3 ms·
Honestly, what does this guy think is the problem? As I understand the problem, the difficulty is that there’s literally nowhere on earth that people want nucle
by moomin 5y ago
Honestly, what does this guy think is the problem? As I understand the problem, the difficulty is that there’s literally nowhere on earth that people want nuclear waste to be stored. Saying “It’s okay, rather than slow radioactivity over 30,000 years it’s going to much more radioactive over 1000 years” isn’t the solution he things it is.
- lumost 5y agoThe plutonium left in the 30,000 year nuclear waste represents a proliferation risk. By burning the plutonium and remaining uranium you are left with shorter lived isotopes that cannot be used in a bomb. Further the number of sites which can promise 30k year storage is quite small. Only Requiring geologic and hydrologic stability for 1k years opens additional options.
- sofixa 5y agoFinland does, they have very long term storage they propose others to use.