3 ms·
Why? Intuitively it does feel like the "nuclear waste" part is some radioactive elements that we could re-use for nuclear fissions. If we found a way to re-use
by napo 5y ago
Why? Intuitively it does feel like the "nuclear waste" part is some radioactive elements that we could re-use for nuclear fissions. If we found a way to re-use the left-overs multiple times until we used all the radioactive parts, that would suggest that it solves the waste problem.
- Jon_Lowtek 5y agoI will try to explain it, but it is probably better to link wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/nuclear_waste https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/nuclear_waste TLDR: nuclear waste also includes things like the reactor casing, uranium mining tools and similar contaminated equipment. Power wash them and you get slightly less contaminated tools and lots of contaminated water. Many people argue that the stuff coming out of la hagues chimney and waste water pipes also qualifies as nuclear waste, even if it is only "slightly radioactive" per cubic meter air/water pumped through them and "just within legal thresholds". Frances reprocessing plant, which is named as "the solution" in the comment, is by many critics seen as a greenwashing plant that for decades failed to hold its proclaimed commercial quotas while irradiating ocean and atmosphere. And we are still taking fuel rod cycle, there is no repurposing a decades old used reactor casing, or a highly contaminated repurposing plant chimney. The thing with "until we used all the radioactive parts" is, that it is a spherical cow, an idealised mathematical solution that doesn't happen in the real world. Yes la hague reduces spent nuclear fuel, but it produces large amounts of mid level and low level nuclear waste.