4 ms·
> Or, when in normal operation of a nuclear power plant you are creating waste products, including the plant structure itself which are deadly for tens of thous
by yongjik 11y ago
> Or, when in normal operation of a nuclear power plant you are creating waste products, including the plant structure itself which are deadly for tens of thousands of years. Far longer than any human institutions or even extant languages.
So pulverize the nuclear waste product, including the "deadly" plant structure itself, mix with other stuff, and spread it evenly in a large landfill. Or even better, make fine powder and throw it into the atmosphere. With a bit of wind, everything will be well below "lowest clinical significant level."
Sounds horrible? But that's exactly what coal plants do!
- dredmorbius 11y ago"Normal radiation emissions" from nuclear power plants do not include decomissioned structures.
- cpeterso 11y agoChemist James Lovelock, one of the authors of the Gaia hypothesis, suggested dispersing nuclear waste throughout nature preserves. Animals can adapt to the radiation pretty quickly at low levels and it would discourage humans from developing the preserves.
- rdl 11y ago"The solution to pollution is dilution."
- Animats 11y agoSmall amounts of highly radioactive waste are easier to deal with than large amounts of low-level waste. There's also the problem that the ecosystem may concentrate heavy metals, much as aquatic ecosystems do. As you move up the food chain in fish, mercury concentration increases, to the point that swordfish now have a warning.