Newsgroups: sci.space
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: The sun as a trashcan (was : Plutonium)
Message-ID: <1988Aug30.005423.20005@utzoo.uucp>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <1255@netmbx.UUCP> <2818@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <2821@pt.cs.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 88 00:54:23 GMT

In article <2821@pt.cs.cmu.edu> jgk@speech2.cs.cmu.edu (Joe Keane) writes:
>I don't have the necessary data handy, but it should be possible to
>send something to the sun by shooting it near Mercury (or maybe
>Venus).  You might have to do some boosting near the planet, but this
>is much more efficient than trying to do a drop (like in _Aliens_).

Actually it has to be Venus, because our current boosters can't reach
Mercury directly.  (Mariner 10 got to Mercury via Venus.)  I suspect it
doesn't help enough.  The best way to get really close to the Sun, in
fact, is a Jupiter flyby (!).  Remember, velocity is what counts, and
Jupiter's gravitational field is so hefty that it does a much better job
on velocity changes than Venus would.

The problem with any such scheme, though, is that suddenly our trashcans
can't be just inert lumps of metal.  Now they need precision navigation
equipment, plus power, plus communications, plus a propulsion system for
course corrections.  New failure modes also appear:  what happens if you
lose guidance on a trashcan before Jupiter flyby?

>>The easiest way to get rid of nuclear waste would probably be to
>>use hard land it on the moon...
>
>Please don't do this!

Why not?  Assuming you have enough control to put them down within, say,
50 km of a specific aiming point, of course.
-- 
Intel CPUs are not defective,  |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
they just act that way.        | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu