Krypton-85

Is nuclear fission going to make a comeback and plug the gap in our energy needs? Will nuclear fusion ever become energetically viable?

Moderator: Peak Moderation

Post Reply
User avatar
Bandidoz
Site Admin
Posts: 2705
Joined: 24 Nov 2005, 11:09
Location: Berks

Krypton-85

Post by Bandidoz »

Interesting......

http://www.davidmiliband.defra.gov.uk/b ... x#comments
Dr David Lowry wrote:Last weekend I attended an international conference in Stockholm, Sweden, where arguments for and against the Swedish nuclear strategy were presented by radiation protection and nuclear waste managment officials, and countered by various environmental and technical groups such as FMKK and MKG.

One of the surprising points raised came in a presentation by Gunnar Lindgren of Milkas (Milj?r?relsens k?rnavfallssekretariat)- the Swedish environment movement's nuclear waste secretariat - when he argued that the emission of one radioactive gas from nuclear operations, is a possible contributor to acceleration of climate change.

The gas in question is Krypton-85, the release of which has risen some 200,000 times since 1945, whilst carbon dioxide releases over the same time period has increased a substantial, but much smaller, 30 times globally.

He asserted that Krypton-85 could be responsible for creating mid-ocean perturbations, triggering much bigger storms and hurricanes such as Katrina that devastated the coastline of America's Gulf shore, New Orleans included, in August 2005.

I am no atmospheric scientist, but have heard this argument over the impact of increasing krypton-85 releases, put forward by Dr Peter Taylor at a Conference on the Thermal Oxide Reprocessing Plant (Thorp) at Sellafield, held at Liverpool University in 1988.

Thorp's operators, BNFL ( now managing the reprocessing plant under contract for the atomic quango, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority) were told to build into Thorp during construction in the 1980s a krypton-85 filtration plant, but they declined to do so due to excessive costs. Could that decision be proved very short sighted?
It may be counter-intuitive, but just maybe going nuclear might exascerbate climate change, not mitigate it, as the IPPC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change)scientific panel has argued today (4 May) in Bangkok in Thailand.

I suggest that anyone wanting to follow-up this issue further contact MILKAS directly - they have several very good English speakers - at informilkas@gmail.com, or telephone : +46 31 42 46 64, or visit their web site at www.milkas.se

Dr David Lowry
environmental policy and research consultant
Stoneleigh
Surrey
Olduvai Theory (Updated) (Reviewed)
Easter Island - a warning from history : http://dieoff.org/page145.htm
User avatar
STG
Posts: 89
Joined: 07 Jan 2008, 15:14

Post by STG »

I find this rather strange information:

Carbon dioxide is a very good IR-absorber due to it's rotational spectra, which is created by it's linear geometry. While krypton is a pure noble gas, which means monoatomic...So it doesn't posses any rotational spectra, and by this isn't much contributing to global warming.
goslow
Posts: 705
Joined: 26 Nov 2007, 12:16

Post by goslow »

yeah, there must be some alternative scientific explanation, but I can't think what it could be!
User avatar
STG
Posts: 89
Joined: 07 Jan 2008, 15:14

Post by STG »

goslow wrote:yeah, there must be some alternative scientific explanation, but I can't think what it could be!
No there isn't an other scientific explanation, I just argumented against Krypton being a greenhouse gas. And it doesn't matter if it is Kr-85 or Kr-84 because they are chemically identical.
goslow
Posts: 705
Joined: 26 Nov 2007, 12:16

Post by goslow »

Yes of course! This is intruiging, perhaps I will try to read up on it.
goslow
Posts: 705
Joined: 26 Nov 2007, 12:16

Post by goslow »

quick google:

"Increases conductivity of lower atmosphere, with possible implications for earth's electric field and precipitation from convective clouds."

but also

"importance of influence is highly speculative."

Conductivity????? Does that make any sense to you? Krypton should be quite hard to ionise, but not as hard as the smaller noble gases.
User avatar
STG
Posts: 89
Joined: 07 Jan 2008, 15:14

Post by STG »

Kr-85 is radioactive (I assume a beta-emitter), so it ionizes the air a little bit more compared to the background radiation. But this increase in activity is only small compared to the background, so I assume there is nothing to worry about that...because the nitrogen is still the main compound of air and therefor the one which will determine the conductivity most.
Post Reply