Geologically it was short, a million years or so, then it fizzled out. Even nuclear fuel has a lifespan. I won't swear to it though, my memory is not what it used to be.

 

are the gamma rays and x rays absorbed in the soil and convert into heat or do they travel through the soil and out through the surface?

 

As I understand it was pretty deep, it affected the groundwater. Any effects it has on local plant and animal life is long gone, other than mutations, which are fundamentally normal.

 

in terms of long term effects, it is not just cancer.

Chernobyl report after 20 years.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This study seems to how that DNA mutation do not affect second generation, which seems counter-intuitive.

 

is there a possibility that the more dense metals get pulled to the centre of the earth,
and that there is some kind of fission, fussion or power generation going on there. It seems strange to me that that the earth has stayed molten for so long?

 

Are there problems with putting all the used uranium rods world wide, in a very deep shaft and rather than trying to save them, back fill the shaft and let them go into melt down together?

 

are the gamma rays and x rays absorbed in the soil and convert into heat or do they travel through the soil and out through the surface?

By and large they are absorbed and turned into heat. Some rough numbers: 1 MeV gamma rays are 90% absorbed by 3 cm of lead. That same level of absorption requires about 4x the distance in granite, 6x the distance in concrete, and 9x the distance in packed soil. So let's be pessimistic and use 10x, thus it takes 30cm to absorb 90% of the energy, or right about one foot. This goes exponentially, so 1 ft absorbs 90%, 2 ft absorbs 99%, and 10 ft absorbs 99.99999999%.

 

Are there problems with putting all the used uranium rods world wide, in a very deep shaft and rather than trying to save them, back fill the shaft and let them go into melt down together?

The main problems are in the safe and secure transport of the material and, more pervasively, the political factors around any proposed solution.

 

is there a possibility that the more dense metals get pulled to the centre of the earth,
and that there is some kind of fission, fussion or power generation going on there. It seems strange to me that that the earth has stayed molten for so long?

Yes and yes (fission).

Let me introduce you to a really neat website. It's called "Google".

Try Googling the phrase "why is the center of the earth so hot" and see what you get.

 

By and large they are absorbed and turned into heat. Some rough numbers: 1 MeV gamma rays are 90% absorbed by 3 cm of lead. That same level of absorption requires about 4x the distance in granite, 6x the distance in concrete, and 9x the distance in packed soil. So let's be pessimistic and use 10x, thus it takes 30cm to absorb 90% of the energy, or right about one foot. This goes exponentially, so 1 ft absorbs 90%, 2 ft absorbs 99%, and 10 ft absorbs 99.99999999%.

That is amazing that this problem can so easily be solved.

 

Yes and yes (fission).

Let me introduce you to a really neat website. It's called "Google".

Try Googling the phrase "why is the center of the earth so hot" and see what you get.

I tried your suggestion - I find it interesting that at the center of the earth is the polar opposite transformation of at the sun. I am happy to find a natural realm to place fission.

the best quote i found -

"The last and most important source of heat is nuclear fission of heavy elements in the Earth’s interior. In short the Earth has a nuclear engine inside it. It is thank to the continous nuclear fission of elements in the Earth’s interior that replaces the heat the Earth loses keeping it nice and hot. This fission process occurs in the form of radioactive decay. It also creates the convection currents in the mantle that drive plate tectonics."

 

That is amazing that this problem can so easily be solved.

The shielding is not the hard part. From a technical standpoint there are a number of other concerns. Just for starters you have to get the material safely and securely to the site where it is to be interred. Then you have to make sure that it is going to stay interred. And all of this must be done in a manner that is cost effective. Finally, you have to deal with all of the political considerations and public concerns, both rational and irrational, that surround this topic.

 

Hello,

Perhaps the following link pages of the EDUCYPEDIA might intrest you:
Internal structure of the earth
Modern physics: Nuclear science-Quantum mechanics

Bertus

 

“does anyone know why the radiation is dangerous - what it does to us that is unhealthy”

DNA damage does not have an immediate effect. Radiation has many components. Radiation ionizes(rips apart) the molecules in your cells. These new molecule fragments cause even more damage to other molecules in the cell. Just one ionization can cause a chain reaction. Chain reactions work both ways.

With this current risk assessment mentality, electricity in homes and factories, and driving side by side on roads would have never been.

In 1970 when I was 18, I got to play with a nuclear reactor. And I mean really play with it. This was all hush hush at the time and I’m not sure how much is still classified. By todays materials and methods, I’m sure it was very archaic. But it was like a hot rod engine to me. A very large amount of power able to vary quickly. It was a superior mechanical circuit.

I would like to see small reactors in every city, independently powered towns. Power reactors are much safer than propulsion reactors. I would love to have a propulsion reactor in my basement.

But they are still mechanical. i.e.-----heat transfer.

Why not tune the reactor for minimal particle emission and maximum photon(radio) emission? Then receive and rectify the signal? Nuclear power directly into electricity. We can distribute efficiently by DC grid now.

All we need is a fast switch.