening inside the body is pretty destructive. Alot of actinides also concentrate in bone marrow, which leads to leukemia.

throwaway_pdp09 7y ago

From wikipedia it seems Ci is a curie. Tritium is a hydrogen isotope, just releasing it in the atmosphere where it will float up and eventually escape seems a possibility. Not suggesting, just asking, really. OTOH I thought tritium was rather valuable. I guess finding a buyer might be the difficult part. Out of interest, I have a beta light (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nite-Tritium-Keyring-Glowring-Colours/dp/B0178BQ1TC/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/Nite-Tritium-Keyring-Glowring-Colou...) and it's still glowing well after a couple of years. I've wondered how much energy it actually contains, were it released at once - any one know?

andbberger 7y ago
You could easily calculate the contained energy. Find the average mass difference between the current state and its decay products and plug it into That Famous Formula.