Here are the publicly known methods to reduce the radioactivity of Nuclear Waste :
Proven to reduce nuclear radiation up to 96% within minutes :
Planetary Association for Clean Energy
“On August 24, 1991, China’s Baotou Nuclear Institute released a Report # 202 , “The Results of Experiments to Dispose of Radiation Materials by Brown’s Gas”, which establishes that experimentation on Cobalt 60 radiation source decreased radiation by about 50% or half-life of radiation — but sometimes more radiation is decreased which needs investigation of possibilities for decreasing more of the radiation in single treatments of exposure to Brown’s Gas flame, lasting only a few minutes, in the samples as described in the table below.
First Experiment Second Experiment
Source Intensity 580 millirads/hour 115 – 120 millirads/hour
After Treatment 220 – 240 millirads/hour 42 millirads/hour
“In another test conducted by Yull Brown before a public audience including U.S. Congressman Hon. Berkeley Bedell with a committee responsible in this area of concern, the experiment ran as follows as reported by the press:
“Using a slice of radioactive Americium … Brown melted it together on a brick with small chunks of steel and Aluminum … After a couple of minutes under the flame, the molten metals sent up an instant flash in what Brown says is the reaction that destroys the radioactivity. Before the heating and mixing with the other metals, the Americium, made by the decay of an isotope of Plutonium, registered 16,000 curies per minute of radiation. Measured afterward by the [Geiger Counter], the mass of metals read less than 100 curies per minute, about the same as the background radiation in the laboratory where Brown was working.
“This experiment indicated a reduction of radiation in the order of over 99% (to about 0.00625 of original level) — in less than 5 minutes, with minimal handling. The improvement in the de-radioactivation process from about 50% to nearly 100% has come only with persistent research over the decades by Brown and his colleagues…”
“The Hon. Berkeley Bedell has reported, “it has been my good pleasure to witness experiments done by Prof. Yull Brown in which it appeared to me that he significantly reduced the radioactivity in several nuclear materials. Under the circumstances, I believe it is very important for our federal government to completely investigate Dr. Yull Brown’s accomplishments in this area.”
“On August 6, 1992, almost a year after the Chinese nuclear report, Prof. Yull Brown made a special demonstration to a team of 5 San Francisco field office observers from the United States Department of Energy, at the request of the Hon. Berkeley Bedell. Cobalt 60 was treated and resulted in a drop of Geiger readings from 1,000 counts to 40 — resulting in radioactive waste residue of about 0.04 of the original level. Apprehensive that somehow the radioactivity might have been dispersed into the ambient environment, the official requested the California Department of Health Services to inspect the premises. The health services crew found no radioactivity in the air resulting from this demonstration nor from another repeat demonstration held for their benefit.
“This sequence of experiments was monitored by the Hon. Daniel Haley, the legislator who established the forerunner New York State Energy Research and Development Agency.
“Other demonstrations, measured with under more sophisticated protocol and instrumentation have been made before Japanese nuclear experts, including four scientists from Toshiba and Mitsui (Cobalt 60 of 24,000 mR/hr with one treatment to 12,000 mR/hr). The Japanese scientists were so excited by what they saw that they immediately purchased a generator and air shipped it to Japan. They sent Prof. Brown a confidential report of some of their results. Subsequently, they tried to obtain addition Brown’s Gas generators directly from the People’s Republic of China...”
A generator which produces 10,000 litres per hour has been built specifically for the reduction of nuclear waste…”
Brown’s Original Generator
Brown’s Gas Generator Manufacturers :
Method & System with Apparatus for Acceleration of Activity Decrease & Radioactive Material Deactivation
Radioactive material can be processed by an apparatus that includes at least a cylindrical outer shell electrode, an inner electrode, and a plurality of prism-shaped ferromagnetic elements positioned between the outer and inner electrodes. The prism-shaped ferromagnetic elements are positioned around the inner circumference of the metal cylinder. The inner electrode component is located within the metal cylinder and is configured to cover the inwardly-pointing portions of the prism-shaped ferromagnetic elements. Radioactive material in a container is placed into the apparatus, and an AC voltage excitation signal is applied to the electrodes of the apparatus during treatment of the material. The frequency of the excitation signal is selected according to the frequency of structurization or the frequency of destructurization of the ferromagnetic material. The process can be monitored and controlled with the use of alpha, beta, and gamma radiation intensity measuring instruments.
Method for Decontamination of Radioactive Materials
Method involves application of external electrostatic field to radioactive material. Source of electrostatic fields is system of conducting strips which is located on dielectric substrate which is bent as Moebius band. Conducting strips are arranged in parallel to band edge and have contact terminals which are located on inner and outer sides of Moebius band in opposition to each other.
Method for Enhancing Alpha Decay in Radioactive Materials
Apparatus and method for decontaminating radioactive materials by stimulating the atomic system of radioactive materials. The stimulus is kept applied to the radioactive materials for a predetermined time. In this way, the rate of decay of the radioactivity of the materials is greatly accelerated and the materials are thereby decontaminated at a rate much faster than normal. The stimulus can be applied to the radioactive materials placing them within the sphere or terminal of a Van de Graaff generator and allowing them to be subjected to the electrical potential of the generator, such as in the range of 50 kilovolts to 500 kilovolts, for at least a period of 30 minutes or more.
Accelerated Radioactivity Reduction
A method for reducing radioactivity in a radioactive sample is disclosed, comprising contacting said sample with a beam of photons, said beam having an energy level sufficient to cause said radioactive sample to emit particles including photons in an amount sufficient to accelerate a reduction in radioactivity of said sample. Also disclosed is a method of increasing radioactive decay in a radioactive isotope comprising the steps of: determining a beam of an effective energy and effective flux of photons to increase radioactive decay in the radioactive isotope; applying the beam to the radioactive isotope; and maintaining the beam for an amount of time effective to increase the radioactivity of the radioactive isotope.
Processing Radioactive Material with Hydrogen Isotope Nuclei
A method for processing radioactive materials is disclosed. The method employs hydrogen isotope nuclei for the treatment of radioactive materials, such as uranium, and effectively increases the observed decay rate of such materials. Therefore, the disclosed method allows remediation of dangerous radioactive materials, such as uranium, without requiring long term, geologically-stable storage sites or costly, accelerator -based transmutation equipment.
V.S. BUTTSEV, et al.
Method for Transmutation of Long-Living Radioactive Isotopes into Short-Living or Stable Ones
Transmutation of long-living radioactive isotopes into short-living or stable ones is conducted under the action of electromagnetic radiation. In the process, highly ionized atoms with energy- resolved hole of accelerated beta-decay are produced from atoms of long-living radioactive isotope and held in ionized state until transmutation of mother nuclei to daughter short-living or stable ones takes place. With coefficient of operating time k preset for daughter nuclei, atoms of long-living radioactive isotope are held in highly ionized state for at least time beta, where beta is lifetime of mother nuclei under accelerated beta-decay conditions. Electromagnetic radiation may be effected by beams of accelerated charged particles (electrons, protons, or ions) or by photon flux. Radiation by charged-particle beam may be combined with photon flux radiation. EFFECT: enhanced transmutation efficiency dispensing with nuclear reactions of collision character and avoiding formation of by-products.
Remediation of Radioactive Waste by Stimulated Radioactive Decay
Disclosed is a radioactive waste treatment process for transmuting long-lived radioisotopes into short-lived radioisotopes through applied nuclear physics. Nuclear reactions, specifically of the (gamma, n) type, also known as photo-disintegration, are utilized to accomplish this transmutation from troublesome, long-lived radioactive waste isotope(s) of given atomic mass to shorter-lived or stable materials of lower atomic mass, by exposing the troublesome isotopes to a high energy photon flux for a sustained time. Generally speaking, the target nucleus of the radioisotope(s) to be treated is irradiated by gamma photons of an energy greater than the binding energy of the neutron in the target nucleus. This causes the irradiated nucleus to absorb the gamma rays, thereby placing the nucleus in an excited state. Upon relaxation, the nucleus ejects a neutron through the (gamma, n) reaction, thereby transmuting the element to an isotope of lower atomic mass and shorter half-life.
Low-Cost Elimination of Long-Lived Nuclear Waste
Aspects of the present invention include a non-metal, a hydrogen absorbing metal, a selected isotope to be exposed to ions of hydrogen or ions of isotopes of hydrogen, and a hydrogen source. The hydrogen source can be an electrolytic solution, a gas or plasma. In some embodiments the hydrogen absorbing metal covers the non-metal to form a microsphere. The hydrogen absorbing metal is positioned to contact the hydrogen source. Further, the hydrogen absorbing metal can be made of multiple layers of dissimilar metals with different Fermi energy levels. The multiple layers of metals have interfaces where swimming electron layers exist. Interfaces between the non-metal, hydrogen absorbing metal, and the hydrogen source also exist with swimming electron layers. The selected isotope is placed in these regions of swimming electron layers to be exposed to the ions of hydrogen and its isotopes from the hydrogen source.
Transmutation of Isotopes with Long Half-Life
For the transmutation of long half-life isotopes, their surfaces are exposed to an electrolyte or a gas or plasma atmosphere to form intermediate layers or vol. zones of a number of structure layers. The threshold zones are placed against a carrier material or close to vol. zones of metals or metal layers, composed of metals capable of absorbing \-1 atom% of hydrogen or its isotope.
Ligand-Assisted Supercritical Fluid Extraction of Nuclear Waste
Method & System for Recovering metal from Metal-Containing Materials
Embodiments of a method and a system for recovering a metal, such as uranium, from a metal-containing material are disclosed. The metal-containing material is exposed to an extractant containing a liquid or supercritical-fluid solvent and an acid-base complex including an oxidizing agent and a complexing agent. Batches of the metal-containing material are moved through a series of stations while the extractant is moved through the stations in the opposite direction. After the extraction step, the metal is separated from the solvent, the complexing agent and/or other metals by exposing the extract to a stripping agent in a countercurrent stripping column. The complexing agent and the solvent exit the column and are separated from each other by reducing the pressure.; The recovered complexing agent is recharged with fresh oxidizing agent and recombined with fresh or recovered solvent to form a recovered extractant, which is distributed through the extraction stations.
Nano-Titanate Absorbent for Radioactive Waste
Metal Oxide Nanofiber Filter
A substantially ceramic nanofilter in the form of a hierarchical structure of layers of metal oxide nanofibre non-woven meshes with increasing filtration ability on top of a mechanically strong but relatively porous substrate allows for high flux with nanometre separation capability. The nanofilter has application in the water purification, dairy, pharmaceutical, petrochemical and radioactive material processing industries. Particularly important, is the application of the nanofilter to filtering out viral and bacterial pathogens from water and air.
Metal Oxide Nanoparticles in an Exfoliated Silicate Framework
A method of producing metal oxide nanoparticles in an exfoliated silicate framework by forming an aqueous exfoliated silicate suspension by mixing a layered clay into water until clear. To which is added an acidic hydrated metal species precursor solution, formed by dissolving one or more transitional metal salts, and a non-ionic surfactant. This solution is then aged to precipitate a product precursor before the product precursor is separated and washed. The product precursor is calcined to form metal oxide nanoparticles in an exfoliated silicate framework.
David YURTH, et al. : High Density Charged Clusters
[ cf. Ken SHOULDERS ]
From: David G. Yurth <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: ‘Gary Vesperman’ <email@example.com>
September 28, 2013
Subject: RE: High burn-Up spent nuclear fuel: The problems multiply…
I have beaten my head against this wall since 1994, when S-X Jin, David Faust and I began testing High Density Charge Clusters as a way of Remediating radioactive emissions produced by spent nuclear fuels. We developed a system that was totally viable. We developed the math that explained what it was and how it worked. WE conducted the experimental protocols for 7 years and documented the procedures that were used to enable and sustain it. We submitted this info to US DOE in 2003 by invitation. In 2004 our system was independently validated by the guys at Sandia Labs. In 2005 I was contacted by Dr. Frank Goldner, the senior nuclear scientist responsible for developing and testing remediation technologies at the agency. He screamed at me and threatened to have me and Dick Shamp arrested under FISA unless we stopped sending documentation to the Department and discontinued our work. I stopped. Dick did not. In 2009, after Obama was elected, Dick contacted the #3 guy at DOE, a career bureaucrat who has served as personal private secretary to the Sec’y of DOE for more than 30 years named Dr. Eysan Khan. He apologized profusely for the way we had been treated and invited me to come to DC to present the HDCC methodology to all 26 of his senior department heads. Two weeks before I was scheduled to make the trip, he called to tell me that he had gotten so much push-back from ‘clients’ of DOE about my presentation that he couldn’t tolerate the pressure. The presentation was cancelled.
This has nothing to do with Yucca Mountain . It has everything to do with the government’s secret and unlawful use of public utilities who generate atomic power as the source for high grade uranium and weapons grade plutonium. They don’t want the problem solved because it would deprive them of their only viable source of supply. They don’t give a fart in a windstorm about the risks they impose on local populations like Fukushima – all they care about is using nuclear weapons to control the planet. And they are getting away with it. That’s why this subject makes no sense to anyone who talks about it – the real agenda has nothing to do with public safety or possible catastrophic contamination of the planet.
Excerpted from David Yurth’s book “The Ho Chi Minh Guerilla Warfare Handbook: A Strategic Guide For Innovation Management” —
Of all the problems I have participated in developing solutions for, perhaps the most important and frustrating has been the development of a system for treating radioactive fuel wastes produced by nuclear power plants. After WWII, the development of nuclear power plants was hailed as the final solution for the energy shortage supply-side crisis predicted by so many for so long. The use of atomic power was touted as the final solution for the problem. Unfortunately, before the 20th Century was ended, we had witnessed the catastrophes at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl. By the end of the century, America had hit the wall with the set of problems posed by accumulating stockpiles of spent nuclear waste materials.
We’ve all seen the statistics. Fifty-two thousand metric tons of spent fuel rods and three hundred eighty thousand cubic meters of solid nuclear waste, which does not include three hundred forty-five million liters of liquefied high level radioactive waste materials are now being collected and stored on more than 140 sites across the nation. [] The US Department of Energy has embarked on a suicidal program to encapsulate and bury all of this material underground beneath Yucca Mountain, a series of limestone caves located in the desert of Western Nevada. Environmentalists have risen up in fury to prevent Yucca Mountain from happening, and the government has mindlessly rolled out its agendas as it always does. The nature and extent of the problem has been deliberately minimized, distorted, and polarized by the opposing forces. The dangers involved in transporting, encapsulating and burying nuclear waste have been denied, suppressed, spun, and ignored by everyone who stands to profit from participation in the program.
The governor of Nevada has vowed to prevent the importation and burial of high level nuclear waste materials in his state by any and every means possible. He has threatened civil disobedience and promised to call out the National Guard to prevent shipments from being delivered in his state. The Nevada legislature successfully importuned its congressional representatives and senators to create a protected wildlife sanctuary around Yucca Mountain so that water, roads, railroads, and all the accompanying development that is called for in the DOE’s plan cannot be lawfully implemented. In exchange, the DOE published a series of scientific and engineering reports purporting to show that the site is totally safe for the storage of high level nuclear waste products. The reports have since been shown to be specious, but the DOE’s policy remains. President Bush has vowed to override Congressional action using the power of the presidential pen. The battle lines have been drawn.
After talking about the problem with several colleagues, we decided that remediation of radioactive emissions generated by spent nuclear fuel wastes was a problem that could and should be solved. We assumed that because so much attention was being focused on the overriding nature of the problem, it was something that deserved our best efforts. My opinion about it at the time was based on the notion that if the problem of radioactive waste could be eliminated from the equation, then nuclear power could be developed in a way that might eventually provide a safe, manageable, reasonably benign alternative to damming rivers, burning coal, and combusting natural gas to produce electric power. It seemed logical and reasonable to all of us.
I began the process in much the same way as I do with any project I participate in. I surveyed the literature, contacted experts, evaluated available technologies, corresponded with friends at DOE and other government agencies, and worked for more than a year to familiarize myself with the territory. I went to some scientific conferences, met some of the private and public sector experts, and listened to their descriptions of the challenges presented by the accumulation of high level nuclear waste at places like Savannah River, Hanford and more than 100 others. I reviewed reports printed and circulated by the DOE and some of its contract laboratory research partners. After nearly a year, I decided that there were a couple of approaches that could be taken to solving the problem that no one else was pursuing.
In 1995 I met with a very special Chinese physicist by the name of Shiang Xian Jin. Before he escaped from the PRC in 1993, he was the top plasma physicist in China. He wrote the physics texts that are still being used to teach plasma physics in Chinese universities nearly two decades later. While serving as the Head of the Physics Department at Beijing University, he was also tasked by the Chinese government with the primary responsibility for evaluating all energy production inventions created by inventors in the PRC. He knows science and scientists because he is one. He knows invention and inventors because he has become thoroughly familiar with the process. When I met him, he was working in a small, privately owned laboratory that was one of the spin-offs from the Pons and Fleischmann cold fusion debacle. When I met him, Jin was writing papers about a totally new kind of technology, patented in the US by a genius inventor/scientist by the name of Kenneth Shoulders. His discovery of a new kind of electron cluster was fascinating because the phenomenon described in his patent was specifically prohibited by the standard physical model as a violation of basic quantum mechanical principles.[]
Jin’s papers describing the behaviors and dynamics of Shoulders’ High Density Charge Clusters were published in the peer reviewed Journal of New Energy, printed and distributed by the International New Energy consortium, a loose affiliation of scientists, engineers, technologists, and inventors from around the world. [] At the 1997 INE convention, Jin and Shoulders presented papers and held discussions about HDCC’s as a possible solution for the nuclear waste material treatment option we had begun to work on. Several major players in the research community attended and participated in these discussions, including George Miley of the University of Chicago, Rugerro Santilli of MIT, Tom Valone of the US Patent and Trademark Office, Eugene Mallove, also formerly of MIT [and publisher of Infinite Energy Magazine and Executive Director of the Integrity Research Institute in Camden, New Jersey] and Tom Bearden, eminent inventor and founder of the Union of Distinguished Scientists.
Papers by Russian, Ukrainian, Byelorussian, and other scientists from the former Soviet Union were also presented at subsequent conferences and published in later issues of the JNE. Eventually, we began to develop a consensus about HDCC behaviors and attributes. Much of the work that proved the utility of HDCC’s as a way to eliminate radioactive emissions from high level spent nuclear fuels was supplied by Jin, his high voltage discharge and instrumentation engineer David Faust of Drexel University, and by Dr. Leonhardt Schroedter, a high profile materials and systems designer with more than 40 patents issued while he worked for Boeing, Rockwell, and other aerospace companies. After seven years of testing and bench top development, Jin and Faust succeeded in demonstrating that a simple high voltage charge cluster generator could produce a high density stream of clusters of electrons which could be propelled through a proton-rich environment [such as deuteride gas] to impact a radioactive target material in a way that would effectively eliminate gamma ray emissions and reduce alpha [nuclear particle] emissions to ambient background levels in less than seven hours. It was a good beginning.
In simple terms, what this meant was that a low velocity torus [a self-organizing standing wave in the shape of a donut] comprised of 6.022 x 1023 electrons [also known as Avogadro’s Number, this is 6.022 times 10 with 23 zeroes after it] could be generated by a controlled device, magnetically driven through a cloud of free protons and directed at a specific target with control and consistency. The velocity of the charge clusters was relatively low [less than 10% of the speed of light] when compared to the kinds of velocities demonstrated by nuclear particle accelerators, but the amount of kinetic energy produced by the interaction was enormous. For each 108 electrons, a single proton was captured in the negatively charged center of the torus. Because protons are 1,883 times more dense than electrons, this meant that instead of bombarding the nucleus of a radioactive material with one high speed particle at a time, which is the basis of the catastrophic annihilation on which atomic bombs are based, each charge cluster was carrying 1015 protons in its center.
While the velocity may have been relatively low, the amount of mass contained in each charge cluster was huge by atomic standards. When the mass of protons impacted the surface of the radioactive target material, the protons penetrated deeply into the sub-surface layers. Unlike neutrons, which travel in a very orderly, linear way, protons bob and weave around the perimeter and in between other atoms because of the strong positive charge they carry. This attribute of protons in such high numbers, traveling at very high actual velocities, meant that many of the protons struck the nuclei of atoms making up the radioactive targets. The product of the impact was not catastrophic because the kinetic energy carried by the protons was insufficient to destroy the atoms. Instead, in the same way a bowling ball knocks the pins down on a bowling alley, the proton’s impact with a nucleus knocked the nuclear materials apart without annihilating the structure.
The temporary separation of the nuclear materials released significant amounts of light and heat, which represented the product of the dissipation of the binding energies imposed by the strong and weak nuclear forces. But instead of creating a chain reaction, the impact simply knocked the atomic particles apart long enough to release as much as 50% of the nuclear binding energies. Very shortly after being knocked apart by the proton impact, the nuclear particles realigned themselves and rejoined to form nuclei with lower energy states and smaller atomic nuclear numbers. What we also discovered was that the recombining process actually created new material with atomic numbers that were different from any of the materials originally contained in the target samples. This was an important discovery because it meant that the mathematical model which predicted that the target material would literally be transmuted into new materials could be verified.
We demonstrated the technique’s effectiveness with both solid and liquid nuclear waste materials in successive trials conducted over a period of seven years. Jin, Faust, Schroedter, and Shoulders worked together to create a mathematical model to describe the interactions created by HDCC’s and published their findings in the JNE in 1999. In 2000, I went to work as CEO of Primary Technologies in Chicago and immediately contracted Jin to pursue his work as one of the technologies sponsored by Primary. Dick Shamp, former environmental scientist and intelligence analyst, who has been a member of the Republican National Committee for more than 40 years and is therefore well connected politically in Washington, worked with us to create a new company called Nuclear Remediation Technologies. This company was created to provide a home for the newly emerging HDCC-based nuclear remediation treatment program we had worked so hard to develop.
By the time Primary imploded in the late Winter of 2001, Jin’s remediation model had been validated by other physicists, including notorious physicist Jack Sarfatti, who produced an extensive critical analysis of Jin’s mathematical formulations.[] Tom Bearden and the Union of Distinguished Scientists also reviewed the model and Jin’s test results. In their 2001 monograph entitled “Reformulation of Maxwell’s Electrodynamic Field Equations,” Bearden, along with world-class mathematicians Lawrence Crowell and Myron Evans and 18 other scientists and mathematicians validated the mathematical formulations by showing that the phenomenon of the High Density Charge Cluster is specifically called for in Maxwell’s original quaternion equations. In addition, we discovered that scientists in China and Ukraine had also developed charge cluster generator technologies which produced quantum-defined clusters that conformed perfectly to the attributes predicted by Jin’s model.
By the end of 2002, we were confident that we had developed and validated a simple, affordable, effective way to treat high level nuclear waste materials so that they produced no radioactive emissions at all. In fact, when the laboratory results were validated by other laboratories, it was discovered that spent nuclear fuel rods could be induced to produce up to nine times as much heat output during HDCC treatment as they do before being retired to water-borne storage tanks. This, we thought, was just icing on a very attractive and commercially valuable technological cake. We were ready, it appeared, to put the wheels on the HDCC radioactive emissions treatment program by driving NRT into the capital formation process.
Just as we were putting the pieces together, a brilliant and much valued colleague died suddenly and unexpectedly in an automobile motorcycle accident. Dr. Paul Brown, (Nuclear Solutions, Aurora, Colorado) had developed a novel method to remediate nuclear waste by photo nuclear reaction using high intensity gamma-rays. The technology utilized long established principles of physics [e.g. giant dipole resonance] that had also been overlooked in their possible application in the treatment of nuclear waste. Brown’s nuclear spallation device had been built and demonstrated in Japan and was on its way to the US for demonstration to the House Science & Technology Committee in Washington, DC, when his death occurred. This event exerted a chilling effect on the members of the INE because it appeared to all of us that his death may not have been accidental at all.
From the outset, our team had acted on a set of assumptions that seemed completely valid at the time but which later proved to be very ill advised. We assumed, for example, that because the nuclear waste problem was global, everyone would welcome a solution. We assumed that our agendas for carefully, scientifically defining and resolving the problem sets were consistent with those of the government agencies tasked by law and public policy to do the same thing. We assumed that the public utilities and providers of the technologies that support the nuclear power production industry would welcome a simple, cost-effective, efficient solution to a universal problem. We were sadly mistaken but did not discover how misguided our attempts were until several years and many hundreds of thousands of dollars later.
Dick Shamp, in his role as President of Nuclear Remediation Technologies, contacted Dr. Condoleezza Rice while she was serving as Director of the National Security Council at the White House. She passed his proposal off to one of her NSC staff members, who sent it to the Department of Energy. The proposal eventually found its way to the desk of Dr. Frank Goldner, AFCI Program Technical Director, Office of Advanced Nuclear Research, at DOE, who eventually responded by inviting us to submit a raft of documents, all of which taken together were needed to provide DOE’s staff engineers and scientists with sufficient information to enable them to evaluate our claims and determine whether the HDCC program would qualify for research and development support. Over a two year period we produced more than 1,800 pages of application and disclosure documents, project descriptions, white papers, laboratory reports, R&D protocols, benchmarks, timetables, milestones, and so on. The process was costly and time consuming, but we kept at it because we had convinced ourselves that all the work we were engaged in could only produce valuable and useful results.
DOE dispatched three of its top remediation consultants to talk with our team, including Dr. Tom Ward and two other DOE consultants who were actively involved in the development and testing of other protocols at Los Alamos and Sandia Laboratories. We believed, based on the kinds of responses we continued to receive from Dr. Goldner and his staff at DOE that the NRT technologies not only qualified for funding support but that we would be contracted by DOE-affiliated laboratories at MIT and other prestigious universities to jointly develop and deploy successive iterations of the HDCC treatment devices in beta tests related to five different industrial applications.
We prepared and filed a patent application which explained the proprietary features of the NRT HDCC-based radioactive remediation and treatment system. As a team, we had dedicated nearly 50 man-years over nearly a decade to develop and mature the technology. By the time the fateful call from Frank Goldner came in November of 2003 we were convinced that NRT was well on its way to becoming a global player. On a stormy afternoon in mid-November, my phone rang. Dick Shamp was on the line. He sounded breathless, as if he had been running up and down the stairs. He told me he had Frank Goldner on the phone and wanted to conference me in, so I told him to go ahead. The instant Dr. Goldner came on the line, he began screaming. Literally. He was yelling so loud that I had to put the receiver a foot away from my head to avoid damaging my ear. At first I was just astonished. I had never been spoken to in that tone of voice by anyone in my life so it took me a few seconds to recover my composure.
During his diatribe, Goldner accused us of all sorts of things, including impermissibly bombarding Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham’s office with an endless stream of unnecessary, unwanted, useless correspondence. He had been specifically instructed by Mr. Abraham, he said, to put a stop to our correspondence. He told us that the Secretary did not want our correspondence on file and demanded that we stop sending it to him. Somewhere in the middle of his screaming I screamed back. After I had managed to put a stop to his tirade, I got his undivided attention by telling Dr. Goldner that I had turned on my tape recorder and intended to send a copy of the tape to Secretary Abraham if he didn’t shut up.
What followed was one of the most astonishing conversations I have ever participated in in my life. We had done everything asked of us by Goldner and his minions at DOE. We had submitted all the documents, made all the disclosures, cooperated with all their consultants and demonstrated that the NRT system was both viable and effective. Goldner informed us that notwithstanding all that, the Department’s policy called for the encapsulation and burial of high level radioactive nuclear waste under Yucca Mountain. No other technology, no other means of remediation, no other alternative would be permitted to impinge on the Department’s policy, under any circumstances. We were ordered forthwith to cease and desist sending any further correspondence to DOE, at any level, for any reason, under any circumstances, related to our treatment system. Further, we were informed that NRT would be denied permission to obtain samples of any radioactive materials under any circumstances, whether for further testing and evaluation or any other purposes. In short, we were told that the United States government and the agency charged with protecting the welfare of its citizens had decided to specifically prohibit the implementation of a technology that had been demonstrated to solve the problem of radioactive emissions generated by high level spent nuclear fuel wastes.
We were understandably enraged by both the decision and the way the message had been delivered. Over the next two years Dick and I complained to several of our White House contacts, as well as dozens of senators and congressmen. We wrote and published op-ed pieces in a number of newspapers. We attempted to contact the DOE consultants we had been working with to see if we could figure what had gone wrong. Once the door had been shut at DOE, all our access to pertinent research information produced by government-sponsored laboratories immediately ceased. People we had worked with for years refused to take our calls. For reasons that have since become crystal clear, but which at the time remained a total mystery to us, the solution we had created was summarily booted off the playing field.
Since that time, it has become clear that we made a number of serious tactical mistakes. The first and most important was the mistake of presumption. We assumed, because it seemed so patently obvious and logical at the time, that if radioactive emissions was such a terrible global problem, and if we could develop an effective solution, we would have contributed something meaningful, useful and important to the process. What we have since learned is that we could not have been more mistaken. The line at the food trough leading from DOE to Yucca Mountain is $12 – $15 billion a year long. The high temperature gas cooled nuclear fission university-based research establishment consumes another $8 – $10 billion each year from DOE and its affiliated agencies. The ancillary research and consulting services related to the actual design, engineering, construction, and operation of the Yucca Mountain implementation plan accounts for another $10 billion a year more.
Everyone in the food chain who relies on DOE funding stands to be disenfranchised if someone outside the system actually figures out how to solve the problem. In this case, as in others we have tackled over the years, the problem set constitutes such a rich target for exploitation that no one who has a position at the trough really wants it resolved at all. I was genuinely astonished when it finally dawned on me that we would have been just as effective if we had painted a big red target on our foreheads and stood naked in the middle of going-home traffic on the DC beltway. Not only did we not fix the problem, we blew the cover of everyone in the private sector who had ever been involved in the process with us for more than 10 years. I guess I can take some comfort in the knowledge that I wasn’t alone in my naïveté, but it hardly gives comfort to the prospect posed by the EEU’s recent decision to build 85 new fission-based nuclear power plants over the next two decades.
Second, in order to move our own agendas forward, we voluntarily disclosed absolutely everything there was to know about who was involved, what we were doing, how we were doing it, how it worked, and why. The DOE and its counterparts in other undisclosed agencies of government who have been tasked with derailing our research don’t have to lift a finger to find out who or where we are. We are now totally naked after having been stripped to our financial shorts and washed repeatedly with a torrent of DOE sanitizers. We cannot hide any longer and therefore can never be safe even if we decide to take this technology elsewhere for development. The results we produced could hardly have been less effective…
DEVICE FOR SUPPRESSING RADIATION
Inventor: ZUZANSKYI YURII MECHYSLAVOVYCH ; BOLOTOV BORYS VASYLIOVYCH, et al.
The proposed device for suppressing radiation contains a toroidal ferromagnetic core, inductance coils, and a screen.
METHOD FOR PURIFICATION OF SOIL FROM RADIO NUCLIDES
ROMANOVSKIJ VLADIMIR V [SU]
BOLOTOV BORIS V [SU]
[Google machine translation — Apparently the process employs sodium-ammonium sulfide and plants to chelate & uptake radionuclides.]
The invention relates to the field of clean technologies razrabotkiaktivnyh pochvyot radionuclides in binary tsiklahproizvodstv using phyto-activation of the soil as an active technical liquidation and utilization in accidents such as Chernobyl.
[ 0002] The object of the invention – capital reduction of energy costs , cleaning intensification ( phytoactivity ) of the soil and getting friendly products.
[ 0003 ] This is achieved by the fact that predlagaemyysposob soil decontamination from radionuclides , including the amendment of the neorganicheskihsoedineny suggests that zarazhennyyradionuklidami layer pochvyperiodicheski treated at reguliruemompolive aqueous solutions sulfidaammoniya , obrabatyvaemyysloy planted in the soil and the seeds of annuals mnogoletnihrasteny , plants harvested and osuschestvlyayutvydelenie radionuclides and ihsoedineny target output of zelenoymassy plant technology
[ 0004] The methods of separation , such as metodamiparovoy distillation , extraction, rectification etc. In this case, when planting into the soil ispolzuyutsemena white sweet clover and ililekarstvennogo , peppermint, dubrovnikabelovoylochnogo , Thymus vulgaris .
[ 0005 ] The degree of localization of radionuclides popredlagaemoy technology depends on himicheskogosostava and physico – chemical sostoyaniyaradionuklidov , agrohimicheskogosostoyaniya soil humus percentage soderzhaniyav it , quality , condition microfossils ( bionics ) of the soil used in kachestvelokalizatorov ( sorbents ) plants , technology and frequency of treatment pochvyneorganicheskimi compounds ihkontsentratsy and other factors.
[ 0006 ] The proposed method is different scale, it can be successfully ispolzovatv as the active cleaning agents (phytoactivity) vast areas contaminated with radionuclides , without neobhodimostisnyatiya , transport and pererabotkipochvy in these areas and mehanicheskogovozdeystviya her.
0007 ] Stock
[ 0008 ] with
[ 0009 ] 00
[ 0010 ] on
[ 0011 ]-N th
[ 0012 ] 00
[ 0013 ] on
[ 0014 ]
[ 0015 ] CJ
[ 0016 ] The physical nature izobreteniyazaklyuchaetsya combined chemical, physical , microbiological and physiological fiziologicheskihsredstv impact on soil ikompleksoobrazovateli . These sredstvaobespechivayut transition element insoluble forms and connections radioisotopes physicochemical state , easily digestible opredelennymvidom ( native ) plants localizers , priopredelennom impact on the process conditions and sorbtsiiagrohimicheskogo mikrofaunypochvy , followed vydeleniemiz of green plants and disposal of the net harvested rich product radionuclides , such as by egoszhiganiya and burial.
[ 0017 ] In batch processing pochvyrastvorami inorganic compound ( MNfZ – HCG in a controlled watering proiskhoditne transition nerastvorimyhi only slightly soluble forms of the compounds radioizotopovstrontsiya and cesium vodorastvorimyei metabolic forms of the compounds , easily digestible certain vidamirasteny , but also increases the content ( vobrabatyvaemoy on the technology basis ) of humic acids ( humus ) due nalichiya MNz groups and sod soil kotoroepolnostyu vetrovoyerozii processes and eliminates contamination with radionuclide zones.
[ 0018 ] As a result of the Chernobyl disaster proizoshelvybros fuel core reactor vast areas in osnovnoms a polydisperse matrix compounds hot fuel particles . Kontsentratsiyatakih particle territoriyamneravnomerna and varies by neskolkoporyadkov , with educated kompleksnyesoedineniya poorly soluble or nerastvorimyvoobsche .
[ 0019 ] In the process of natural and antropogennogovozdeystviya postepennoevymyvanie occurs on the surface of the hot toplivnyhchastits radioisotopes Sr, Cr and other radioactive elements , their dissolution and transition element compounds (nitrates, sulfites , chlorates , carbonates , and other compounds neorganicheskogoi organic origin ) .
0020 ] The present compounds of cesium and strontium related to IA and to groups of elements , which are the main radionuclides in soil, slightly soluble. On acidified soils sharply snizhaetsyausvoenie data connections kompleksoobrazovaniyi radioisotopes plants.
[ 0021 ] 0
[ 0022 ] 5
[ 0023 ] 0
[ 0024 ] 5
[ 0025 ] 0
[ 0026 ] 5
[ 0027 ] 0
[ 0028 ] 5
[ 0029 ] 0
[ 0030 ] 5
[ 0031 ] In order to intensify the natural ( human bezvmeshatelstva ) phytoactivation and increase the degree of localization radioisotope ovrasteniyami on these soils and their deoxidation treatment applied pochvyvodnymi ammonium sulfide solution .
[ 0032 ] In the treatment of the present gidrolizaprotekayut resulting reaction
[ 0033 ] (NH4) aS + 2Ha0 2NH40H + HaSNH «OH + H20
[ 0034 ] As a result of ion-exchange reaction : MZ + HaS + HZ
[ 0035 ] where M – radioisotope ; Z- S- acid ostatok.Sulfidy elements of groups IA and HA ( as oxide ) are soluble in water and form an alkaline environment prigidrolize :
[ 0036 ] CsaS + N20 – CsSH + CsOH and dalee CsSH + HCG – CsOH + H2S
[ 0037 ] 2SrS + H20 – Sr (SH) 2 + Sr (OH) 2 and dalee Sr (SH) 2 + 2H20 (OH) 2 + 2H2S
[ 0038 ] i.e. CS2S + 2H20 – 2SzON N25i2SrS + + 3H20 (OH) 2 + 2H2S
[ 0039 ] In the process of making an aqueous ammonium rastvorasulfida at reguliruemompolive soil provided eeizvestkovaniya process . Application in the present tehnologicheskomreglamente podkislennyhi on saline soils crops such as donnikbely and / or drug , peppermint, white-tomentose Dubrovnik , timyanobyknovenny deoxidizes rassalivaetpochvy and creates conditions of enrichment with nitrogen . In this case, these plants semeystvagubotsvetnyh and family Bobkov , proizrastayuschiev middle lane Evropeyskoychasti , plants of temperate climate , soil moisture trebovatelnyek well otzyvayutsyana imineralnyh application of organic fertilizers on crop yields dramatically povyshayutsvoyu obrabatyvaemyhuchastkah crops, while uvelicheniiusvoyaemosti plants by transferring ihv calcareous forms . Plants ispolzuemyev proposed technology , obespechivayutukos their green mass per season nemenee twice.
[ 0040 ] The use of the proposed solution of ammonium sulfide sposobevodnyh outputting not only improves the digestibility soedineniyradionuklidov , but also significantly improves
[ 0041 ] the most vital functions of soil and plants vysazhennyhna it , intensifitsiruyaprotsess dissolution of radionuclides and ihusvoeniya green mass of selected plants.
[ 0042 ] Isolation of green mass rasteniyekologicheski valuable raw materials and products ikontsentratsiya radionuclides in ostatochnomprodukte provided in predlagaemoytehnologii in the processing plant zelenoymassy priemamirazdeleniya technology , for example by extraction , distillation , steam distillation etc. As the extractant ( solvent) vpredlagaemoy technology can be used, for example , liquid C02 . Ispolzovaniedannogo selektivnogorastvoritelya at selected tehnologicheskihparametrah provides a process of separation of a mixture of liquid and tverdogoveschestva , the transfer of radionuclides in carbonate form compounds in the solid phase (raffinate ) and the extraction of the liquid phase massyrasteny green – environmentally chistoyproduktsii ; aromatics lekarstvennogosyrya , raw food , canned goods , alcoholic beverage , pharmaceutical , perfumes, cosmetics and dr.otrasley industry.
[ 0043] The method proposed by the authors developed and perfected in vegetatsionnyhopytah in the laboratory ispolzovaniemdernovo podzolic suglinistoypochvy ( soil) from the evacuation zone ( area : South side on the outskirts of Kirov, Narovlya , Gomel region). . Dannoypochvy Average total contamination with radionuclides was 60 -70Ki/km
[ 0044 ] The soil unless they are processed , the s1986 , was placed in a circular yacheykidiametrom 560 mm to 250 mm thick layer .
[ 0045 ] Control of the pH of the soil was carried out with help of the standard procedure razrabotannoyv Qing (GOST 26483-85 ) prigotovleniemsolevoy hood.
[ 0046 ] Initial soil pH sostavlyala 5 ,6 -6 , 6. In the process of making a pochvu 10 % aqueous sulfide ammoniyaobespechivalos maintaining soil pH range 9,5-10,8 .
[ 0047 ] The experiment was carried out with ispolzovaniemchetyreh plant species vysazhennyhv separately in four yacheykahkazhdoe , with two cells on kazhdomurasteniyu is a cell control the process proceeded vkotoryh natural phytoactivity without entering into the soil on the proposed neorganicheskihveschestv
[ 0048 ] Technology, but only when using reguliruemogopoliva .
[ 0049 ] After the cut through certain plants periodyvremeni dried and pulverized , and then placed into a laboratory dry zelenuyumassu extractor in kotoromv extractant ispolzovalsyazhidky C02 . The extraction process is one step and multiple step proizvodiliv
[ 0050 ] 0 modes. Then carried izmerenieradioaktivnosti extract and raffinate obtained from green mass rasteniyiz all sixteen experimental planting (cells) using standard techniques op5redeleniya cesium -134 , 137, ruthenium -106 , cerium -144 , strontium -90 , U- 235 and plutonium -239 , 240 , 241, Commission Goskomgidro – meta on the radiation monitoring of natural
0051 ] 0 environment – Instructions and guidance INSTRUCTIONS assessment of radioactivity on zagryaznennyhterritoriyah , approved. 29,04.1987 city
[ 0052 ] The following table shows the results of vegetatsionnyhopytov and shows the change in
[ 0053] The rate of accumulation of radionuclides 5 (CN ) in the tissues of plants depending otvida plants and their cutoff time (vegetatsionnogoperioda ) . Accumulation factor (KH ) is the ratio of the concentration
[ 0054 ] 0 radioactivity in the extract and raffinate concnetrates radioactivity in 1 kg of soil , the concentration of extract and raffinate radioactive rasschityvaetsyana 1 kg of dry product ( plant) for their
[ 0055 ] 5 education.
[ 0056 ] In the experiments, the mean concentration of radioaktivnostiizotopov : cesium , ruthenium, cerium , strontium, uranium and plutonium in pochvesostavlyala : 3.06 10 Bq / kg. Po0chvy density equal to 1.36 g/cm3.
[ 0057 ] The experiment showed that the technology allows primeneniepredlagaemoy in comparison with the control intensifitsirovatprotsess 1-3 orders of magnitude , increase phytosorbtion ( accumulation ) radionuclides white and / or drug , myatoyperechnoy, Dubrovnik belovoyloch -tion , common thyme , providing vpereschete over the average yield of
[ 0058 ] 0 to plant sod- podzolic pochvahza one growing season cleaning pochvyot radionuclides by 2-5 %. Suschestvuyuti other plants, allowing the application of the proposed obespechitpri tehno5logii fitosorobtsiiradionuklidov high efficiency in a wide range of selectivity.
[ 0059 ] In this case , as shown by experiment , the proposed technology provides you , the division of the above-ground parts of plants chistoytselevoy products, at concentrations in the residual products followed by burial and ihutilizatsiey izvestnymtehnologiyam .
[ 0060 ] The use of the proposed soil tehnologiidezaktivatsii rasteniyamisemeystva Labiatae and Bobkov , otnosyaschihsyak plants containing aromatic and bolshuyugammu lekarstvennyhveschestv , combined with periodic obrabotkoyzagryaznennyh radionuclides pochvvodnymi ammonium sulfide solution , would eliminate the power-hungry , trebuyuschihogromnyh material investments ikapitalnyh cost technologies not pozvolyayuschihumenshit collective dose of pollution .
[ 0061 ] The technology – reducing the collective aktivnyyinstrument dozyzagryazneniya areas with active land use.
[ 0062 ] It is compared to the loss-making tehnologiyamiochistki soil from vlozheniyv it provides a profit for the production of clean and schetpolucheniya dorogostoyascheyi scarce goods : aromaticheskihveschestv , essential oils etc. izsyrya ( green plants ) fitodezak – activation .
[ 0063 ] The economic impact of technology on at primeneniipredlagaemoy polluted with radionuclides territory Gomelskoy and Mogilev regions sostavitdesyatki billion rubles. , Will vernutzemli and labor to aktivnomuzemlepolzovaniyu , will provide clean vysokoplodorodnyhpahotnyh land from radionuklidovmaksimalno for 15 – 30yo , while improving tehnologiivozmozhno before.
[ 0064 ] Formula izobreteniya1Sposob soil decontamination from radionuclides , including the amendment of the neorganicheskihsoedineny , otlichayuschiysyatem that , in order to increase effectiveness, as an aqueous solution of inorganic sodium ammonium sulfide, and after making it to the pochvuvysevayut seeds of annuals and monocotyledons that collect in the season and techenievegetatsionnogo isolated from radionuclides, their connections and byproducts .
[ 0065 ] 2 . A method according to claim 1 otlichayuschiysyatem in that the seeds of annual and seeds of mnogoletnihrasteny donnikabelogo and / or drug , myatyperechnoy , germander itimyana ordinary white-tomentose .