i don’t understand it either, because there’s so little of it. and also, we know how to handle dangerous substances. like, asbestos stays dangerous forever.
Oh, this is one i actually know. I wish I could find the exact YouTube video where I learned it, butnuclear waste disposal is a massive long-term problem.
It boiled down to answering the question of - how do you prevent people from digging up all your buried nuclear waste for the tens of thousands of years it will continue to be radioactive? It was a super interesting watch, so I’ll see if I came find the vid after I get off work.
That was always so frustrating and annoying to me. “We won’t invest money on nuclear power because someone in 10,000 years might get radiation poisoning from the waste we will carefully bury underground. So, let’s keep burning coal, pump the waste smoke into the air that will kill the atmosphere whitin three decades and give everyone radioactive poisoning, today!”
Humanity was handed the key to stop global warming dead in its tracks and skip straight to renewables with a healthy planet. But we can’t seem to resist the temptation of blowing people up for a slightly higher profit next quarter.
I think it’s basically what we’re already doing with spent nuclear fuel. I’m not aware of any actual real life examples of this being a problem. It seems like people who do know the nuclear fuel life cycle have got it figured out and “what do we do with all this waste?” is more of a hypothetical than an actual issue.
Not only this, but research into nuclear waste processing, to make it safer to dispose and maybe even recyclable, is halted. There’s no research grants going there almost at all, because of the off chance it might turn into weapon’s grade fissionable material.
I recall that Canada was working on a long-term nuclear waste storage facility. I looked it up, it’s a 26 billion dollar project.
It’s not a hypothetical issue, it’s a political issue. Political issues are real issues.
You can’t blame Grassy Narrows first nation for opposing the location of the nuclear waste facility near their territory. It’s a community that’s been decimated by industrial waste.
I support nuclear technologies where sustainable energy isn’t feasible but I think people aren’t wrong to consider a waste a problem. It’s not an absolute showstopper, but it is something that is part of the challenge of building nuclear facilities.
I don’t understand why waste was such a big anti-nuclear talking point. The raw material was mined. Just put the waste back in the same hole.
yeah it seems really simple, but then, you have the realities:
lots of uranium mining is open pits. like this one in namibia -
-
that’s not going to keep stuff in one place.
transporting it, hell even getting the producers to agree to accepting it for storage - would be a political nightmare.
even in places where it was mined underground, you have water tables to worry about. it’s simply not that simple.
i don’t understand it either, because there’s so little of it. and also, we know how to handle dangerous substances. like, asbestos stays dangerous forever.
Oh, this is one i actually know. I wish I could find the exact YouTube video where I learned it, butnuclear waste disposal is a massive long-term problem.
It boiled down to answering the question of - how do you prevent people from digging up all your buried nuclear waste for the tens of thousands of years it will continue to be radioactive? It was a super interesting watch, so I’ll see if I came find the vid after I get off work.
That was always so frustrating and annoying to me. “We won’t invest money on nuclear power because someone in 10,000 years might get radiation poisoning from the waste we will carefully bury underground. So, let’s keep burning coal, pump the waste smoke into the air that will kill the atmosphere whitin three decades and give everyone radioactive poisoning, today!”
Humanity was handed the key to stop global warming dead in its tracks and skip straight to renewables with a healthy planet. But we can’t seem to resist the temptation of blowing people up for a slightly higher profit next quarter.
I also don’t know a lot about the nuclear fuel life cycle, but don’t you think it might be more complicated than this?
I think it’s basically what we’re already doing with spent nuclear fuel. I’m not aware of any actual real life examples of this being a problem. It seems like people who do know the nuclear fuel life cycle have got it figured out and “what do we do with all this waste?” is more of a hypothetical than an actual issue.
Not only this, but research into nuclear waste processing, to make it safer to dispose and maybe even recyclable, is halted. There’s no research grants going there almost at all, because of the off chance it might turn into weapon’s grade fissionable material.
I recall that Canada was working on a long-term nuclear waste storage facility. I looked it up, it’s a 26 billion dollar project.
It’s not a hypothetical issue, it’s a political issue. Political issues are real issues.
You can’t blame Grassy Narrows first nation for opposing the location of the nuclear waste facility near their territory. It’s a community that’s been decimated by industrial waste.
I support nuclear technologies where sustainable energy isn’t feasible but I think people aren’t wrong to consider a waste a problem. It’s not an absolute showstopper, but it is something that is part of the challenge of building nuclear facilities.