JF Mezei wrote:

On 2016-12-12 13:29, Fred J. McCall wrote:

The Moon is better suited to that sort of thing, but it's still
hideously expensive trash.


It is hideously expensive to launch spent radioactive garbage and have
it crash onto the moon (there is no need to land, is there ?) compared
to all the regulatory red tape and long term costs of maintaining
uranium dump site on earth ?


Yes.


Different slant: the sun is said to be a big fusion reactor. If one
were to send a tonne of uranium to the sun, would it remain as uranium
(either molten or vapour) or would the extreme conditions cause any type
of atom to break apart and form hydrogen ?


Even more expensive. Getting to the Sun from here is HARD. The Sun
is a fusion furnace. It starts with hydrogen and makes heavier stuff,
not the other way around.


--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn