3 ms·
Which is a good point, but "half life" doesn't mean "all gone". It'll take some x cycles to get it down to some safe level y. So the water needs stored until th
by beat 7y ago
Which is a good point, but "half life" doesn't mean "all gone". It'll take some x cycles to get it down to some safe level y. So the water needs stored until then, if it's not being released somewhere.
Meanwhile, it keeps accumulating, because the problem is caused by groundwater leaching into the contaminated reactor area. So at some point, accumulated volume p will probably exceed available storage area q, which seems to be where we are now. So it has to be dumped somewhere.
The solution is almost certainly to dump it at sea, but I don't think they can get away with dumping it right on the coastline, politically.
- pvaldes 7y ago> at some point, accumulated volume p will probably exceed available storage area q Maybe they should stack a second row of containers in the second floor then? (hey, we doubled the available space with only steel beams, some concrete and a welder! we can build upwards!, is like magic!)
- beat 7y agoGosh, why didn't they think of that? Every difficult engineering or social problem can be solved by the clever one-line idea of some dude on the internet.