Discussion about this post

User's avatar
LionessElise's avatar

oh my god that's GORGEOUS, Cat

thank you

Expand full comment
Bruce Cohen's avatar

I remember seeing that in Scientific American and being absolutely enchanted by the idea of a natural fission reactor. What fascinates me the most is how negative feedback loops kept the reactor running within fairly narrow parameters, almost as if there were an intentional operator at the controls. A few years later I fell down the rabbit hole wondering if that could have happened elsewhere and -when as well. Couldn’t find any definitive answer because the tendency is to dig the uranium out of the ground and make either reactors or bombs out of it as fast as possible, and damn the measurements.

One thing that reactor can teach us is how to contain fissionable material, whether fresh or depleted from use, for long periods of time. That reactor ran for thousands of years without a meltdown. And countries other than the US have been successful in storing radioactive waste safely. For us it’s a political problem, not a technical one.

“This being the Cold War, people were pretty uptight about accounting for and tracking all fissionable isotopes in or out of any given civilian facility because, you know, big boom bad,”

And yet Hanford has admitted they can’t account for more than 1 metric ton of plutonium (more than enough to make 50 Hiroshima-size bombs). They don’t think it’s actually gone walkies, just that their process is imprecise. Then again, they sure left a lot of high radiation garbage lying around. This is a bit of a concern for me since I live in Portland (Oregon, not the one near you) just down the Columbia River from the creeping crap that’s leaking from Hanford.

All of which makes me wonder what an archeologist of some intelligent species evolved after we’ve been gone for 10 million years would make of the isotope ratios in the ground around Chernobyl.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts