Nuclear Dump in the Heavens

Using the space shuttle to "bury" radioactive wastes

As the poisoning of Love Canal painfully shows, the problem of ordinary chemical pollution is horrendous enough. But potentially worse is the dilemma of how to dispose of radioactive wastes. Though countless schemes have been proposed for sealing the deadly stuff deep within the earth, few people seem willing to live on or near such a "hot" burial ground. Now scientists are suggesting another idea: banish the nuclear-age garbage to far-off space, using NASA'S shuttle as a kind of celestial dump truck when it finally flies, probably early next year.

The space option for nuclear waste is not exactly a new idea. It has long been apparent that the safest incinerator for such material would be the nuclear fires of the sun. But solar burial has one overwhelming drawback: sending a rocket spiraling into the sun with a nuclear cargo would require extremely high speeds and prodigious amounts of fuel, as would the alternative of sending it out of the solar system. The nearby moon, on the other hand, is more accessible, but contaminating that pristine surface would surely create an international furor. Nor would public concern be less if the debris were left circling the earth, with the potential of becoming a nuclear Skylab.

Yet there may be a safe and acceptable nuclear depot in the heavens. Three space engineers writing in the journal Astronautics & Aeronautics suggest parking the dangerous debris in an orbit far from any living thing, midway between the earth's own path around the sun and that of the neighboring planet Venus. Left there, say Claude Priest and Robert Nixon of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and Eric Rice of the Battelle Laboratories in Columbus, it would never come closer to the earth than 22.5 million km (14 million miles). The scheme would also be cheaper than sending the waste into the sun. Best of all, say the engineers, the garbage would remain locked in its orbit for at least a million years.

They admit that their brainstorm has some shortcomings. Because of the shuttle's small payload, only the most hazardous fission byproducts could be considered for launch. They would also require almost foolproof packaging--probably a hardened mix of metals and ceramic encased in stainless steel spheres. As a precaution against a crash during lift-off or in the early stages of the journey, the spheres would be carried in an aerodynamically shaped container with heat shielding. That would enable them to survive a fiery plunge back into the atmosphere without spreading radioactive debris round the earth.

Following a trajectory that minimized passage over land, the shuttle would carry its hot cargo into earth orbit. Then the crew would deploy a giant mechanical arm and guide the nuclear package, together with a booster rocket, out of the cargo bay. After backing the shuttle a safe distance away, the astronauts would fire the booster, kicking the nuclear package out of earth orbit and hurtling it sunward. The booster would be detached and steered back into the cargo bay for return to earth and reuse on further missions, like the shuttle itself. Meanwhile, after a journey of about 160 days, another rocket in the nuclear waste package would be fired by remote control, this time braking the container and letting it settle into a permanent solar orbit between earth and Venus.

The authors acknowledge that the most careful preparations would offer no absolute guarantee against the workings of Murphy's Law (what can go wrong, will). But, they say, the risks are clearly calculable and precautions can be taken. Their enthusiasm is apparently shared in Washington. Last week, as part of a joint program with the Department of Energy, NASA awarded a $296,000 contract to the Boeing Co. Its purpose: to start up a four-year study on the possibility of exercising the space option for ridding the earth of nuclear wastes. qed

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.