Everything's simple to the simple minded.
Everything's simple to the simple minded.
It could be sold to people like the bloke who supplies our woodburner logs. Lives across the field from us, but from time to time I see a tractor pulling a big trailer full of large tree trunks arriving at his. He cuts them into logs and sells on.
We'll be dumping the granite worktop that we have. Too dark - can't see if it's wet or dirty, to hard and unforgiving when you biff it with a glass. No use at all.
More so than you, that's for sure.
And you wouldn't need a hob - you could cook anywhere on the worktop.
Well, like many things, I think there is a lot of hype over this sort of waste. The waste made into glass if buried properly, not near water which is used and of course recorded on plans correctly written are unlikely to harm anybody. the problems start if inappropriate waste gets to inappropriate areas with bad administration practices. Brian
A lot of so-called granite work tops aren't actually granite at all. It seems to me that in the kitchen and bathroom trade, almost any stone that's not marble gets called granite. True granites are pinks and greys. The almost-black iridescent one is Labradorite.
I doubt if even that matters. Stuff doesn't leach out of glass.
Er, doesn't that create a problem of what to do with the spoil from building the repository?
B-)
I believe lead does from CRTs.
You build another Aberdeen.
Is there a golden Labradorite too?
I think we could be on to a winning product here. It just needs the right marketing.
Looks like it leaches from CRTs at different rates depending on which bit of the tube you're talking about. Put an extra layer of pure glass around the glass blocks, f'rinstance.
I'm only aware of the almost-black one, but apparently it can come in a variety of colours. This from
But whether any are available as work tops, I've no idea. The dark background on the common variety shows up the iridescence, so a lighter background colour might not look as impressive.
Some nice pics on this page
I don't think you'll find aquifers at 1000m in soft roock You might in granite.
Anyway it has been explained to me by people here that nuclear waste is not dangerous. Having a change of mind now it might be coming their way? Or worried about house prices?
The requirement is for stable rock, without groundwater flow at between
250m and 1000m deep. Surrey stands on sand, clay and gravel, with chalk beds that provide aquifers for London. You would be hard pressed to find a site that is less suitable.
The whole point of geological storage sites is that they are build and forget. They don't rely upon continuing administration to retain their ability to store the material safely.
As has been explained to you many times, the longer a substance retains its radioactivity, the less dangerous it is. Highly radioactive substances are only highly radioactive because they are decaying rapidly. The high level waste destined for these repositories will remain hazardous for no more than a few hundred years.
It has only been around for a little over four thousand years, so nobody yet knows. We do know, from early copper tools, that the next layer, a copper case, can, in the right conditions, survive virtually unchanged for at least five thousand years.
The contents will long since have decayed to safe levels.
Surrey is mostly sands and gravels overlying chalk. All highly permeable. The chalk is an important aquifer and drinking water is extracted from it via deep boreholes.
You wouldn't want to risk contaminating it. Shades of Delboy and 'Mother Nature's Son'!
Interesting, thank you, although it was really a flippant question, based upon there being black and golden varieties of Labrador retrievers.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.