SDAI-Tech1 said:
I have to assume your fear is that radioactive particles will set up a chain reaction and the resultant thermal output will heat up the earth.
You don't have to worry about such a possibility.

J---No, I am not worried about a possibility of a chain reaction in the same sense as the fast chain reaction in a nuclear bomb or even the controlled chain reaction in a nuclear power plant.
What I am saying is that there is another chain of reactions involved in nuclear fission processes.
I would call it the contamination chain, the highly radioactive material contaminates its surroundings, then the contaminated surrounding contaminates its surrounding and so on.

SDAI---"Spent control rods are quite dangerous and are kept in storage facilities designed to absorb and limit the contamination potential."

J-- Yes but the surroundings still become contaminated and radioactivily hot,
even if the actual temperature is not so hot.

SDAI-- "You have to remember that the entire planet is playing a game of checks and balances with atoms, particles, radioactive atoms and all are working to achieve ground state."

J-- I agree

SDAI-- "Nuclear radiation is eventually absorbed by atoms that can absorb the extra energy without becoming radioactive themselves."

J-- Most atoms DO BECOME radioactive when they absorb neutrons or protons.

SDAI-- "So even if all the control rods of all the nuclear reactors were dragged over the surface of the earth a balancing would eventually occur."

J-- Yes, the key word here is eventually, like hundreds or thousands of years.

SDAI-- "At first, all things that contact the rods would become extremely radioactive themselves and distort intelligent function, but eventually the atoms would reach ground state. In the process, thermal heat would be increased, but even that would find itself converted into different forms of energy and mass."

J-- I have not studied the idea of converting energy into mass, so it is hard for me to accept that idea. According to e=mc^2 or m=c^2/e, means that it takes a tremendous amount of energy to make a little bit of mass.

SDAI-- "About forty years ago, scientists planted a tree in a box, watered it and weighed the amount of water they gave it. After five years the tree and dirt weighed several hundred pounds and yet only 100 pounds of water and dirt had been added to it. Where did the other 200 or so pounds come from? The answer? It pulled it from the air and from solar radiation itself."

I have been under the impression that the solar radiation only facilitated or acted like a catalyst to help the plant in absorbing carbon molecules from the air.

Snip

SDAI-- "Radioactive waste, even if 100 times more than exists now, would never pose a longterm threat to the earth's climate because of this balancing mechanism in place."

J-- It is because of this balancing mechanism that is in place that I suspect that there will be a long-term threat to the earth's climate.

I consider the problem from a viewpoint of everyday physics, nuclear radiation imparts kinetic energy to air molecules, air molecules start moving faster, (they heat up) if the air molecules in the upper atmosphere move faster than 7 miles per second they can escape the Earth's gravity, thereby cooling the remaining air. (the balancing act)

But IF the air molecules escape into space then the Earth's climate WILL change.
How quickly or what quantity of the air will disappear will depend on the amount of kinetic energy that these air molecules have.

What I would like to know is; how much kinetic energy has the radioactive "contamination chain" imparted to the atmospheric molecules so far.

Some atmospheric particles are escaping from the Earth, the question is: Has the nuclear energy that has been released into the atmosphere increased a natural effect, or is the escaping effect totally due to the nuclear interactions that have been spread into the atmosphere by man?

Johannes