5 ms·

can you name any? btw. putting it somewhere and forgetting about it is definitiv not an option.

by merb 7y ago

ben_w 7y ago
Why isn’t it an option? There are plenty of places where it’s implausible for any future civilisation to reach without knowing what radiation is any why such waste is best left undisturbed.
realusername 7y ago
You can use part of it as fuel, it's just does not economically make sense to do so right now. And what's wrong with storing it exactly?
TeMPOraL 7y ago
Put it in a sealed container and drop it in an abandoned mine, or even a pool. Keep an armed detail protecting it from getting stolen. There, done. If you're talking about storing the waste long-term, on the order of "more than any country existed on the planet", then this is a problem only because the irrational fear of nuclear doesn't let us build reactors that could further reprocess the fuel. (And if civilization collapsed now, then all you have to do is to burn the paper maps on which the storage location is marked, and nobody will find the waste before it decays to background radiation levels. If we fuck up civilization now, then the few remaining survivors will be stuck for a couple thousand years with medieval-era technology on a thoroughly broken planet. It's extremely unlikely someone would stumble upon the ruins radioactive waste storage plant. The planet is very large, the amount of nuclear waste is ridiculously tiny.)
- Xylakant 7y ago
  > Put it in a sealed container and drop it in an abandoned mine, or even a pool. Keep an armed detail protecting it from getting stolen. There, done. Indeed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine
jks 7y ago
Here's a disposal site in Finland: http://www.posiva.fi/en/final_disposal/basics_of_the_final_disposal http://www.posiva.fi/en/final_disposal/basics_of_the_final_d...
- merb 7y ago
  oh great. the methodology which might not work because of copper erosion. also kbs-3 is not in use. it might be next year, but nothing is proven yet, especially since it already had some critism. in 100 years we will see if it was a good idea. and basically thats the problem of waste disposal.
dev_tty01 7y ago
Typical straw man argument. No one is arguing to put it somewhere and forget about it. Monitoring will of course be a big part of any of these strategies. The small volume of material has to be located somewhere safe for a few dozen years until reprocessing tech catches up. That is a manageable issue, assuming we get out of our own way and invest in the required R&D. It only takes the will and the commitment to get it done. The return is carbon free energy at a massive scale. That is transformative.

can you name any? btw. putting it somewhere and forgetting about it is definitiv not an option.

by merb 7y ago

can you name any? btw. putting it somewhere and forgetting about it is definitiv not an option.

Why isn’t it an option? There are plenty of places where it’s implausible for any future civilisation to reach without knowing what radiation is any why such waste is best left undisturbed.

realusername 7y ago

You can use part of it as fuel, it's just does not economically make sense to do so right now. And what's wrong with storing it exactly?

TeMPOraL 7y ago

Put it in a sealed container and drop it in an abandoned mine, or even a pool. Keep an armed detail protecting it from getting stolen. There, done. If you're talking about storing the waste long-term, on the order of "more than any country existed on the planet", then this is a problem only because the irrational fear of nuclear doesn't let us build reactors that could further reprocess the fuel. (And if civilization collapsed now, then all you have to do is to burn the paper maps on which the storage location is marked, and nobody will find the waste before it decays to background radiation levels. If we fuck up civilization now, then the few remaining survivors will be stuck for a couple thousand years with medieval-era technology on a thoroughly broken planet. It's extremely unlikely someone would stumble upon the ruins radioactive waste storage plant. The planet is very large, the amount of nuclear waste is ridiculously tiny.)

Xylakant 7y ago
> Put it in a sealed container and drop it in an abandoned mine, or even a pool. Keep an armed detail protecting it from getting stolen. There, done. Indeed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asse_II_mine

jks 7y ago

Here's a disposal site in Finland: http://www.posiva.fi/en/final_disposal/basics_of_the_final_disposal http://www.posiva.fi/en/final_disposal/basics_of_the_final_d...

merb 7y ago
oh great. the methodology which might not work because of copper erosion. also kbs-3 is not in use. it might be next year, but nothing is proven yet, especially since it already had some critism. in 100 years we will see if it was a good idea. and basically thats the problem of waste disposal.

dev_tty01 7y ago

Typical straw man argument. No one is arguing to put it somewhere and forget about it. Monitoring will of course be a big part of any of these strategies. The small volume of material has to be located somewhere safe for a few dozen years until reprocessing tech catches up. That is a manageable issue, assuming we get out of our own way and invest in the required R&D. It only takes the will and the commitment to get it done. The return is carbon free energy at a massive scale. That is transformative.