3 ms·

Nuclear waste storage is a political problem, not a technical one. The Yucca Mountain project is the long term storage option. It's isn't really that hard, rel

by Fej 8y ago

Nuclear waste storage is a political problem, not a technical one. The Yucca Mountain project is the long term storage option. It's isn't really that hard, relatively speaking, to dispose of nuclear waste. Just put it in a hole and mark it so no one goes there. But no one wants to be the host - not because it's inherently dangerous, but because it's scary. Yucca Mountain would already store all the waste if it weren't for one Senator from Nevada.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
It doesn't matter why it's a problem, all that matters is that it's a problem, and you have no ability to demand the residents of Nevada allow Yucca Mountain to open. With that said, there are valid geological and hydrological concerns as to why Yucca Mountain should not move forward. They are outlined here [1]. Therefore, there is no adequate solution, only a demand that a suboptimal solution be implemented to support a suboptimal generation technology. [1] http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/yucca/techcon1.htm http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/yucca/techcon1.htm
- acidburnNSA 8y ago
  The salt deposits in New Mexico are a wonderful place for nuclear waste. It's almost a no-brainer [1]. "It doesn't matter why it's a problem, all that matters is that it's a problem..." Intermittency of wind and solar is a problem by any stretch of any imagination. Year-averaged wind capacity factor in USA is 35%. Solar is 25%. There are massive seasonal variations that batteries don't solve. It's a legit concern. Nukes help alleviate that because they're the only known dispatchable 24/7 carbon-free energy that we can scale to the necessary scale. Just gotta figure out how to make the more cheaply. Curing fears spawning from the linear no-threshold dose response model will help with that. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/02/09/americas-high-level-nuclear-waste-is-gone/#2eb63c6f2e02 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/02/09/americas-...
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]

by Fej 8y ago

toomuchtodo 8y ago

It doesn't matter why it's a problem, all that matters is that it's a problem, and you have no ability to demand the residents of Nevada allow Yucca Mountain to open. With that said, there are valid geological and hydrological concerns as to why Yucca Mountain should not move forward. They are outlined here [1]. Therefore, there is no adequate solution, only a demand that a suboptimal solution be implemented to support a suboptimal generation technology. [1] http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/yucca/techcon1.htm http://www.state.nv.us/nucwaste/yucca/techcon1.htm

acidburnNSA 8y ago
The salt deposits in New Mexico are a wonderful place for nuclear waste. It's almost a no-brainer [1]. "It doesn't matter why it's a problem, all that matters is that it's a problem..." Intermittency of wind and solar is a problem by any stretch of any imagination. Year-averaged wind capacity factor in USA is 35%. Solar is 25%. There are massive seasonal variations that batteries don't solve. It's a legit concern. Nukes help alleviate that because they're the only known dispatchable 24/7 carbon-free energy that we can scale to the necessary scale. Just gotta figure out how to make the more cheaply. Curing fears spawning from the linear no-threshold dose response model will help with that. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/02/09/americas-high-level-nuclear-waste-is-gone/#2eb63c6f2e02 https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/02/09/americas-...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]