<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Atomic Show #031 - Uranium resources and mining techniques</title>
	<atom:link href="http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/</link>
	<description>A show about atomic energy</description>
	<pubDate>Mon,  8 Sep 2008 15:07:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Shane Brown</title>
		<link>http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3880</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2006 13:50:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3880</guid>
		<description>Daniel,

As a sanity check, I went and looked up Cohen's paper; it's 32,000 tons U per year that rivers bring into the ocean, not per day.  Also, the U content of seawater is given as 3 ppb, which is 3 milligrams per 1000 kilograms (or 1 billion milligrams).  Here's the reference:

http://www.sustainablenuclear.org/PADs/pad8301cohen.html

The salient point is still there; 5 billion years of U supply with no more than 1% increase in price over that time.  Now there's an inflation rate I can live with!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel,</p>
<p>As a sanity check, I went and looked up Cohen&#8217;s paper; it&#8217;s 32,000 tons U per year that rivers bring into the ocean, not per day.  Also, the U content of seawater is given as 3 ppb, which is 3 milligrams per 1000 kilograms (or 1 billion milligrams).  Here&#8217;s the reference:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sustainablenuclear.org/PADs/pad8301cohen.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.sustainablenuclear.org/PADs/pad8301cohen.html</a></p>
<p>The salient point is still there; 5 billion years of U supply with no more than 1% increase in price over that time.  Now there&#8217;s an inflation rate I can live with!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane Brown</title>
		<link>http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3872</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane Brown</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2006 02:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3872</guid>
		<description>Hi Daniel,

If we're talking straight metal, U has a density of 19,050 kilograms per cubic meter (19 times denser than fresh water at 1000 kg/m^3).  So, if we run the numbers:

32,000 tons U = 32,000,000 kg U;

32,000,000 kg / 19,050 kg/m^3 = 1680 cubic meters; let's express that as a cube;

cbrt(1680 m^3) = 11.9 meters on a side; how about as a sphere;

(4/3) pi r^3 = 1680 m^3; solve for r -&#62; radius of 7.37 meters, or a diameter of 14.75 meters.

Finally, 1 ton of uranium occupies v = 1,000 kg / 19,050 kg/m^3 = 0.052 cubic meters or 1.85 cubic feet.

Uranium is seriously dense!  Though it doesn't hold the record for normal solid-state density in the periodic table (it's a toss up between iridium and osmium at 23,000 kg/m^3).

I wonder on how many other blogs there are comments with engineering unit conversions going on? :)  Thanks for letting me dust off my brain!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Daniel,</p>
<p>If we&#8217;re talking straight metal, U has a density of 19,050 kilograms per cubic meter (19 times denser than fresh water at 1000 kg/m^3).  So, if we run the numbers:</p>
<p>32,000 tons U = 32,000,000 kg U;</p>
<p>32,000,000 kg / 19,050 kg/m^3 = 1680 cubic meters; let&#8217;s express that as a cube;</p>
<p>cbrt(1680 m^3) = 11.9 meters on a side; how about as a sphere;</p>
<p>(4/3) pi r^3 = 1680 m^3; solve for r -&gt; radius of 7.37 meters, or a diameter of 14.75 meters.</p>
<p>Finally, 1 ton of uranium occupies v = 1,000 kg / 19,050 kg/m^3 = 0.052 cubic meters or 1.85 cubic feet.</p>
<p>Uranium is seriously dense!  Though it doesn&#8217;t hold the record for normal solid-state density in the periodic table (it&#8217;s a toss up between iridium and osmium at 23,000 kg/m^3).</p>
<p>I wonder on how many other blogs there are comments with engineering unit conversions going on? :)  Thanks for letting me dust off my brain!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Work</title>
		<link>http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3870</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Work</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2006 00:29:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3870</guid>
		<description>Hi Shane
              What's 32,000 tons of Uranium in cubic meters? For that matter whats 1 ton in cubic meters?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Shane<br />
              What&#8217;s 32,000 tons of Uranium in cubic meters? For that matter whats 1 ton in cubic meters?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Work</title>
		<link>http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3867</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Work</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2006 22:16:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3867</guid>
		<description>works now thanks Rod</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>works now thanks Rod</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rod Adams</title>
		<link>http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3866</link>
		<dc:creator>Rod Adams</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3866</guid>
		<description>Daniel:

Thanks for the heads up. I goofed up the file name and added an extra 0 in the link. I should work now.

Rod</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Daniel:</p>
<p>Thanks for the heads up. I goofed up the file name and added an extra 0 in the link. I should work now.</p>
<p>Rod</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel Work</title>
		<link>http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3865</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Work</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2006 20:49:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://atomic.thepodcastnetwork.com/2006/10/05/the-atomic-show-031-uranium-resources-and-mining-techniques/#comment-3865</guid>
		<description>I'm getting network errors trying to access the mp3. Anyone else having problems?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m getting network errors trying to access the mp3. Anyone else having problems?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
