Well, there is a Low Level Disposal site in Andrews, Texas ran by WCS ( Waste Control Specialists). They currently just except waste from Texas and Vermont But WCS is trying to pass the export rule to allow waste from 36 other states. Which if anything happens like contamination or accidents with the waste, Texas and its tax payers will be responsible. Check out the link below!
No, lasers would not cause nuclear changes, they would only melt or vaporise material which is not what is wanted. The nuclear properties of the waste would remain the same.
no, its not safe to dispose nuclear waste in water,rather it would be safe to dispose it in common salt trenches.
It would cause pollution because it would harm men or animals using the land, and would contaminate food produced on the land. However this is not allowed to happen, nuclear waste is carefully controlled and confined to waste stores designed for the purpose
No physical or chemical process can alter the radioactivity of the waste, so it will still be there whatever you do with it. If the volcano is active, when the next lava flow occurs the nuclear waste will be ejected with the volcanic matter, so it would be a very bad idea. The idea for long term waste disposal is to find somewhere very geologically stable where it will stay for thousands of years without any risk of returning to the earth's surface, just the opposite of the volcano's contents.
High level radioactive waste would have no potential for producing a nuclear explosion, so your question is puzzling. Perhaps you mean production of a dirty bomb, which terrorists might use to contaminate an area by spreading radioactive material around using a conventional explosive. That is obviously not justified unless you are a terrorist.Plutonium can be extracted from spent uranium fuel and used in nuclear weapons, but I would not describe it as high level radioactive waste, plutonium is only mildly radioactive.In fact I think at present in the US and in Russia, the stockpile of nuclear weapons is being reduced and some of the fissile material is going into civil nuclear reactor fuel.
Yucca Mountain is a proposed repository site for storing high-level nuclear waste in the United States. The site was chosen for its geologic stability and isolation to prevent radiation from reaching the environment. If approved and constructed, Yucca Mountain would be used to store spent nuclear fuel and other radioactive waste generated by nuclear power plants.
No, lasers would not cause nuclear changes, they would only melt or vaporise material which is not what is wanted. The nuclear properties of the waste would remain the same.
no, its not safe to dispose nuclear waste in water,rather it would be safe to dispose it in common salt trenches.
It depends on the waste material. Methods appropriate for chemical hazards would not be so for nuclear waste.
It would cause pollution because it would harm men or animals using the land, and would contaminate food produced on the land. However this is not allowed to happen, nuclear waste is carefully controlled and confined to waste stores designed for the purpose
it means that either a nuclear rocket or a nuclear lab has exploded letting out nuclear waste and radiation which means the city would have to be evacuated until they are out of the nuclear radation zone.
Sending nuclear waste to the sun is currently not technologically feasible or economically viable. The cost would be extremely high and the environmental and safety risks involved in launching such a mission would be significant. It is more practical to focus on improving nuclear waste management and disposal techniques on Earth.
Probably these two reasons: 1) The cost of sending rockets constantly to the sun loaded with nuclear waste would bankrupt the industry. 2) A "misfire" (rocket that crashes) would be an environmental disaster.
Nuclear waste is an unfortunate by-product of the process of nuclear fission for the purpose of energy production. The spent fuel rods are "safely" stored and sequestered, but will remain dangerous for thousands of years. As far as I know, there is no "purpose" for nuclear waste, other than to convince people that they do not want a power plant in their backyard. The theoretically possible process of nuclear fusion (which is how the sun works) would produce less radioactive material and waste.
No, fission is still a fuel in - waste out reaction. Eventually the supply of nuclear fuel would run out.
it would not be able to functionlike store food and waste or energy
One method is deep geological disposal, where the waste is stored underground in stable rock formations. Another option is to reprocess the waste to separate out useful materials and reduce its volume. However, there is ongoing research into more advanced technologies to effectively manage and dispose of nuclear waste.