3 ms·

Literally gets discussed every time this topic comes up. Nuclear fuel is 10^5 more dense than carbon fuels, so the actual amount of waste is small, and it can l

Literally gets discussed every time this topic comes up. Nuclear fuel is 10^5 more dense than carbon fuels, so the actual amount of waste is small, and it can largely be recycled if we design facilities for it. "2. The U.S. generates about 2,000 metric tons of used fuel each year. This number may sound like a lot, but it’s actually quite small. In fact, the U.S. has produced roughly 83,000 metrics tons of used fuel since the 1950s—and all of it could fit on a single football field at a depth of less than 10 yards." https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-nuclear-fuel https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/5-fast-facts-about-spent-...

avmich 5y ago
You're probably talking about different level of details. What's the isotope composition of waste? What are the half-life periods for them? What are the possibilities of remaining radioisotopes to contaminate water/air/soil? I'm watching nuclear arguments quite a bit and don't see this level of details, which would allow making a decision. I've studied physics, yet I should admit I can't see the rational argument for nuclear industry - not yet, I only see declarations "it's safe". How can those waste products be processed? How they can be stored? What are the supposed difficulties? Costs? What we have learned so far? All of this matter is nowhere to be seen in discussions about waste. Those 83,000 tons you mention - what's that? Can we use it somehow? Can we separate it into less problematic and, say, more energetic material? Can we put it into reactors? What have been tried?
- arrosenberg 5y ago
  The rational argument is that it can provide carbon-free electricity for the entire planet with today's technology. All the information you are asking about is readily available on the internet if you are genuinely interested. I do think it's amusing that anti-nuclear folks are so worried about waste issues when the current solution for carbon fuel waste is "dump it in the environment and let the kids deal with it". With nuclear fuel the waste is solid and in small enough quantities that it can be managed.
  - avmich 5y ago
    You're making statements, and I would like to check them. Unless I'm able to - and it takes enough of efforts to find this information on the Internet, I've tried - I'm not convinced, despite of, or maybe because of, all knowledge that I have, and I can't recommend it. If that would be trivially available, surely there would be some page which can be easily linked to with all answers to questions like these?
    - arrosenberg 5y ago
      Go nuts. I already linked the DOE page, and here is another useful one - https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]

avmich 5y ago

You're probably talking about different level of details. What's the isotope composition of waste? What are the half-life periods for them? What are the possibilities of remaining radioisotopes to contaminate water/air/soil? I'm watching nuclear arguments quite a bit and don't see this level of details, which would allow making a decision. I've studied physics, yet I should admit I can't see the rational argument for nuclear industry - not yet, I only see declarations "it's safe". How can those waste products be processed? How they can be stored? What are the supposed difficulties? Costs? What we have learned so far? All of this matter is nowhere to be seen in discussions about waste. Those 83,000 tons you mention - what's that? Can we use it somehow? Can we separate it into less problematic and, say, more energetic material? Can we put it into reactors? What have been tried?

arrosenberg 5y ago
The rational argument is that it can provide carbon-free electricity for the entire planet with today's technology. All the information you are asking about is readily available on the internet if you are genuinely interested. I do think it's amusing that anti-nuclear folks are so worried about waste issues when the current solution for carbon fuel waste is "dump it in the environment and let the kids deal with it". With nuclear fuel the waste is solid and in small enough quantities that it can be managed.
- avmich 5y ago
  You're making statements, and I would like to check them. Unless I'm able to - and it takes enough of efforts to find this information on the Internet, I've tried - I'm not convinced, despite of, or maybe because of, all knowledge that I have, and I can't recommend it. If that would be trivially available, surely there would be some page which can be easily linked to with all answers to questions like these?
  - arrosenberg 5y ago
    Go nuts. I already linked the DOE page, and here is another useful one - https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html https://whatisnuclear.com/waste.html
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]